Reasonable said:
Good points. I do think this gen will last a little longer than usual, though, mainly driven by the following:
1 - economic downturn - I expect this to add a year or two to the gen as it will likely foster climate of moderation rather than focus on trading up to new versions (I mean in the bigger picture, not the smaller HC who'd trade up to get an even more graphically intense Gears or Metal Gear). Economic downturns tend to focus people on getting more out of what they have and finding more cost effective ways to extend value of investments they've made. 2 - dramatic cost of development driven by HD consoles - I can easily see another Wii in a normal cycle, but not another big HD jump. Developers have been complaining a lot about high cost of development for HD consoles, and while the SDKs are good, clearly another power jump would simply worsen the situation 3 - given 1) and 2) above I expect MS and Sony to instead stick with the current consoles spec, which I'd argue is easily good enough to last and 3 years, and instead expand the systems through extended experiences via Natal and the 'purple wand'. This plays nicely to the idea of 'adding value' to existing investments. Instead of buying a whole new console, controllers, etc. you instead buy less expensive extension tech that dramatically changes what you already have. It also eases pressure on development costs and allows the industry to milk their investments in current tech for longer.
In short, I think Sony and MS are going to go down the route you suggest, reinventing the existing consoles through peripherals and focusing on new gameplay approaches vs hiking graphical power. I think Wii Fit has been a real interesting peripheral this gen, showing how something that genuinely extends the experience (if properly backed by titles) can effectively change the core console offering and drive additional sales and growth via titles specific to that peripheral. MS and Sony's challenge is to avoid what I think of as the EyeToy issue - if they let their new control schemes become low interest peripheral with little support, they'll have failed completely in revitilising their consoles mid gen. But if they get it right, it'll be as though they've launched 360 V2 and PS3 V2 and I'd expect that, coupled with 1) and 2) above, to keep the consoles on the market, viably selling, a lot longer than usual. Nintendo may come out with a new console, but they have better breathing room to do so. However, looking at current sales and the success of Wii Fit I wouldn't be surprised if they make a concious effort to extend Wii lifetime also.
|
Good points on the reasons this generation will last longer. But you missed one, which is a unified online service. Both Xbox Live, PSN and Wii Friend codes help towards this. It's generally established that games with online last alot longer than it's offline counterparts. (People still play CS 1.6!). Being online and connected to the internet helps keep the system updated, and as Microsoft recently shown. Allow you to completely reinvent your console with software.
By that reason alone, I can easily guess that this generation will last the PS3 10 year lifespan. Not only will the PS3 hit 10 years, but the wii, and 360 will hit it as well. This is benefitial to many, including us gamers.
It's often argued that our graphical, and processing power has reached a point where it's acceptable for the majority of the population. Any further improvements would burden developers with extremely high development costs and bring the industry further down. Instead of striving to improve the industry. As we get later, and later into a console's life. Developers will be able to develop HD games for cheaper as the technology becomes more and more commonplace and widely used. They will also be able to safely use larger budgets because as the overall population of people who own the consoles increases, so do their protential sales, and thus. Money earned.
The point being that our hardware is at a point where it doesn't need to be improved anymore. Doing so is damaging to the industry and doesn't help consumers, whom will have to pay for more expensive hardware in the future. And developers whom will have to pay more to be able to bring out the full potential of new and improved hardware.
This generation is at a point where almost all upgrades to the consoles can be done via software. Including NATAL and the PS3 Motion Wand opens up more avenues of development without increasing the overall cost of developing. This means that games can only go down in developing cost and allows for us as gamers to be able to enjoy the potential of gaming as a whole.
Miyomoto said it once before. That having nothing but powerful machines in a console war is like having nothing but dinosaurs roaming around. They will fight and eventually destroy themselves. By constantly moving forth and trying to achieve photorealism, extreme power, and all that. We're entering a realm that it's very possible to destroy the industry. Games are requiring budgets of multi-millions, and smaller gaming companies who want to get into the industry have a harder time making the market penetration that they need in order to be able to garner the money to make blockbuster games to compete with already powerful companies like Rockstar.
Sorry, I'm ranting. I'll go back to IM now.
Why must JRPG female leads suck so bad?
