Forums - Gaming Discussion - Possible 7th gen scenario

So yesterday there was a thread asking if Wii was underpowered and I made one asking if PS3/360 were overpowered. Based off the responses I came to the conclusion that its a bit of both.

Wii-a moderate boost over the actual Wii, the bare minimum to play HD games. Cost $299 and had an 8gb HDD, sold at a small profit. Still had motion controls as main feature. Just imagine games like Mario Galaxy, Skyward Sword and Metroid Prime 3 in HD.

360-same specs but delayed to holiday 2006, doing this causes the RROD fiasco to never happen. Games like Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo are instead late Xbox titles. Gears of War is main launch title. Costs $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss

PS3-ditches the Cell and uses DVD instead of Blu-Ray. DVD had only been mass market price for 5-6 years and people werent ready to upgrade yet. PS3 Slim could add Blu-Ray support. As for the Cell, they should have used a more cost friendly alternative on par with 360. Cost $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss. 

This scenario would essentially be in terms of power, Wii=PS2, PS360=GC/Xbox. They would all benefit from this by Wii being strong enough to get competent multiplats, 360 wouldnt have the RROD and PS3 wouldnt have lost so much money.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.


Mensrea said:
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.


Ya I was thinking that too after I posted it, 360 did in fact benefit alot from releasing earlier, cheaper and easier to develop for. Having the better online service could have been a big selling point for COD players and games like Gears/Halo are strong system sellers. But ya I think Wii/PS3 would have had a strong lead on 360 but Kinect could have caused 360 to boost up to the competitors sales for 1-2 years.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Mensrea said:
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.

but PS3 is probably going to end up at 100m NOW so being cheaper and keeping more market from MS wouldn't change anything?



Lord of Ratchet and Clank

Duke of Playstation Plus

Warden of Platformers

M$ played it right by going one year earlier, it(and a bunch of $$$) allowed 3rd party support. But under your scenario, the gaming community might have been a lot different. To me, the decline of console gaming in general might have been more dramatic than it is now. The big benefit of having the 360 and the wii be so successful, it pushed gaming into the casual arena much more clearly. If that hadn't happened, the current trend towards tablets and smartphones would have overwhelmed any support for consoles in short order. For this coming generation, they will atleast enjoy support for 3-5 years from the publishers.

Around the Network
platformmaster918 said:
Mensrea said:
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.

but PS3 is probably going to end up at 100m NOW so being cheaper and keeping more market from MS wouldn't change anything?

Yeah, I don't see it making 100 million. Everyone says that, but I'm going to call bullshit.




platformmaster918 said:
Mensrea said:
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.

but PS3 is probably going to end up at 100m NOW so being cheaper and keeping more market from MS wouldn't change anything?

If 360 was being dominated by PS3/Wii and Sony didnt take such a huge loss early on then the 7th gen could have very well followed a typical 5-6 year cycle.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:

So yesterday there was a thread asking if Wii was underpowered and I made one asking if PS3/360 were overpowered. Based off the responses I came to the conclusion that its a bit of both.

Wii-a moderate boost over the actual Wii, the bare minimum to play HD games. Cost $299 and had an 8gb HDD, sold at a small profit. Still had motion controls as main feature. Just imagine games like Mario Galaxy, Skyward Sword and Metroid Prime 3 in HD.

360-same specs but delayed to holiday 2006, doing this causes the RROD fiasco to never happen. Games like Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo are instead late Xbox titles. Gears of War is main launch title. Costs $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss

PS3-ditches the Cell and uses DVD instead of Blu-Ray. DVD had only been mass market price for 5-6 years and people werent ready to upgrade yet. PS3 Slim could add Blu-Ray support. As for the Cell, they should have used a more cost friendly alternative on par with 360. Cost $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss. 

This scenario would essentially be in terms of power, Wii=PS2, PS360=GC/Xbox. They would all benefit from this by Wii being strong enough to get competent multiplats, 360 wouldnt have the RROD and PS3 wouldnt have lost so much money.

A moderate power boost on the Wii would not be enough to push HD meaningfully. Remember, the Wii was basically a souped up GC. That, and there was really no good way to introduce HD, anyway.

Gen 6: 480p: 20 million pixels per second for 60 FPS

Gen 7: 720p: 55 million pixels per second for 60 FPS

Gen 8: 1080p: 1.2 billion pixels per second for 60 FPS

The problem becomes obvious when you put things like this. A console does not jump two orders of magnitude in one generation--even obeying Moore's law, which we were long out of by this time, we wouldn't have even finished one order of magnitude's growth in a generation. But that's what pushing 1080p required. Even if you went from 720 as an intermediary (and that would have problems because 720p signals aren't commercially broadcast. There was no good way to make this transition, and really, Nintendo opting out of the nonsense with the Wii was just fine because it gave developers and consumers a chance to not adopt the expensive new thing. 

And suprise suprise, the casual gaming audience isn't interested in spending great gobs of cash on an HDTV. They wanna swing a wiimote.



Egann said:
zorg1000 said:

So yesterday there was a thread asking if Wii was underpowered and I made one asking if PS3/360 were overpowered. Based off the responses I came to the conclusion that its a bit of both.

Wii-a moderate boost over the actual Wii, the bare minimum to play HD games. Cost $299 and had an 8gb HDD, sold at a small profit. Still had motion controls as main feature. Just imagine games like Mario Galaxy, Skyward Sword and Metroid Prime 3 in HD.

360-same specs but delayed to holiday 2006, doing this causes the RROD fiasco to never happen. Games like Perfect Dark Zero and Kameo are instead late Xbox titles. Gears of War is main launch title. Costs $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss

PS3-ditches the Cell and uses DVD instead of Blu-Ray. DVD had only been mass market price for 5-6 years and people werent ready to upgrade yet. PS3 Slim could add Blu-Ray support. As for the Cell, they should have used a more cost friendly alternative on par with 360. Cost $399 with 60gb HDD and sold at $50 loss. 

This scenario would essentially be in terms of power, Wii=PS2, PS360=GC/Xbox. They would all benefit from this by Wii being strong enough to get competent multiplats, 360 wouldnt have the RROD and PS3 wouldnt have lost so much money.

A moderate power boost on the Wii would not be enough to push HD meaningfully. Remember, the Wii was basically a souped up GC. That, and there was really no good way to introduce HD, anyway.

Gen 6: 480p: 20 million pixels per second for 60 FPS

Gen 7: 720p: 55 million pixels per second for 60 FPS

Gen 8: 1080p: 1.2 billion pixels per second for 60 FPS

The problem becomes obvious when you put things like this. A console does not jump two orders of magnitude in one generation--even obeying Moore's law, which we were long out of by this time, we wouldn't have even finished one order of magnitude's growth in a generation. But that's what pushing 1080p required. Even if you went from 720 as an intermediary (and that would have problems because 720p signals aren't commercially broadcast. There was no good way to make this transition, and really, Nintendo opting out of the nonsense with the Wii was just fine because it gave developers and consumers a chance to not adopt the expensive new thing. 

And suprise suprise, the casual gaming audience isn't interested in spending great gobs of cash on an HDTV. They wanna swing a wiimote.

Math is a bit wrong here, 1920*1080=2,073,600

2,073,600 * 60 = 124,416,000, or about 1/10th of that.

For the PS360, the problem wasn't the number of pixels to display, it was the ambitious graphics + high def textures + polygons that kept resolution at 720p.

They are some games at 1080p@60 but they are few and far between.  



Around the Network
Mensrea said:
platformmaster918 said:
Mensrea said:
Well the Wii would have done a little worse at the start, but not much. I think in the long run it would have outpaced the actual Wii. It might have gotten better third party, but who knows.

360 would have done much worse I think. 360 really benefited from the early launch, even if RROD was a pain, they got their foot in the door and used that to beat sony for most of the gen. If sony as you said came out with a cheaper model around the same time as the 360, I could see it putting the xbox brand away.

I think in this scenario: Wii 120 million lifetime PS3 100 million lifetime xbox 45-50 million lifetime.

but PS3 is probably going to end up at 100m NOW so being cheaper and keeping more market from MS wouldn't change anything?

Yeah, I don't see it making 100 million. Everyone says that, but I'm going to call bullshit.

At the very least it's going to come close. It's already done ~5 million this year, so hitting at least 83-84 million after the holidays should be no problem. Then it'll probably drop to 6-7 million or so in 2014, which would put it at around 90 million (though a significant price drop could actually result in higher numbers). Another 10 million after that point is a completely reasonable estimation.