they learn their lesson, the will focus on getting a powerful platform but easy to get games too.
they learn their lesson, the will focus on getting a powerful platform but easy to get games too.
| Soriku said: Seeing how strong the PS3 is right now, there's only so much the PS4 can go. The jump from the PS3 to PS4 won't be as large as the jump from the PS2 to PS3. |
That's what people were saying when PS2 was the newest system.
jacezo said:
personally i dont care how long it last just how well it sells also i think that it is stupid that people think the wii could last ten years it just isnt powerful enough |
The same thing is true with the PS3 and Xbox360. However, the longevity of a console depends on how financially successful it is for the people supporting it. Xbox lasted for 4 years before MS decided to release a new one, remember?

There is that whole "point of diminishing returns" trend to keep in mind as well.
That point at which vastly over-engineered hardware (so advanced, nobody utilizes its potential out the gates) provides nothing more than initial marketing bullet points to convince consumers that they are buying a "revolutionary" piece of hardware.
Some buy on this notion alone, but at an inaccessible price, you are cutting out the largest pool of consumers.
And revolutionary tends to be extremely short lived, especially when it comes to semiconductor based electronics.
The only advantage to starting from the ground up with all proprietary components (BD, CBE, etc.) is the assurance that over time, these components will be drastically reduced in size and cost as opposed to off the shelf components, which are typically a bit harder to volume source over time (Xbox GPU) and harder to reduce in price over time (Saturn). It's a gamble either way.
But in the interest of cost cutting, the better option is often to make more with less (Wii), essentially taking advantage of lower priced components and updated versions of components (faster) used in the previous generation.
End result: cheaper product with presumably notable improvements over the predecessor.
Nintendo will probably take the same approach next generation, which by then will allow them to produce an HD console with a better storage system, improved controls for less than the current generation of HD consoles and still pull a profit on each unit from the beginning. That's if they stick with the safe strategy.
Worst thing Nintendo could do is throw a curve ball that bucks the industry trends (like the expensive proprietary storage format of the N64) and alienates 3rd party developers. I don't see this happening.
I would not be surprised to see a PS4 and Xbox3 similar enough in performance and features so as to be practically indistinguishable beyond their 1st party game studio libraries.
Meaning, all three will probably be very similar in cost and performance, leaving 1st party IPs the key determining factor in which platform to choose.
But, only the future can tell.
1 tb hard drive, 2gb of ram, nvidia 280 graphics card, cell processor with 16 cores, blu ray drive that can read a 100gb disc, and it will come with a kb+m. They will sell ps1, ps2, psp, psp2 games through an upgraded psn and some ps3 and ps4 games like they are doing right now. and the hard drive could be upgraded to a 2tb hard drive like the ps3s is now. the kb+m is there to entice developers of MMOs and RTS games to make a port to the ps4 and they will have a system set up where they help makers of those games port their code to work on a cell processor like they have now. and it will retail for $400, probably be sold at a very slight loss. the most expensive thing in there would probably be the hard drive but the way hard drives are falling in price now that wouldn't be for long.
Ps4 I predict will not be the most powerful console of next generation that would be more likely either the next XBox or next Nintendo console.
If Ps4 is the least powerful it will sell the most next generation. Ps2 was least powerful last gen and sold the most consoles and Wii is the least powerful this generation and has sold the most consoles.
We will have to see what happens in 4 years time.
totalwar23 said:
The same thing is true with the PS3 and Xbox360. However, the longevity of a console depends on how financially successful it is for the people supporting it. Xbox lasted for 4 years before MS decided to release a new one, remember?
|
That's because the Xbox was a money sink for MS. It accomplished the primary goal of getting a foothold in the game hardware industry, but it had no future other than as the predecessor to the 360 due to its distant second place finish. Nvidia pulling the rug out from under the Xbox only made it a simpler issue to axe the console altogether, but either way, there was no point in MS to continue to back a loser with no future, even though it had a devoted user base due a very respectable library of softs.
Like the Saturn and Dreamcast, in the end, the Xbox was probably still being sold at a loss without a massive influx of license fees from volume games sales to make the platform profitable.
the ONLY thing i can see bettering for the next generation is less slowdown and pop up in game. I dont want photorealism. If we can get games like Gears, Heavy Rain and KZ2 this gen then im so very happy with gaming staying this visually pleasing....i really dont know where gaming can go....but the way the PS3 is set up the tweaks and firmware upgrades could be enough for me to be happy with PS3 power for the rest of my gaming needs.
Perfect online play and lobby setups, refine trophies/achievements and keep putting out games like LBP, Gears, Super MArio Galaxy, Paper Mario.....i couldnt be happier. Some games using 1:1 motion sensing from Nintendo might be fun but id like that to be one aspect of gaming in the future and not put into ALL games.....power wise, Blu-ray, online store and firmware upgrades i dont see why the PS4 or any future systems need to start leaping forward anytime soon.
CGI-Quality said:
Interesting. And I agree that the Next Gen shouldn't begin for a long while- until at least Holiday 2012. |
at the earliest i agree......i mean when i think about games that have been SPECIAL i dont see them as being techniclly amazing. Paper Mario for Wii was amazing, Gears looked great but its gritty gameplay is what had me going.....LBP is loking spectacular and not because of the cell or any processor.....Shadow of the Collosus was horrid graphically imo, but the art direction and just sheer gargantuan feeling made it breathtaking...
Technically we are at a good spot i just would like to see the perfection of all of the things we see now....creativity and great gaming is not synonymous with processing power and great gaming to me.
i'm sorry i pay for quality and bleeding edge tech. i will pay if it is worth it.
this blu-ray player here (ps3) was definately worth the price. And now, the games are even pretty good too!!

