Yes definately.

Just because good designers can hide the flaws of the hardware with good game design, doesn't mean the games aren't limited by the hardware that they are running on. 2012 looks like a pretty decent year to release the next generation of consoles. Just in time to catch the 3D wave and anything else you can care to mention.

But i mean, looking at Sony and MS, both will most likely keep their online service as they are, Sony will keep and/or upgrade the blu ray, microsoft might upgrade to blu ray, the launch of natal cant be a short term product but rather a huge investment for the future of xbox.. so it'll be there still. Sonys 3d gaming is taking place this gen and all consoles will most likely have full BC if a new console would launch.

So why would they need to invest in a new console launch (i.e taking a loss to push for installbase) when what is making the consoles successful is taking place right now and for a few years to come.

Sony has their 10 year plan for example.. that would most likely mean a new PS console within 4 years. And in return that would most likely mean a new Xbox within 4 years. And knowing we'll have to wait a few years to get some good 3d games. Or to see the full effect of the support for Natal (which basicly will release 2011). I dont understand why they would just shut it all down and relaunch a new console the following year, or the year after that.

I think we'll see new SKU's with optimized components, harddrive upgrades and new features. But i dont see the need for "next gen". The need to start all over again with pushing for installbase, new marketing and new "niches".

I think this gen will be like the DLCs. We'll see small updates to keep this gen alive until there's actually something out there that can justify a NEW console.

Were still no were near photorealism, even Crysis maxed isn't close to photorealism.

Not to mention consoles is going to die out eventually, things are going to change and portability is going to be involved. Not to mention other things like virtual reality.

To be clear..

Take Nintendo DS and PSP for exampel. The DS has gone from being just the DS, to DSi and soon to 3DS. All is within "this gen". PSP has had 1000-3000, and even a "futuristic" DD only PSP Go. These are the types of upgrades i see for the Consoles this gen. But that isn't really "next gen".

And just think about the difference from PSP 1000 to PSP Go. From a solid handheld to a slide look with focus on portability, and from UMD to DD etc.

Even looking at the 360. From a 360 with blade interface, to bigger standard HDD sizes, to a new UI, to the shutdown of the Pro, to Jasper, to freaking Natal and onwards. All within the same gen.

So again.. i dont see why there's any need to be a "next gen" for the consoles in two-3 years. But that dosen't mean we wont see a slim 360 with built in natal, or a PS3 with upgraded Blu Ray and better 3d processing powers. I just dont see a 720 or PS4 in 2012 or even 2015.

I don't think anyone thinks the current gen wouldn't keep selling and being supported for a couple of years into the next gen much like the PS2 which is 10 years old as of march. there are advantages to launching the next gen while this one is still strong, any losses can be of set by profit from last gen while you get early adopters to get a foothold into the next generation, and developers can generate revenue while they build their tech (engines etc) for the next generation. Then as the last generation fades you can drop the price of the next gen consoles to get the wider audience with your next gen games. Much better than waiting until you are making little to no money and you have to take a loss on the console to compete with the competition. 

Being the first to launch a next gen console can have it's own advantages as microsoft have shown, I think whoever launches first will also set what level of tech jump there will be as multi platform titles are ever more important for third party developers, I don't think any of the big three will want their console to be to far away from each other (Nintendo may not care) I mean look at the PS3 even with it's technically more powerful tech because it was so unique for a long time it got inferior ports and the Wii doesn't get many ports at all. 

they have reached cap thats why the more complex games we see the more 600p or lower we get , go look at the effects pc is pulling off with 1080p and high rez textures running in 60 fps plus , its a no brainer that the consoles have been maxed out, there is only so much optimising a developer can do with a certain engine, if they had more power to work with they would spend less time optimising to squeeze into constraints and more time pushing the hardware.

i know some of you wont agree, but i want 1080p and 60fps with more polygons and physics, the consoles do not provide this.

the biggest part of what sucks about this gen is the pc gets less and less love (software wise) which wasnt the case at all last gen and before it, the consoles really only have 2 years max left in them, then after that developers are gonna need more ram and processng power its just the reality of the industry, if we want to see leaps then hardware needs to change and thats why the pc still remains the king in the visuals.

all these multiplat games most of us pay 60+ dollars for are running in much lower quality compared to the pc version which is usually 10 bucks less, so my 1080p was worth it or not? ya for bluray i guess but what about the games , if we want to keep with the times of the tech then these consoles need to go out sooner than later

Of course we do. I want this gen to last at least a few more years but eventually a new console is nice.

Like yeah the PS3 and 360 are future proof with firmware updates but within a few years time technology will be better and they can make newer better consoles that are more powerful and can do more. Things you can't update with simple firmware.

Gotta say no. Altough the $299 barrier is set for good, theres still a lot for the consoles to go, especially with Natal and Move, its hard to justify whether the consoles are making enough profit or not, im sure sony wants this gen to last quite a bit longer and wil convince move is the next step for this gen.

the xbox may have its last good year with Reach and GeOW3, but Natal should keep it up running and some new games can really change direction if its implemented well. The Wii is still going strong and hopefully nintendo makes the decision to reprise its franchises like star fox or pikmin.

Theres definitely room for another few years, HD is HD for a reason, and interest goes to 1080p is still in a low % of households, so unless every1 converted to HD, nintendo would have a reason or some new revolutionary technology in graphics and computing which would have to be pretty cheap to manufacture.

But nintendo, sony, and m$ want to hold onto profits b4 sales decline. Natal and Move was a smart move, nintendo should try to do the same.

Yes. Just not right now or any time soon.

We do need definetly a next gen. Alot of programing techniques cant be used with todays technology. Without higher power programmers are limited. we have to reach the point were power is practically endless and developer dont have to care about limitations. Then they will be able to do everything they want.

lets say programmers are painters. And consoles are their tools. Today they only have one type of tools. They have for example just simple pencil with the PS3 and 360. They can draw just a certain type of pictures. Ofcourse they can draw a lot of things but they cant make watercolour painting with a pencil they cant use chalk or make graffitis with a pencil.

We have to reach the point where the developers can make everything they want. Today we have some games which dont need better hardware. But there are also a lot of game types which ae just in the middle of their development and we cant even see how they will evolve with 10000 times of PS3/360 power. We dont even know what new genres and new type of games could be done with 3d new screens new input devices and unlimited computing power. Maybe we will be able to play with systems which cant be differenciated from the reality. Ofcourse this point will be reached in 100years+ but we have to go the way. Games are still a young medium. They just arrived. Its like movies. On the beginnig we had just back and white without tone. And great things were made. Games are at this point. Our grandchildren will look at Super Mario Bros like we look on movies from the 1920s.


We need new hardware we need better technology. If we dont go that way we wont find out whats on the end of this way.


Also it would damage the whole industry. Millions would loose their jobs. Do we actually need more Computer power at all ? Couldnt we just stick with todays technology and improve it a little ? The whole industry would crash. Probably the whole economy. We need development in order to keep our economy going. We are at a point were we cant say we dont want that anymore its too late.

We have to keep this process going people have to spend money for stuff even if we buy stuff the stuff has to be new. If its not new then there wasnt spend money for development and production that means a lot of people have lost their jobs and that means there is less money in the system which can be spend for stuff. The money the potencial jujst vanishes its not like we were saving something we just lost it completly. Thats why we need better faster more economical cars computers houses and so on.

This are two points why I think it would be bad for everyone if we wouldnt have new consoles. One explains why we need more powerful consoles and the other explains why we need new consoles at all.