Poll: Will this console gen be shorter?

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Probably, last gen was longer than the previous one and this new generation started off with slightly weaker hardware which in the end won't really do Sony and MS many favours in the long run.

I do hope though that it will last maybe at least 5-6 years and hopefully by then the economy as a whole will be more positive and in the plus so that by then MS and Sony could throw in some more hardware into a new gen instead of holding back, maybe also developing a few parts here and there seeing as how we've gotten to that point where they either have to go unique or they're just a "pc".

For me I wasn't exactly sold on this gen as much as I was the last, I started off with a PS3 until that died a year and a half later which prompted me to go grab a 360 and ride that side out for most of the generation and I ended up avoiding the Wii altogether because it didn't really have anything I was interested in at the time, now this generation it's taken some time but I'm sold on a Wii U first, an XB1 next year and probably a PS4 a few years later because so far they don't really want me to grab their system as of yet.

I do hope it won't drag on for another 8 years though, I'd rather they go for 5, make new systems with improved hardware that won't dent them as much yet allow them to make profit for that generation (well for Sony at least), Nintendo could do with some hardware improvements themselves but not as much as say Sony and MS.

 

[Bellvedere]

I don't think so. It's not really in anyone's interest to have shorter generations.

Console manufacturers make their money through games licenses not through hardware sales (unlike mobile phones, tvs, etc. ect. that are constantly moving). A new console generation means spending big bucks to ensure they get a significant portion of the consumer base so that third party developers want to make games on that system and therefore pay for licensing. Even if they end up doing poorly in terms of market percentage, skipping a generation ahead whilst competitors stick with the current generation is unlikely to work out. Not to say that there isn't a time, obviously it has happen least the concept of console gaming stagnates and dies off completely, but just that it is an expensive and risky time for console manufacturers and I imagine that they wouldn't want to go through that every other year.

Game developers aren't particularly keen to release games for brand new systems either because they don't yet have as large a potential player base as systems from the previous gen since there are many gamers are waiting for a multitude of reasons (money, enough games they want, that special system seller, price drops, security in the quality of hardware, etc.) before they adopt the new console generation. Costs are also initially higher as they adapt to new platforms and hardware.

Then there's consumers, many of which either can't or don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a new console every couple of years. As we seem to be getting to the point of diminishing returns on upgraded hardware, there's a more lackluster reception to current gen games too. Or rather what we get from the upgrade isn't as immediately noticeable as the move up from previous gens has been so it isn't quite as exciting, which will certainly slow the adoption of new hardware. Also given how hit and miss backwards compatibility has been from one generation to the next, I'm not sure people really want to have several gaming systems taking up all their room or saying goodbye to all their old games every few years.

 

[Rozalia1]

Spoiler

It'll likely last longer if anything else, sorry marks.
Also to the couple of guys doing it this is a thread about generation length, not a "I luv mobile gaming, bring on ze future" thread.

Why don't we let things play out for a good 4 years before we start with the little uninformed predictions shall we friends.

 

[Casual Shinji]

No one can predict the future.

But unless there are some unforseen circumstances, I definately don't see this generation being shorter than the last. For one, Sony's gaming division is one of the few that's actually making them any money, so you can bet your ass they'll try and stretch it for as long as they can. And secondly, with the solid sales of the PS4 I think it's clear there's still a great demand for "user friendly" gaming hardware.

Also, at this point game developement is such a bloated beast that it might be time for it to go on a bit of a diet. The reason the current gen isn't as much of a leap as the previous ones were might already be a sign of that. I honestly wouldn't mind if games continued onward with the graphical power of the previous generation, using the power of the current one just to make everything run smooth and sharp. But then I am a man of simple tastes.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

Probably be twice as long with this kinda talk... probably not for the Wii-U though. I predict a quick death or "upgrade" halfway through as they fall so incredibly far behind the tech curve.

 

[The Lunatic]

I think they'll probably be shorter.

The current consoles are horrendously out-dated and underpowered, even at release. With the advent of things like UE4 (Which has already been toned down due to the low power of the consoles) and other things, it seems unlikely that consumers are going to want to be so outclassed by the PC market.

 

[Ragnar47183]

If anything we should see console generations last longer. It takes longer for devs to get used to the programming the more advanced the consoles get and it just ends up costing to much for devs and consumers.

We wont see leaps in technology as big as we have seen in the past so there really isnt any reason to update the technology that quickly.

Also with the way things are going, I think we will start seeing the ability to upgrade single components of consoles before to long.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Heard some of my friends talk about it and it really peaked my curiosity. Consoles are one of the few tech devices today that don't update every year but instead every 7-8 years. So perhaps Microsoft and Sony will update their consoles more frequently in the future?

What do you guys think?


Edit: accidently put PS4 instead of PS5 XD. Pretend that 4 is a 5.

You also put Xbox 3 instead of Xbox 4.

 

[Rozalia1]

I think they'll probably be shorter.

The current consoles are horrendously out-dated and underpowered, even at release. With the advent of things like UE4 (Which has already been toned down due to the low power of the consoles) and other things, it seems unlikely that consumers are going to want to be so outclassed by the PC market.

Not even going to bother getting into the hiding behind the big three excuse that has been peddled to death. You want to swallow that corporate bunkum spread by shills, and marks than go ahead its your choice to do so.

However "Unlikely that consumers are going to want to be so outclassed by the PC market"? What is this supposed to even imply? It clearly doesn't say anything based on fact.
Consoles will never outclass a PC based on its static hardware so if what you're saying was true they'd not even be any consoles. Additionally its not saying customers don't know their consoles are outclassed if its supposedly a problem...so what is it really saying?

 

[The Lunatic]

However "Unlikely that consumers are going to want to be so outclassed by the PC market"? What is this supposed to even imply? It clearly doesn't say anything based on fact.
Consoles will never outclass a PC based on its static hardware so if what you're saying was true they'd not even be any consoles. Additionally its not saying customers don't know their consoles are outclassed if its supposedly a problem...so what is it really saying?

Some console players legitimately think they are buying into a good deal, they think the hardware they are getting is better than a computer. They are of the opinion only PCs costing thousands of dollars can match their console.

However, the quirk in what I was saying is the use of the word "so" as to imply, a lot.

If we compare the PS3's release hardware to a top-end graphics card from 2012, the graphics card is about ten times as powerful. A big upgrade, no doubt. But, really not that surprising for six or so years.


Now, we if we compare PS4 hardware (Xbox one is weaker, so, consider that.) to a top of the line piece of PC hardware, we're already seeing hardware ten times the power and more. Hardware of the PC is increasing in power at a dramatic rate. Not just in graphics cards, but for CPUs and Hard drives.

SSDs are getting cheap. Devices like the Occlus are becoming affordable. 4K will most likely become a very real option for PC gamers during the lifeline of these new consoles.


I think people have been fine with their consoles so far, for the most part due to the difference not being that massive.

But, when you're comparing games running at 900p or lower, at only 30FPS to 4K 60FPS games (Which we almost definitely will be in a few years.) I think it's just going to be too massive of a void to really ignore.

And that's before we even consider PC exclusive features and games which make the most of these.

 

[Rozalia1]

Some console players legitimately think they are buying into a good deal, they think the hardware they are getting is better than a computer. They are of the opinion only PCs costing thousands of dollars can match their console.

However, the quirk in what I was saying is the use of the word "so" as to imply, a lot.

If we compare the PS3's release hardware to a top-end graphics card from 2012, the graphics card is about ten times as powerful. A big upgrade, no doubt. But, really not that surprising for six or so years.

Now, we if we compare PS4 hardware (Xbox one is weaker, so, consider that.) to a top of the line piece of PC hardware, we're already seeing hardware ten times the power and more. Hardware of the PC is increasing in power at a dramatic rate. Not just in graphics cards, but for CPUs and Hard drives.

SSDs are getting cheap. Devices like the Occlus are becoming affordable. 4K will most likely become a very real option for PC gamers during the lifeline of these new consoles.

I think people have been fine with their consoles so far, for the most part due to the difference not being that massive.

But, when you're comparing games running at 900p or lower, at only 30FPS to 4K 60FPS games (Which we almost definitely will be in a few years.) I think it's just going to be too massive of a void to really ignore.

And that's before we even consider PC exclusive features and games which make the most of these.

You gave no impression you were talking about that... Still even those folk know their consoles are "outclassed", and evidence that there are PCs that can match consoles price points is shaky at best as something is always off in how they've calculated things.

??? So? Don't see usage of that anywhere.

I recall articles of PC being 10 times more powerful than the PS3 in 2012 yes...which only served to get a "no shit" response from me, as next they'll tell me the PS3 was more powerful than the Atari Jaguar.
I've tried searching for articles on PCs ten times plus more powerful than the PS4/Xbone, but it keeps churning up PS3 threads so you mind forwarding me some of those links?
Oh and in what world are hard-drive upgrades relevant to what you're saying? First thing I did when I bought my PS4 was replace it's hard-drive with a bigger Hybrid drive (SSDs are currently simply bad value products whose only function to me is as a boot up drive).

If they can get cheap while having a good size than perhaps I'll grab one to use full time (well three at the minimum in actuality), its irrelevant to the situation however. Sony has a VR device too. How cheap is 4K? It going to be "mainstream" like 3D?

Did you see the PS3/PS2's initial games? Current graphics mean nothing, not that they ever will anyway.

Exclusive games go both ways friend.

 

[Greg White]

Has nothing to do with PCs man, don't know where you are getting that, just reflects your lack of understanding at what is currently happening to consoles, and their future, of which they have none. PC will not escape the coming change unscathed either. Desktops will go the way of the Dodo by 2020. Our workplace is embracing the office of the future, all mobile devices. When that happens the price of desktops will skyrocket. I won't bother explaining any more to you, still stuck in the Consoles VS whatever mentality.

*Also I was ninja'd above

I rather doubt that. Mobile devices are nice, but they still lack the efficiency of a proper computer. Yes, you can use a tablet to read off notes in a meeting, but gaming on one is extremely lackluster. Desktops will always have the advantage of modulization and upgradability(something mobile devices and Mac's aren't likely to ever get) and while there is a cap as to how much sensory input the human eye can receive(4k resolutions at 60fps are pretty much it), I don't see mobile devices getting that good in the next few years, even if technology continues to advance at its current rate.

As for price, no, desktops won't be going up as you seem to think. Mobile devices require miniaturization of components which costs considerably more compared to what more traditional setups do, and that's before you take into account the security risks of using an all mobile setup, something most major companies and institutions(especially government institutions) can't afford to take.

 

[Strelok]

I rather doubt that. Mobile devices are nice, but they still lack the efficiency of a proper computer. Yes, you can use a tablet to read off notes in a meeting, but gaming on one is extremely lackluster. Desktops will always have the advantage of modulization and upgradability(something mobile devices and Mac's aren't likely to ever get) and while there is a cap as to how much sensory input the human eye can receive(4k resolutions at 60fps are pretty much it), I don't see mobile devices getting that good in the next few years, even if technology continues to advance at its current rate.

As for price, no, desktops won't be going up as you seem to think. Mobile devices require miniaturization of components which costs considerably more compared to what more traditional setups do, and that's before you take into account the security risks of using an all mobile setup, something most major companies and institutions(especially government institutions) can't afford to take.

Your whole argument died at the bold part, now you sound like a console apologist spouting nonsense. Gaming dos not even factor in to the end of desktops, when business stops using them (the largest consumer of desktops) that is when the prices will rise. So you can keep imagining that gaming has some effect on that if you want. Besides notebook power is catching up quickly to desktop power. When business switches to notebooks, the price will fall for notebooks in general. You are still stuck thinking in the now, not 5 or 10 years from now, that last sentence made me laugh, I work for a major company. Security for mobile devices is changing, and will soon be less of a concern.

 

[Greg White]

You are still stuck thinking in the now, not 5 or 10 years from now, that last sentence made me laugh, I work for a major company. Security for mobile devices is changing, and will soon be less of a concern.

And I work IT for the military. Wireless devices remain one of the biggest security risks because, no matter how you encrypt it, you still end up transmitting a signal that is laughably easy to intercept and read. No secured facility allows wireless signal(with very few exceptions) to go in, out, or through for this very reason.

 

[NinthPlanet86]

Granted, this generation doesn't seem to be quite as expensive for the console manufacturers, they don't seem to be selling their consoles for a loss of several hundred dollars each as they were last generation, but this is coming at the cost of the new consoles already feeling obsolete because they can't do 1080p/60FPS.

According to this article [http://uk.ign.com/wikis/xbox-one/PS4_vs._Xbox_One_Native_Resolutions_and_Framerates], both the Playstation 4 and Xbox One can output at 1080p and 60fps, but it depends on the game.

Depending on how fast internet infrastructure advances, the whole idea of consoles may very well be obsolete by the time a new generation starts in about 8 years or so, as people may decide to just stream their games from a cloud gaming provider rather than have a piece of hardware that can run the games locally.

I would argue that the impact of cloud gaming is an unknown at the moment. Cloud gaming requires reliable, high-speed Internet connectivity and a reliable service provided by the cloud gaming servers. At the moment major markets such as the US and the UK do not have Internet infrastructure that, IMHO, are truly capable of supporting cloud gaming. For instance, I have a monthly usage cap of 60GB. Streaming 1080p/60fps to a screen uses a lot of bandwidth - according to Netflix, a HD-quality video stream from their site uses approximately 3GB per hour.

Overall, though, I suspect this console generation will be as long as the previous one, but maybe just a little shorter. As others have mentioned, it really does depend on the advances in technology that happen the next few years.

 

[masticina]

I give it about 2 years shorter then the PS3/Xbox360.. and why not Wii.

Because they dragged it out and even though yes in the last two years we gotten some real great games that really pushed the hardware but. It was a bit a waiting game and it felt wrong. By then you expected to have something new on the horizon.

I am happy the PS4 and Xbox One are out now. And yes the WiiU to, why the to.. because I think that Nintendo is not playing the same game as Sony and Microsoft is.

And I expect the first two years of the PS4/Xbox One to be explorative mostly. It takes a while to get the most out of hardware. Then we might have 4-5 years of prime and hopefully at the end of such point we already know what the future for console gaming is.

By the way anybody who wants to talk about 4K screens.
http://s3.carltonbale.com/resolution_chart.html
Do the math I am sure your 1080p television in your living room is actually to far to effectively show 1080p where you sit.
I bought my television using that stat and it is for a bedroom. Even there it was bigger then 50" Just to keep the back area of the bedroom within the 720p zone. 4k? He.. yeah if I sit 2 feet away from it.

 

[Vykrel]

i think it may be a little bit shorter, but only by a year or so.