I think that this generation is totally different from the other ones. The PS3 and the 360 were two "future-proof" machines, that are doing really good numbers right now, so It's logical to think that this generation could continue for another few years.
On the other side, even though there are big games incoming (as usual, just look at God of War II), this gen is coming to an end, because the Wii-U will force Microsoft and Sony to bring new consoles on the market, not to lose too much marketshare.

In my opinion, every new console will be available, at most, during the first quarter of 2014.

Even if Sony and Microsoft could go with the current generation two or three years more, they can't because Nintendo starts the new gen. They could sell PS3 and X360 for some more time (but I think Wii U might steal some of its sales), but if they start their new gen to late, Nintendo will have gained to much advantage, that they would lose the next gen. So they are forced to bring their next-gen-consoles next year.

I think last gen ended up around 200m sold HW, and I think this gen will end up around 250m HW or so - and the next will sell 300m HW... Give or take 10-15m units in all cases :P

True. Well... Except in gaming ;D (think Sega)

I don't think so. All it takes is a new slim model combined with a price cut to really gain momentum.

I heard Sony said they are re-launching Move this year as well? That could really boost sales if executed properly.

Who says they will only do better graphics?
We already got the Wii U doing its Tablet thing, we got the 720 most likely doing a Kinect 2.0, and a PS4 doing ....something.

It all the years of gaming, Nintendo (SNES and Wii) is the only one that was capable of launching a year or more after their competition and still have the greatest market share in the end. However, in both those cases (Genesis and 360) the one who launched first retained a solid marketshare and a significant increase over previous generation.

Facts are, its just the smart business move to be first or as close as possible to the first one out the gate. The more head start you give is heavily impacting to your end result.

Wait, whaaaat?? How about PS2 vs Dreamcast? And Sega Saturn launched ca half a year a head of PS1 WW... That would actually mean that out of the last 5 generations 4 of the winners DIDN'T launch first.... Your arguments don't hold up :)

"year or more after..."

Saturn launched on November 1994. Playstation launched that December. (one month in Japan and other regions were really close too)

Dreamcast launched on November 1998. PS2 launched March 2000. (1.5yrs)

So yes, I guess PS2 technically fits that same criteria, however, Dreamcast was DOA. I just didn't really think about it as Sega was already well on their way out of the console business by then as everything after the Genesis was a failure. (solely in terms of sales and market share) Same reason most people only include Sony/MS/Nintendo when talking about that generation.

Then in terms of N64 and Xbox/GC, all three launched well over a year after those mentioned above and frankly didn't stand a chance. You also have the same thing with PS3 and 360. I know for certain that if PS3 launched within $50 of 360 at the same time, 360 would clearly be last place. Hell at the same prices they launched at, PS3 has always had a lead when you align launches.

You can't argue how much a solid head start gives to a competitor. MS and Sony won't allow Nintendo any more than a maximum of a one year head start.

PS3 and 360 are still healthy buy yeah we are in need of new consoles.

Launching the PS4 and Nextbox by the end of 2013 needs to happen or else the gaming industry is going to face some serious loss in revenue.