By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
teigaga said:


I don't think having two different consoles would be a very good idea.  Fragmenting your market is a poor strategy because it halves your install base.  If Microsoft is trying to go for the casual market, how can they do that with a very expensive high spec console?  I think that 300 dollars is about the upper limit for a new console to a casual gamer.  $400 puts you solely in the hardcore range.  As for the next generation being longer than this one, it's hard to say, but I'm not sure about that one either.   I think that new hardware is essential in keeping people interested and engaged in your brand.  I think you need a new console every 5 or so years to energize your fanbase.  With new technologies popping up, a trend that will continue in coming years, I don't think that a long lifespan is necessarily a good thing.

With Sony, I think it's really a matter of survival.  I just flat out don't think can financially afford releasing another PS3.  Holding out a little longer is an interesting idea, but it could lead to some of the issues that they saw with the X-Box 360.

But, let's say theoretically that the consoles do go for specs approaching top of the line PCs.  How much better will the graphics look?  They'd probably look about as good as modern PC games on the highest settings, and I don't think that leap will be enough to really grab gamers' attention.  Moreover, I don't think that even that kind of jump will prevent competent ports to the Wii U.  

I guess we'll see sometime next year who's right and who's wrong, but I don't personally see the Wii U being blown out of the water.  I'm expecting a PS2-X-Box style gap.  Maybe DC-X-Box at most. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pUhraVG7Ow

Possibly this. I was blown away from the gameplay demontration of starwars 1313 (not the trailer), especilally the partical effects on the smoke/fire and character models.This game is being developed as multiplatform across current gen and its not even using unreal engine 4, so I Think we may be suprised by what what next gen could potentially bring. You also have to remember that alot of the current high end PC games have loose optimisations. When development teams utilise such power on a didcated system (set CPU/GPU) the results will be noticably better.

I also think that the closer step towards realism will be key in next-gen. Just as motion controls and online multiplayer opened the door for growth, I think fully believable charaters and shiny effects will do a similar thing next gen. I know so many people who are impressed by CGI trailer but don't actually play games because the games themselfs don't contain the same cinematic quality and character performance. Previous leaps have been impressive by technology of the day but they never really came close to capturing realism.

As for comparing the gap between the systems. The gap between the ps2/ xbox was quite large, I imagine if a game was built to take advantage of the Xbox's power, a ps2 port would require severe optimisation. But I guess if the wii U is the leader, as the ps2 was, then it would alright because games would be made for it 1st and then ported to the next game consoles, or they will at least be made with Wii U in mind. But yeah, I guess we will wait and see.

Personally, the demo for Star Wars 1313 didn't impress me as much as it did others.  It's a matter of opinion, but I don't think that represents enough of a leap for me to go out and buy a new console.  I understand that optimization is important, and it's why the relatively weak (by PC standards) X-Box can still compete with decent PCs.  Even so, I don't see the X-Box 720 or PS4 outperforming a custom made gaming PC.

The gap between the PS2 and X-Box was large (just try playing Sonic Heroes on a PS2) but at the same time, it wasn't large enough to sell the system, and it wasn't large enough to prevent ports across systems.  I don't think a similar gap to that would really hurt the Wii U.