Poll: Will we ever need a new generation of consoles at all? [NOT a "NOW" question]

[zuro64]

First of all, a PS3s price is ridiculous when an Xbox that cost about 1/3 and have more games works just as fine. Personally I dont like PSs because of the controller (gives me cramps in my hands:/).

On poll i chose Other, because I dont think that we need a new generation of consoles but the one's we have will sooner or later have to be replaced by something else. I think that they should realease the same consoles with the only differences being that it has better hardware in it or it is in slimmer conditions(like the did with the current one's). That way we can forget about the backward compatibility of games and it still feel the same as before (got to love that)!

 

[THE_NAMSU]

I don't think we need the next "generation," just some upgrades. I mean, smartphones have more RAM than the PS3 and Xbox, and sony should make a more efficient OS for their cell microprocessor. Some developers like the one for GT5 said the PS3's RAM limited development of GT5.

 

[Dogstile]

Many like to sit on their couches and be comfortable while playing games. Not saying a computer chair isn't comfortable, but unless you live in a studio apartment, it's unlikely the computer in your home is somewhere in the open area of your house. and we all know how well that whole "keyboard on your lap, mouse on the cushion" thing works..

Thing is, you can buy a controller for your PC. It was a normal thing for my uncle when I still spoke to him to go round his, boot up his PC and sit on the sofa playing lego batman or some racing game i don't remember on his wall monitor.

Still, while we won't need a new gen on consoles, we'll get one.

 

[hermes]

Yes, but not until after a couple years...

 

[emeraldrafael]

Consoles are still cheap in a relative comparison to what you'd pay for the equivalent PC.

Remember, when they come out, Consoles are the best of the best at the time, and expected to be for a few years at least. so to compare a console to a mediocre computer rig and say its around the same price is an unfair statement.

Also, all consoles start expensive this generation (well, not the Wii, but Nintendo could lose money on each wii and still come out after game sales. Besides, lets not forget PCs where so stupidly expensive when they first came out too.

Now, if I can pay (today) 400 or so dollars for a PS3/Uncharted combo, and get a cheap blu ray player as well as a DVD player as well as a game console, as well as online for 20 bucks, then thats more then a deal for me.

Besides, there will always be the market for consoles. they're not more expensive cause the tech is getting harder to make. tech is always getting cheaper and easier. Just like at a 4 GB flash drive. way back when, in the times of floppy disks, that would make your head explode or lead you to think you just stumbled on some hi tech military grade shit. Nowadays, its not uncommon to have an 8/16/32 GB flashdrive or iPod/Phone. And we even have entire TBs at our disposal as a plug in for <url=http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=1tb+external+hard+drive&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=10479185004777316904&sa=X&ei=-uCNTtn9FOXs0gHFhOgd&ved=0CIQBEPMCMAE>$55 USD. Its because developers are realized that they can do more and put more into a console. Think of how cheap your iPhone would be if it couldnt text, go to the web, take pics/vids, record voices, had no colour to the screen or even a screen saver, could store only 100 individual contacts (with one number per contact) and only store maybe a few minutes of voicemail. hell, you can probably pick up a pay as you go phone that does some of that and still only pay 30 bucks for a data card.

...

Ultimately it wont matter. Neither group of gamer is right in the whole "who is better for the industry" argument, and both have their strengths and weaknesses. Once we get far enough ahead, they'll both be one device that functions far beyond the limitations or expectations of both devices combined. And even then we'll still have the "master gaming race" argument and fanboy wars.

But for now, yes, we will need a new generation. how many more will we need, I couldnt tell you, but we will need at least one more.

 

[Mr Jack]

While I agree with your last pargraph, I would argue a few other things. Firstly: you can't compare consoles to cars. Cars are built for many different purposes, from hauling heavy equipment, to going fast, to getting great fuel economy. If we only used cars for one purpose, like fuel economy, then yes you could most definitely make it so parts were interchangeable (Read: how Nissan came back from the brink of bankruptcy).
I don't think it would increase development costs in any significant way, because it would be the console makers selling the upgrade components. So if you bought your Xbox from Microsoft, then you would also get the parts from them. The idea I'm talking about is in the same vein as the "give them the razor, sell them the blades" concept. You can sell a basic system for super duper cheap, then make the money off the parts.

As you said, this does unfortunately make it so people would have to have some idea of what was currently in their system, which would turn many off from it. So I can see that being a limiting factor. I do think that it would be less of a problem overall than one might think. We truly can make these parts plug and play. The only real problem would be connecting some of the wires, but that can be easily overcome by large IKEA-style pictures, and color coded ports for where things go (and numbered for the light spectrum impaired). 10 years ago I can buy the fact that people don't want or need to get inside our electronics, but it's an area of our lives that is very important now. Not everyone needs to know how to build one from duct tape and paperclips, but you should be able to use plugs and not electrocute yourself.

I'm off to class now, but I'll be back in a few hours.

The components inside computers are however made for many different market segments. Aside from that, and what I think is the most fundamental difference is how things evolve in time. A sports car from the seventies contains parts fundamentally different to a modern sports car. They will be made using different design paradigms, with different materials, and therefore there will be precious few components that can be used in both. Similarly, advances in processor architecture means new interfaces, and new motherboards, even when they are designed to do the same thing.

The increase in development costs were referring to the game studios rather than the console manufacturers, sorry I should have made that clear. Console games benefit from having been optimized to run on one set of hardware, having the system you suggest would negate this advantage.

Since you brought up the handle and razorblades idea, I'll tell you what I think would happen if the system was adopted. Like the razorblades, the price will increase in time, till you have spent more than you reasonably should, and then they will discontinue it and make you buy a new console. Once you had invested enough in your console, the prices would begin to ratchet up, as the console manufacturers will have a monopoly on the component upgrades, with large mark ups on components compared to the prices for an open system like the PC.

For example; Microsoft has a monopoly on hard drives for the 360, and they go for 4GB/£ (~2.5GB/$).
I can get a new hard drive for my PC for 33GB/£ (~20GB/$). That is eight times more expensive, you could probably look forward to similar mark-ups on other upgrades too.

I agree that it is pretty simple to put some components together (if I can handle it anyone can), but some (most?) people buy consoles in part due to the buy and forget nature of them.

Perhaps "decades" was a bit long on the time line, but you could get a significantly longer amount of playtime out of a console that you can upgrade (just like people keep their computers forever, while only replacing the insides).

The insides are the computer. The case is just a box that the computer sits in, to increase the ego of the guy who owns it. I know that's why I bought a gnarly one, with crenelations like it's a gothic cathedral.

To stop this getting too off topic, we will get a new generation of consoles at some point, better hardware gives you more freedom. There are always people who argue that what we have is enough -"640k of RAM is enough for anybody" - but the past has always shown them to be wrong. I think they will be this time as well. I have no idea what the next generation will be like though, probably have web browsers and more social functionality than they do now, but beyond that I have little idea beyond "more powerful".

 

[Luke5515]

I think we're close to hitting a graphics wall, but other things can be improved, like cost.
We're going to see new generations until they're not profitable.

 

[Zach of Fables]

I have trouble imagining that graphics will get better than what the PS3 can currently offer, and if it does improve it would be 3D, which is a luxury anyway. But of course by the nature of technology and the industry a new generation will probably be coming along sooner or later. Maybe it will all be Kinex-style controllerless play.

 

[Tharwen]

I think we don't because practically the only thing that could be improved is the graphics, and I'd prefer developers to work on better fun than on better visuals.

Hahahahahahahahhaha

Oh, you were serious? That is wrong in so many ways, better hardware can improve more than just graphics.

It allows for better AI, better framerate, better draw distance etc in games. All things that improve the overall experience.

There is a reason that games companies are complaining at console limitations.

Sorry, 'performance' would probably have been better than visuals.

Anyway, AI hasn't put strain on computers for years, and framerate and draw distance both go under graphics in my book.

 

[Tharwen]

I think we don't because practically the only thing that could be improved is the graphics, and I'd prefer developers to work on better fun than on better visuals.

Hahahahahahahahhaha

Oh, you were serious? That is wrong in so many ways, better hardware can improve more than just graphics.

It allows for better AI, better framerate, better draw distance etc in games. All things that improve the overall experience.

There is a reason that games companies are complaining at console limitations.

Sorry, 'performance' would probably have been better than visuals.

Anyway, AI hasn't put strain on computers for years, and framerate and draw distance both go under graphics in my book.

Well I remember Ubisoft saying consoles were holding back AI.

Ah, here it is.

http://attackofthefanboy.com/news/ubisoft-thinks-theyre-limited-by-the-xbox-360/

Hmph. Maybe you win on the AI point, but I still hold the framerate and draw distance cards!

 

[Frizzle]

When we do get a new generation it needs to be upgradeable though. Hell even the N64 had upgradeable RAM.... I think that will be necessary to make consoles successful in the long term. It would make it even better for manufacturers: they come out with new stuff, and you have to buy parts from them to upgrade it. People can swallow multiple smaller purchases easier than one big one (a new console).

Oh ya lets take one of the PCs biggest weaknesses and why so many people prefer consoles and apply it to a console. Thats an absolutely brilliant idea. That is probably the worst idea I have ever heard regarding consoles.

So my ability to spend $150 dollars to upgrade my graphics card so I can play Battlefield 3 and Witcher 2 on High settings, as opposed to buying an entirely new computer, is a weakness?

 

[Henkie36]

While the graphics may have reached their maximum, the freedom is a long way from the limit. The 3D-market also is getting interesting for gamedevelopers to explore, adding something new after all of the genericness that games are suffering from recently. But it's mostly the thing you can be able to do in one go. Something like Liberty City in GTA IV or the island in OFP: Dragon Rising to the extreme.

 

[Frizzle]

Many like to sit on their couches and be comfortable while playing games. Not saying a computer chair isn't comfortable, but unless you live in a studio apartment, it's unlikely the computer in your home is somewhere in the open area of your house. and we all know how well that whole "keyboard on your lap, mouse on the cushion" thing works..

Thing is, you can buy a controller for your PC. It was a normal thing for my uncle when I still spoke to him to go round his, boot up his PC and sit on the sofa playing lego batman or some racing game i don't remember on his wall monitor.

Still, while we won't need a new gen on consoles, we'll get one.

I honestly think this is the way everything will end up going eventually. Only problem with that is it takes some of the bigger players and puts them at the mercy of Microsoft, because it owns the OS that everyone will be playing on. I would love to have that now, but just haven't figured out how to get a controller to work with the games I want it to. That and a lot of them have trouble supporting them.

Snip my stuff

The components inside computers are however made for many different market segments. Aside from that, and what I think is the most fundamental difference is how things evolve in time. A sports car from the seventies contains parts fundamentally different to a modern sports car. They will be made using different design paradigms, with different materials, and therefore there will be precious few components that can be used in both. Similarly, advances in processor architecture means new interfaces, and new motherboards, even when they are designed to do the same thing.

The increase in development costs were referring to the game studios rather than the console manufacturers, sorry I should have made that clear. Console games benefit from having been optimized to run on one set of hardware, having the system you suggest would negate this advantage.

Since you brought up the handle and razorblades idea, I'll tell you what I think would happen if the system was adopted. Like the razorblades, the price will increase in time, till you have spent more than you reasonably should, and then they will discontinue it and make you buy a new console. Once you had invested enough in your console, the prices would begin to ratchet up, as the console manufacturers will have a monopoly on the component upgrades, with large mark ups on components compared to the prices for an open system like the PC.

For example; Microsoft has a monopoly on hard drives for the 360, and they go for 4GB/£ (~2.5GB/$).
I can get a new hard drive for my PC for 33GB/£ (~20GB/$). That is eight times more expensive, you could probably look forward to similar mark-ups on other upgrades too.

I agree that it is pretty simple to put some components together (if I can handle it anyone can), but some (most?) people buy consoles in part due to the buy and forget nature of them.

Perhaps "decades" was a bit long on the time line, but you could get a significantly longer amount of playtime out of a console that you can upgrade (just like people keep their computers forever, while only replacing the insides).

The insides are the computer. The case is just a box that the computer sits in, to increase the ego of the guy who owns it. I know that's why I bought a gnarly one, with crenelations like it's a gothic cathedral.

To stop this getting too off topic, we will get a new generation of consoles at some point, better hardware gives you more freedom. There are always people who argue that what we have is enough -"640k of RAM is enough for anybody" - but the past has always shown them to be wrong. I think they will be this time as well. I have no idea what the next generation will be like though, probably have web browsers and more social functionality than they do now, but beyond that I have little idea beyond "more powerful".

Point taken on the 1 source for parts thing. That could be a problem. The fix would i guess put us back to how it is now.

As for the part exchange. Only the actual electrical parts change (leaving USB type ports aside for a minute) as opposed to something that moves etc. When the architecture changes, that usually only changes one part - such as the motherboard- unless i'm mistaken. You can still use the same RAM and GPU unless I grossly misunderstand electronics.
I think i could mentally iron out a lot of the problems in my head, though getting corporate people to do the same in reality might be a different story.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the insides are what makes up the console, but they're essentially the same as a family buying an HP pavillion PC, and then buying a new one every few years because it doesn't have the guts to run something they want. It kind of comes down to the console market catering to the hardware, and the PC market catering to the software.

 

[Frizzle]

So my ability to spend $150 dollars to upgrade my graphics card so I can play Battlefield 3 and Witcher 2 on High settings, as opposed to buying an entirely new computer, is a weakness?

The fact that you NEED to upgrade your graphics cards to play battliefield 3 and witcher 2 is a weakness. One of a consoles strengths is that the 360 will play every single game with the words 360 on the box and the same goes for the ps3 and wii. You cant say the same about a PC because due to upgradible hardware they vary so much. Having to check the specks or worry about if your computer will run a certain game is most definitly a weakness.

notice the bold. You can play those 2 games on pretty low end computers with no problems. PC versions of games get better graphics, physics, and I'm sure AI at times because they have the ability to up their specs. I can play witcher 2 on an Nvidia 520. Won't look as good as if i play it on a 560, but it'll play.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

r PCs. Before you can get rid of the 360, you need to be able to connect four 360 controllers to a PC easily and have them work as effortlessly as they do on the console.
(2) Gaming computers need to get a bit cheaper.
(3) PC manufacturers need to sell fewer models that are easier to understand. You need to be able to check a game's box, read one number, and know whether or not your PC can play the game. Part of the allure of a console is that you KNOW it can play the game without worrying about RAM, GPU, CPU, etc.
(4) PC OSes need a better app system, so gamers can play things as thoughtlessly as they do sticking a disc into a 360.

1. you can already do this, though from personal experiance getting the 360 controller to work with microsoft's PC software is a pain.

2. Gaming computers are already prerty damn cheap, the $1000+ for any sort of gaming PC has long been a fallacy.

3. This is a problem, but there is a legion of people who devote their time to analyzing these prodcuts, evaluating them and opining on their worth. They then post this infomation freely on the web. A little light research is required, thats all.

4. This hasn't been a problem for quite a while, PC games have had auto launchers since at least 2000, put the disk in and it gives a prompt asking you if you want to launch the game.
The introduction of services like Steam has only simplified this process. Boot up your client and start the game you want.

I think you misunderstand - I wasn't trying to enumerate what should be required, but rather what is.

As you say, getting the controllers to work is a pain. Connecting them to a console is typically effortless at this point.

Gaming computers are cheap, but not so cheap as a console. Typically, it costs a lot more to buy a computer that can handle games with the same fidelity as a contemporaneous console (the current generation having been out so long that it's a bad example at this point). Console manufacturers are making purpose-built machines and often taking more than a hundred-dollar loss on every console sold. So it's sort of unthinkable that gaming PCs will reach the price of consoles any time soon. Yes they're getting cheaper, but they haven't reached console levels of power and price.

A little light research is, for one, underselling things by rather a lot. It feels like little research if you're already a bit familiar with all of it, but a lot of people (including a lot of gamers) have no idea what RAM is, much less what type is compatible with what other components, how much they need, etc. Even if you want to go into, say, Best Buy and try to buy a prebuilt PC, you're going to find several dozen computers there, often being advertised somewhat duplicitously ("blazing fast" processors, but integrated graphics or clear attempts at confusing system memory with hard drive memory). If you want to buy a console, you have essentially three choices and it's really easy to see the pros and cons of each - just go look at what games each has. You can't do that easily for a PC and you can't even know if it will be able to play future games. If I buy a 360, I know I can play all 360 games until they stop making them, I don't have to worry about trying to guess how much memory I'll need two years from now. Perhaps more importantly, the reality of the situation is that no research beats "light" research every time.

In order to get a game on Steam you need to be able to use a web browser, find Steam, download it, find the file, install it, set up an account, buy the game, download it, install it, install any runtime libraries required for the game, and tweak the settings so it runs well on your PC. For a 360, I have to press the eject button, but in a disc, close the tray, turn it on, and press one button to start the game. And the PC situation is assuming there are no conflicts at all. I've had to troubleshoot PC games for hours before getting them to run. In fact, I have a couple of games that I just flat-out cannot play (as in bought and have never once gotten to run successfully). I've looked and looked, but something deeply mysterious is conflicting with them. And I am far more computer-savvy than you could ever expect the average consumer to be. Again, these things feel simple, natural, and completely trivial to us, but the issue is whether they feel as simple for people who aren't used to doing such things. Before general computing devices can replace purpose-built devices, they need to be simple enough for complete imbeciles to use them easily.