Wii U, PS4 and "Nextbox".

[chocolatekake]

A lot of people seem to be down on the Wii U for the graphics. And how they're only as good as the 360 or PS3. And to be fair, they do have a little catching up to do in the graphical department anyways. But while I'm not in full support of everything about the console, I think it's good that Nintendo is trying to innovate. Even if it's not what people might want, innovation shouldn't be faulted.

But my question is, for the inevitable "Nextbox" and PS4, how are Microsoft and Sony going to go beyond their current consoles? If it's only a graphical upgrade, why bother? With the current financial market not changing much and failing of the PS3 and the financial nightmare it is to make high definition games for it, the next generation could really only be worse.

What are your thoughts? How are Microsoft and Sony going to improve upon themselves?


EDIT: Maybe innovation just for the sake of innovation isn't faultless. But I don't think we can take real strides forward without at least seeing what does and doesn't work.

 

[Danceofmasks]

...

It is easier to make graphics for DX11 than DX9.

 

[pretentiousname01]

it won't be just a graphical update. Look at how things changed from xbox to 360, ps2 to ps3.

If anything I'd be worried that while wii2 will lead the charge for the next 2-4 years. Just as it did prior. It will just fall behind again, just as prior.


Look at what sony is doing with 3d. more specifically the tv that allows big split screen, that's remarkable. Or just if 3d becomes common place (bleargh) then wii2 will be behind. Yeah it may look nice, but its not 3d.

 

[EMFCRACKSHOT]

With lasers and a toastie maker?
nah, i got nothing xD

 

[GonzoGamer]

For the next xBox, some reliability would be nice. For the PS4, how about not giving us a feature then ripping it out from under our feet two months later? And for both, pop in some MKB support. It's not that hard to allow the game to access a USB keyboard and mouse. Make it optional, as a big chunk of console appeal is the controller itself, but just the same it wouldn't hurt.

Yes. consoles are supposed to work and gain features not break and lose them.
Honestly, this generation's consoles are so disappointing, I'll stick with the PC next gen.
I don't care what they "say" their going to do, the pc really does do everything and how it works is left up to me, not the company that makes it.

 

[lovest harding]

Innovation for the sake of innovation is pointless in my opinion.
My toaster could have an LCD screen telling me every bit of information like how hot it gets, how long in exact milliseconds it'll take to make my toast, how pretty I am that morning, but I still just want it to make damn toast.

And as for gaming, I just want quality games.

Wii-U has one thing going for it for me, that it can deliver multi-platform games that 360 and PS3 get with the same quality. I don't really like most of their first party games, personally. They should put as much effort into helping developers use their systems to make third party games on par with their first party titles.
If they put as much effort into that as they do into trying to innovate their consoles (with less success as the consoles come, as they're not really looking to innovate now they're just taking popular ideas like 3D and touchscreen and forcing them into their consoles), they could have the best console hands down.

EDIT: I suppose I should at least mention the others. xD

PS4: An appropriate launch price without the 'I CAN DO MOTION STUFF TOO!' nonsense (that whole six axis thing was just stupid in my opinion).
Xbox: More reliable (although I managed to get away with two separate 360's that never had any issue, a launch system and then I later upgraded to an Elite).
AND FULL BACKWARDS COMPATIBILITY FOR ALL CONSOLES.

Nothing all that exciting from the other two. xD

 

[Scizophrenic Llama]

A console that won't burst into flames within the first few months of it's rushed release.
A console that won't cost me upwards of two to three months rent.

Backwards compatibility better stick around.

 

[Mr. Omega]

The WiiU actually puts Sony and Microsoft in an interesting position. Nintendo had something that Sony and Microsoft simply do not have when it comes to making another console: Justification. With improved online features, better hardware, the jumps to HD, better third party support, the new, unique controller and vast array of new functions, Nintendo can easily justify the WiiU.

What can Sony and Microsoft do in a new console that both A: Can't be done on their current consoles and B: Is enough of a selling point to justify their audience buying the new console? Beef up the hardware more? Well considering that the PS3 cost (say it with me now, everyone) FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE U.S DOLLARS, and it'd be a pretty safe assumption the next generation would cost even more, why bother and why not just get PC instead? One of console's main selling points is that it's much cheaper than a gaming PC and doesn't require constant hardware updates? If we're going to assume the next gen will be more expensive and the features amount to little more than a hardware update, why not just get a PC?

In order to justify a new console, they would have to do something big. Something radical. Something different. Something... dare I say it?... gimmicky. But that would risk them losing the hardcore fanbase they spent this entire generation supporting themselves on, because we all know how much "HARDCORE" gamers hate "gimmicks". The next few years for Microsoft and Sony are going to be interesting... I'm not predicting failure, I'm just predicting something different.

 

[Space Spoons]

Well, if they make everything cheaper (like say $200 for a console, $20 for a game) in the next gen, I'd consider it a huge step forward. Apart from that, I'm honestly not sure.

 

[SuperNova221]

Overall performance increase == more possibilities on what can be done ingame. Also, consoles need to use some damn AA. I can't stand the lack of AA. Overall, both 360 and PS3 look completely awful graphically. Partly developers fault, but they keep touting it as life-like when it simply doesn't have the power to be anything near lifelike, so they try to hard to make it realistic and it just looks horrid.

 

[funguy2121]

it won't be just a graphical update. Look at how things changed from xbox to 360, ps2 to ps3.

If anything I'd be worried that while wii2 will lead the charge for the next 2-4 years. Just as it did prior. It will just fall behind again, just as prior.


Look at what sony is doing with 3d. more specifically the tv that allows big split screen, that's remarkable. Or just if 3d becomes common place (bleargh) then wii2 will be behind. Yeah it may look nice, but its not 3d.

Quit kidding yourself, 3D is a rich man's fad. Of all the movies that have been shown in 3D in the past couple of years, precious few were actually filmed that way or even look halfway decent that way. No one except the occasional rich idiot is going to fork over the cash for a 3D TV and leave the 3D off during the 95% of the time that he's watching/playing the television shows/movies/internet content/games that don't use 3D.

 

[Javarock]

Overall performance increase == more possibilities on what can be done ingame. Also, consoles need to use some damn AA. I can't stand the lack of AA. Overall, both 360 and PS3 look completely awful graphically. Partly developers fault, but they keep touting it as life-like when it simply doesn't have the power to be anything near lifelike, so they try to hard to make it realistic and it just looks horrid.

What?

I had the ps2 for 10 year, Playing it constantly before I bought the 360. AND I was amazed by the graphics of the new games, Perhaps Im just not spoiled in the graphics department to expect things to not look realistic and that it hardly matters if it brings you fun. And no I think tghe graphics are fine, I don't understand the push for more. Or perhaps you have confused yourself and are refering to aethstetics, Beacuse that is VERY diffrent.

 

[Daaaah Whoosh]

I like it when developers talk about "pushing the console to new limits". If we get a new generation, then they'll never try and use everything they have, they'll just stick to what's easy.

 

[TheGuy(wantstobe)]

MS/Sony will have to finalise chips by this time next year to make a holiday 2013 release leaving very little actual choice in what could be available that is a significant upgrade over the NWU simply due to lack of shrinkage going on in power draw and heat generated with current top of the line GPUs.

This puts them in an interesting position where NWU has the best console versions of multiplats and is gaining momentum, and most importantly engines, during the 12-18 months that it is alone on the field where it is the lead dev console with things being downported to current gen hardware and then due to the engines being made for the NWU and publishers being tight with cash they'll use the NWU as the base platform and up-port to the other two as the PS2 was leaving me to suppose that next gen will look like last gen overall.

 

[C117]

it won't be just a graphical update. Look at how things changed from xbox to 360, ps2 to ps3.

Ayup, as far as I'm concerned, the things that changed was the size of the game catalouge of Sonys console, you having to INSTALL a fucking videogame on the TV, constant system updates and wireless controls that have a nasty tendency to drop dead whenever they feel like it.

 

[CrystalShadow]

A lot of people seem to be down on the Wii U for the graphics. And how they're only as good as the 360 or PS3. And to be fair, they do have a little catching up to do in the graphical department anyways. But while I'm not in full support of everything about the console, I think it's good that Nintendo is trying to innovate. Even if it's not what people might want, innovation shouldn't be faulted.

But my question is, for the inevitable "Nextbox" and PS4, how are Microsoft and Sony going to go beyond their current consoles? If it's only a graphical upgrade, why bother? With the current financial market not changing much and failing of the PS3 and the financial nightmare it is to make high definition games for it, the next generation could really only be worse.

What are your thoughts? How are Microsoft and Sony going to improve upon themselves?

Well, I don't know about the Wii U. Nintendo has just admitted a lot of the footage for 3rd party games that are ports of 360/PS3 games didn't come from the Wii U.

And we still don't know the system specs (except rumours).

So... Point in fact we don't really know how the Wii U compares graphically to current-gen consoles.

We don't have much to go on. (And historically, for game consoles launch titles look a lot worse than stuff later on in the console's life. So comparing late-generation PS3/360 titles to first-generation WiiU titles isn't going to be all that reliable.)

Still, it does leave an interesting question about what Sony and Microsoft are going to do here...

 

[pretentiousname01]

it won't be just a graphical update. Look at how things changed from xbox to 360, ps2 to ps3.

Ayup, as far as I'm concerned, the things that changed was the size of the game catalouge of Sonys console, you having to INSTALL a fucking videogame on the TV, constant system updates and wireless controls that have a nasty tendency to drop dead whenever they feel like it.

then you are are in the very minority.

xbla/psn, netflix, online play, party chat, the inter connection between your gaming system and everything else in your growing media collection.

 

[C117]

it won't be just a graphical update. Look at how things changed from xbox to 360, ps2 to ps3.

Ayup, as far as I'm concerned, the things that changed was the size of the game catalouge of Sonys console, you having to INSTALL a fucking videogame on the TV, constant system updates and wireless controls that have a nasty tendency to drop dead whenever they feel like it.

then you are are in the very minority.

xbla/psn, netflix, online play, party chat, the inter connection between your gaming system and everything else in your growing media collection.

Well, I can agree with you on the whole online business, even if I never play online (my internet connection is nothing short of unreliable). But what do you mean with connection between gaming system and media collection?

Yes, I live under a rock, and I haven't got an Xbox in any form. Sorry...

 

[thethingthatlurks]

Overall performance increase == more possibilities on what can be done ingame. Also, consoles need to use some damn AA. I can't stand the lack of AA. Overall, both 360 and PS3 look completely awful graphically. Partly developers fault, but they keep touting it as life-like when it simply doesn't have the power to be anything near lifelike, so they try to hard to make it realistic and it just looks horrid.

What?

I had the ps2 for 10 year, Playing it constantly before I bought the 360. AND I was amazed by the graphics of the new games, Perhaps Im just not spoiled in the graphics department to expect things to not look realistic and that it hardly matters if it brings you fun. And no I think tghe graphics are fine, I don't understand the push for more. Or perhaps you have confused yourself and are refering to aethstetics, Beacuse that is VERY diffrent.

Uhm, do you not know what AA is?
Basically, it "smooths out" the steps that result from diagonal lines on screen. Take for example a game with a chainlink fence. With AA on, it looks very realistic. With AA off (as on a console) it looks absolutely awful. Here's an image for comparison:

There really isn't any reason why this isn't featured in modern consoles, considering it's been standard on the PC for a decade or so. The reason a performance increase is necessary is that AA isn't exactly easy on the GPU.