By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
TheRealMafoo on 17 March 2008
Edit Thread
Sullla said:
Ail said:
I love all those talks about end of generation.
I have yet to see any game that would require more powerfull consoles to run on.

I think this generation will last longer than most have been predicting it....

I really enjoy these posts about how this generation is so different from all the others, and how it will last so much longer. I think many of you have accepted these companies' PR speak about how their platforms are going to be around for ages and ages to come. The reality, however, is that every company always says that they'll be around for the long haul in each generation. Remember how Iwata said that the Gamecube was going to be supported for 8 years and sell 50m units? How did that go?

The problem is that the dynamics of this market ensure that there will be a new generation every five years, six at the absolute most. For the following reasons:

  • Because of the way that third-parties work, one clear winner always emerges in each generation. 
  • Technology improves rapidly (Moore's Law) allowing greatly improved performance at greatly reduced costs.
  • There is a huge advantage attached to being the first mover in each generation, beating your rivals to the punch.
  • Therefore, the "losers" of each generation have a gigantic incentive to launch their new platform early, accelerating the next generation to make up for their shortcomings in the previous one. All you have to do is look at the 360 to see this in action - and, clearly, it worked for Microsoft.

So I don't accept the notion that these consoles are going to be around for another five or six years with nothing new appearing on the horizon. Even if that were technically possible, it won't happen for business reasons (who would tamely sit in third place and accept losing money?) And if none of the current manufacturers are willing to develop new consoles, a new company will seize the market opportunity by jumping in and taking advantage with a powerful and inexpensive system (e.g. Sony in 1994).

SOMEONE will have launched a new platform of some kind by the end of 2011, kicking off the eighth generation. That's a guarantee.


I agree his post is a little off, but I think you are not looking at all the factors in your list. Here are a few to consider that would make this generation longer.

  • The cost of making games today has gone way up. One as high as 70 million. In order to make profit off those games, you need a huge client base. The next generation will almost certainly cost even more. These rising costs mean platforms need a longer lifespan in order to justify these development costs.
  • This generation saw an improvement in display medium (HDTV’s), the next one will not. That reduces the need for another step up in visual quality. Aside from memory constraints, the current crop of consoles from MS and Sony can display amazing visuals and sound. The best games on the PC are only marginally better (and that’s debatable) 1-3 years after these consoles were released. That’s unheard of in the gaming industry. (and another sigh as to why these will be around for a while).
  • MS has no good upgrade path. When MS comes out with their next console, it will have to be a complete departure from what they are doing now. Heat and performance of the PPC has hit its limit. To change will cost a lot of money, and will hurt backwards compatibility. Sony will milk the PS3 for as many years as they can.
  • Lastly, everyone is making money. Most of your money is made on the backend of a consoles life. The big three are going to all show profits. Why rock the boat when you’re making money? I think this fact alone will extend the life if this generations consoles.