Hynad said:
Play4Fun said:
zarx said:
Yes the PS3 was a 10x jump after just 6 years that was my point we are closing in on 8 years, hence why a PS3 style throw as much tech as possible ignoring reason and cost console in 2013/14 would be more like 14x the current generation.
One poster does not a consensus make and nether of those posts contradict what I have been saying at all. All along I have been saying that next box and PS4 would be 6-10x the current generation and the Wii U arround 2-3x.
The Vita does not use just off the shelf parts, it is the only system that uses a SGX543MP4+ it was custom for the Vita saying it is off the shelf is like saying that the Xenos in the 360 was off the shelf because it's a tweaked X1900 chip. It is currently the most powerful mobile device out there and likely will be atleast until the iPad 3 if it does use a retina level display 2048x1536 as rumoured, because they are going to need a hell of a GPU to keep the UI resopnsive at that resolution.
And I stand by my statement that with 8 years of tech advances they won't need an overly hot, big and noisy console to make a generational leap.
And given how well the 360 worked out for MS this generation I doubt they would want to change stratergy to much, I mean they went from 24 million to 60+ and turned a profit in the last few years that is a massive win for them, I don't see how they would consider it a failure.
|
It's not just one poster, I linked his posts because he is one of the veterans of the forum and knows his stuff.
Anyways, we'll just have to wait and see who is right.
I think it will be me since I am superior to you and take more things into account like the business/financial feasibility of the consoles, not wanting dev costs to blow up too much, not wanting to be forced to have a gen that drags on too long (Like they were forced to this gen), heat output and size of the consoles and them wanting to launch at a more market friendly price than just thinking MAXIMUM POWAH!!!
|
A gen that drags on too long? How can you possibly come to the conclusion that it may be a bad thing? Especially on a sales site like this here one. Ha ha ha.
|
i suppose there are advantages to longer console cycles...gamers don't have to dish out money for new tech in a few years, games are taking longer to develop so more time available for devs, more time to squeeze every bit of processing power out of the console.
But there are disadvantages too,like:
. the hardware companies missing out on revolutionary tech trends which could make consoles that have been on the market too long lose some appeal to possible customers and leaves an open window for a new player to seize the opportunity to enter the market
.The gap between consoles and PC would grow larger and larger which could lead to some of the graphics enthusiast console market migrating to PC because they are hungry for better tech and graphics.
. The console manufacturers would want to move on to new hardware once their current hardware start to hit the impulse buying prices.
. In the beginning of a new gen, you usually see devs releasing new, more innovative IPs. Not that it doesn't happen in mid-to-late gen but devs find it easier to launch new IPs with a fresh gen to build a fanbase because at that time customers are very open to trying new things. As consoles get more mature it is the big established brands that soak up alot of the sales.
I think consoles will evolve into something like a combination of Onlive and Steam before we reach a point where we have to have really long gens due to diminishing returns.
Then a new gen will be the manufacturers sending out add-on hardwares like new controllers, a virtual reality system or a holodeck. =D
I'm just going on a limb here, who knows what we'll really end up with but I do believe consoles will evolve to something really new in the near future.
