Honestly, do you think the successor to the Xbox is going to sell 3x worse than its predecessor? I mean, you can use any metric and magical thinking to get the data to say what you want it to say but I'll call you out on conformation bias next. People with a conformation bias have already written off "next-next gen" and like to point to the WiiU as proof of it. I'm fairly certain the next Xbox and Playstation won't be peddling along at less than 100k month only after 3 months on the marketplace. When the next COD or Madden hits shelves and we see the new sexy graphics, with all these new sexy gameplay features, those people aren't going to want to be playing it on their 360. Content and services will drive people to the new platforms, that's how its always worked. Nintendo had neither to drive their platform which is why it's a failure.
Confirmation bias goes both ways. Thinking objectively about the whole thing, its hard to be optimistic about the future of dedicated console gaming.
Let's start with Microsoft. Although Microsoft is in competition with Sony in the console business, you have to remember that this is Microsoft. They make most of their money with Windows and Office licenses. Xbox is a very successful brand in the West but MS has lost billions to get there. MS is in the business to make money, not lose a lot of money and continue to pursue a market with low profitability for them. They obviously did this for a reason. According to that one guy, it was to 'kill' Sony. Whether or not that's true, the xbox 'experiment' had a lot to do with the taking over the living room. Something that Apple is also interested in obviously but doesn't really know how to proceed. Overall though, Apple is MS's main competitor. No I'm not saying Apple TV is in competition with consoles. Think about the whole picture.
The MS and Sony loss leader strategy lost them a ton of money and it doesn't look like either are doing it again (Sony can't afford to). They raised the bar and made it very expensive to compete which definitely effected Nintendo. I really think this started with PS2 being a loss leader. A new sexy console that played new sexy games and dvds for the price of a dvd player (pretty much anyways.. at the time of course) and it didn't break the bank (for consumers). The Wii didn't create the casual market like some people think, it expanded it to people like grandparents. There were casual games for the PS2 and many casual gamers. Not just core gamers.
Xbox brought console games closer to PC games than ever before, converting some PC gamers and introducing those experiences to others. It only sold 24+ million consoles compared to PS2's 150+ million. It had a higher attach rate than PS2 probably because core gamers buy more games. I doubt grandma ever played anything beyond Wii Sports on their Wii, in comparison.
360 and PS3 sales combined in the past 7 years sold about as much as the PS2 alone did in its first 7 years. How many of that is casual? Probably a lot going off kinect sales. Why mention this? Because in 2006, an overclocked gamecube was good enough for casual gamers. My laptop has overall better hardware than the rumored Durango/Orbis specs; the generation gap will be much smaller than the last one. I have no doubt that core gamers will buy the new hardware. But that's a lot smaller of a demographic than you probably think. I do think it's very possible the next xbox could sell 3x less than the 360. The PS3 didn't repeat the success of the PS2 with sales under half of PS2's lifetime total.
Publishers like EA will probably gimp their current gen ports to get you to buy new hardware and buy their games made for new hardware, but I only see a small demographic taking the plunge. PS3/360 might be ancient, but consumers don't really care about specs. They might care about graphics and games, but they've reached the point of diminishing returns. You and I might not think so, but the masses will. They don't make these consoles for just you and I, they make them to make money. Something that they lost a lot of to make a little bit for themselves with the current gen - not a good business model.
The tablets/smartphones have had an effect on consumer trends which will effect their console buying decisions. So will the poor economy, especially if these consoles are over $500. I think MS to some extent realizes all this which is why kinect 2.0 will come with it and they're pushing it as an entertainment console. They'll still cater to core gamers but the core gamers confirmation bias won't comprehend they are an afterthought. Xbox is a brand now and the next xbox console is more or less a PC. I have a feeling the brand will extend to the PC in addition to TVs and whatever they're talking about. It's already used on their phones and tablets.
It's not just the Vita tanking or the Wii U not selling. There are many more 'signs' out there. The worst enemy of the new hardware will be their existing current gen hardware. More than ever they'll be competing with it. And if the rumors about no used games are true and if there is no solution for BC (mostly of interest for those who made a lot of online purchases this time around), game over. MS can also afford to fail. The brand can't fail though, it's no longer going to be a console brand. Sony cannot afford to fail, they're in poor financial shape. Sony could do everything right to cater to the core gamers (and I think they will try), sell a lot of games for third party publishers, and still fail. The demographic is not large enough when you take all those other elements away. Then there is PC which possibly because of Steam has kinda rebound from harder times (Steam has also slightly curbed PC gaming's largest problem: piracy. Piracy is still there but buying a AAA game for $15 with auto updates and the ability to download it anywhere is appealing to many former 'soft' pirates).
"That's how its always worked" is
never a safe bet. Business as usual will run you into the ground.. unless you're a huge corporation and the government bails you out and instead of going to prison for destroying the economy you continue on business as usual... I don't think applies to video game consoles though.
I've seen people who call themselves gamers who I'm convinced don't noticed the difference between 30fpsa and 60fps. At least they don't care about it if they notice it. Even some of these sub HD rendering games look HD at normal sitting distances (from say a 55" TV, 7 to 10 feet). You'll have better visuals and better lighting, things that a small number of people care about. You'll have deeper gameplay experiences, AI, and physics if they choose to use them. But at the end of the day you could ground-up re-create the same game suiting to ancient HD twins hardware gimped in certain areas with compromised or faked lighting and the masses won't see the difference. That's assuming they would re-create one of the next gen titles, but hopefully you see my point.
