| Shadow1980 said: Had the PS3 & 360 exhibited more normal sales curves, both systems having more pronounced peaks that were no later than 2008-09, the PS4 & "720" would likely have been released around 2010-11. So, long story short, new generations of consoles are dictated not only by technological advancements but also by business concerns. If spec upgrades to existing platforms are to be the future, they need to do something past spec upgrades have failed to do and have the same effect on sales as entire new generations would. But if history is any indication, nothing will keep the PS4 platform from reaching a peak and enterting a terminal decline phase, thus forcing Sony to release a PS5 to keep hardware sales up. Not only will abandoning the concept of generations for simple spec upgrades to existing platforms have implications for other issues that have been discussed before (e.g., game development, consumer confidence), it will have implications regarding the very viability of the console market itself. It is not unreasonable to assume that, eventually, people will stop buying PS4s in any appreciable quantity no matter how often Sony boosts the CPU speed or GPU power by small, incremental amounts. A PS5 is going to be necessary at some point, and waiting another 8-10 years for the tech to advance enough to be "worth it" in some people's eyes isn't going to change that. |
Great points. Last gen was quite different from the norm. It started with MS getting in trouble with the XBox, no room for a slim due to NVidia keeping the price high which forced them to launch early with the rrod while killing off the original XBox. Sony was in a blu-ray vs hd-dvd war and ended up with an expensive machine which cost them a lot of money. Both launched with a console a bit ahead of the tech curve and both lost a lot of money, while Nintendo did it's usual thing and got free reign with an inexpensive console that became a giant hit.
Lessons learned, and after a longer generation with that delayed peak to recoup the losses, XBox One and PS4 launched with a much more reasonable BOM getting a more affordable start. To the consumer it might seem that tech hasn't progressed as much, since the ps2 to 360 step was bigger than usual, while the 360 to ps4 step was back on the normal path, leaving a smaller noticeable increase.
Now some people like to think that incremental models will keep the sales curve steady. I doubt it. It won't crash as much as when a new console is due obviously, and sure there will be people upgrading. Yet there will also be people longing for a new gen, new experience, not feeling any need to upgrade for a bit better graphics, switching to a competitor for a new experience. iPhone fatigue is already happening. If die hard fans are already returning the upgrade why would that not happen with incremental consoles. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-apple-iphone-se-review
I put my money where my mouth is by purchasing the SE, but I ended up returning it - the whole user experience was simply too close to the product I already own. It may not have been quite the revelatory upgrade I was hoping for, but that's not to say that this product doesn't deserve kudos.
Plus it becomes a mess after a few iterative upgrades. Different second hand versions of ps4s, which new games still work on what older version and are thus held back by the specs of that version. For example if the NEO is getting 9 year guaranteed support, that means games are still bound by that 8 core Jaguar and 8GB of ram until 2025! (Assuming 3 yearly upgrades and NEO.2 getting a better CPU and more RAM in 2019, which won't be used until 2025...)
One last thought, what if PC games had a clause to be guaranteed to run well on 9 year old average PCs and can have no extra features. That means supporting GPU's from 2007 which had 256MB memory lol. Well pretty much the same as gameplay still being determined by what ps3 and 360 can do. No Witcher 3 sorry.
