The biggest games right now don't even put recommended specs with more than 4GB RAM and 1GB of Video RAM.

Plus, you have to realize that consoles are heavily optimized as are their games. They always use far less memory. 2-4GB in shared RAM is more than enough for anything happening in the next 5-8 years.

Then why are both Crytek and DICE saying they want 8GB in next gen consoles?

Because they are developers and will ask for what best to them. More memory allows them to focus less on optimization and overall development time. i.e. it reduces their costs to manufacture their products.

However, console manufacturers will do what is going to provide a base that will meet the needs for the next 5 years plus keep cost of manufacture and heat displacement down. 4GB of shared RAM on a heavily optimized device now and 5 years from now is easily equal to a 512MB device over the last 6 years when everyone has 4GB/1GB in their PCs.

The reason why most PC games have recommended specs of 4GM RAM and 1GB video RAM is because we are at the end of a generation.

RAM was the biggest shortage this gen. Many developers complained about those 512mb, especially PS3's 256+256mb.

4GB is only 8 times 512MB and since next gen GPUs will be around 8 times faster you can see that 4GB is the absolute minimum and with 4GB we will have the same situation next gen where developers complain about running out of memory. 8GB is much prefered, especially as memory is dirty cheap this time around unlike last gen when memory was comparatively expensive. And memory doesn't draw much power or generate heat.

Even games that are clearly 'next-gen' like Battlefield 3 and others have recommended specs of 4GB RAM and between 1 and 2GB of video RAM.... AND that game when optimized with some stuff reduced runs on PS360's 512MB shared. It would be running on high everything on a optimized set of 3GB shared RAM.

BF3 is not next gen. BF3 doesn't look significantly better than Bad Company 2 and it's clearly designed with consoles in mind. Only minor X11 effects are on the PC version of BF3 but the main assets are the same between PC and console versions, such as character models, amount of polygons, base textures, mipmaps.

In a couple of years you will see Frostbite 3 engine that will be truly designed for next gen consoles and the PC versions of Frostbite 3 games will have 16GB recommended system RAM and 4 GB video ram.

SUPERCHUNK vs SLIMEBEAST!!!

WOOOOOOOOOOT!!!11!!1!!ONE1!!!

I'm putting down 20 bucks on Superchunk, you in?!

No. Because 4G Ram in your PC insures that you get the 2G of ram your game can actually use. Windows is such a memory hog that it easily eats 1G away. As far as I know, in 2011, most people still ran a 32bit OS like WinXP or Win7 for gaming. All games are compiled with a 32bit compiler. So the maximum you get on a PC is 2G ram (even less if you run a 32bit OS due to the required texture mirroring). I doubt we will see a major sweep to 64bit games in the very near future. A new console with 2G of ram would be sufficient and economically sane, more would just increase the console price too much compared to the competitors (of which there are now two by 2013, so every $ saved counts).

Owning the PS3 version on a 46" 1080p TV and playing it on my buddies PC shows quite a difference in techinical capabilities. Watch this full screen in HD, look at more than the up front textures. Lighting, smoke, water, drawing distance with higher textures on PC, animation, destruction... so many things are simply better. This all from the first game made on the engine that was also designed to be ported down to consoles. Imagine what it would be if it was on high-end PCs and next gen hardware. Frostbite 2 is intended for next gen stuff. 4GB shared RAM... that's all your getting at best. Quote me.