Feasibility of an upgradeable or forwards compatible console *spawn*

[expletive]

Nuts. Obviously everything doesn't revolve around the gaming console market, but big profits and dollars sure seem to make a lot of sense. When the next gen consoles are able to make a decent profit on the hardware, and sell millions of games that will mean there's little to no reason to release a new or upgraded system. If another company does decide to jump in then the onus is on them to establish themselves while spending billions of dollars doing so. If both Sony or MS see that these new competitors aren't making headway into the console market then there's little reason to release a newer console. You act as if any old company can come in and release something and it will change the entire dynamic of the industry. The costs of reality say otherwise.

First off, I think these machines will be profitable almost immediately, it appears they will be more easily cost reduced, and also more scaleable so complete ground up re-designs aren't necessary.

With regards to competitors coming in, they already have. $99 Roku boxes play angry birds, $99 apple TVs can stream Infinity Blade 2 to your TV. Where will these devices be in two to three years? These things already exist. Its a bit of why BluRay will never be what DVD was, even though BR is superior, streaming is damn close enough.

Gabe newell:
"The threat right now is that Apple has gained a huge amount of market share, and has a relatively obvious pathway towards entering the living room with their platform," Newell said. "I think that there’s a scenario where we see sort of a dumbed down living room platform emerging."

In regards to Microsoft and Sony, Newell claimed that "Apple rolls the console guys really easily. The question is, can we make enough progress in the PC space to establish ourselves there, and also figure out better ways of addressing mobile before Apple takes over the living room?”

 

[Xenio]

Yes, they have a patent on JIT compile for 2 architecturely different GPUs. Those guys have implemented assorted emulators, h/w compat, recompile, JIT compile, up/down porting, and other techniques between all the Playstations.

what kind of hardware will be required to emulate a ps4 coded to metal?
seems impossibile for me, for the next 15 year al least

 

[SKYSONY]

I´m not sure if forward compat is on Sony current agenda. We have seen MS patents that point out to a hardware that offers forward compat, with an design focused on that. I´m not sure this applies to Sony.

Mind MS is also partnering with cable providers, a move Sony is not reported to be doing.

 

[patsu]

what kind of hardware will be required to emulate a ps4 coded to metal?
seems impossibile for me, for the next 15 year al least

It is possible for Sony because the next next machine is not out yet. And the upcoming one is also designed "from scratch". When they want to refresh the system, they will pick a h/w and s/w approach that make the transition trivial.

I believe Sony provides low level API for developers too (not just high level ones). For people (like NaughtyDog ?) that really code on the metal, they will have to take care of themselves. I don't expect many devs to do this.

It's also one of the reasons Cell was abandoned. They basically pick a "common" design so that developers don't have to use esoteric techniques. Compared to past consoles, the software should be portable or recompilable (dynamically or statically) to other vendors' platforms, let alone their own future ones.

For truly risk free run-everywhere games (on iOS and Android), I think they will continue to push for approach like PS Mobile.

 

[upnorthsox]

Actually the business model would remain quite the same actually.

HW sold for small loss or breakeven, and make cash on sw.

For the devs, it would be pretty transparent if the hardware is designed correctly. Same content, same gameplay, same "target". Just let the api handle the game behind the scenes and render as best as possible to the machine's ability.

For the bottom tier that means 720p and perhaps 30fps (frame rate might be a bit too much)

For mid tier, 1080p.

Upper tier, 1080p + 3D.

This happens on a daily basis for pc gamers, but with more variables.

So as a Dev, give them a quicky/crap port and be done with it. Sounds like a plan........

 

[MrSpiggott]

Technically, I quite like the concept of a multi-tier level console, but I don't think it's necessary to delay the release of the higher sku.

Arcade sku = 720p standard
Pro sku = 1080p standard
Elite = 1080p 3D
Elite pro = 1080p 3D 60FPS

Etc.

How long would Microsoft support different revisions? 3 years, 7 years, 10 years?
Won't this stifle innovation?
When I get a new console it's not just the improved graphics that I look forward too, its more often the game play advances that the improved hardware allow.
If three generations of hardware have to be supported, which seems fair assuming a 2 year update cycle, then all that's going to improve is image quality and non gameplay related effects.
For example a grand theft auto style city won't be able to grow in complexity.

Not sure that's very appealing.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Not sure that's very appealing.

I'm quite sure it's not appealing. The fascination with the iOS model by some people scares the hell out of me. It does not bode well for quality products, devs will target the lowest denominator and if it runs better on newer hardware that will be great for those that buy it.

 

[dobwal]

I´m not sure if forward compat is on Sony current agenda. We have seen MS patents that point out to a hardware that offers forward compat, with an design focused on that. I´m not sure this applies to Sony.

Mind MS is also partnering with cable providers, a move Sony is not reported to be doing.

Sony is guilty of what most other companies that are dominate in their market are guilty of doing. Adopting a conservative approach in an effort to not to disrupt their success and market position. MS is doing what some upstarts tend to do, make attempts to disrupt the current paradigm with new additions to standard services/features.

MS was guilty of the same conservative approach in the PC space but now feel compelled to try a more radical and aggressive approach.

If MS attempts this type of sku system and finds success, Sony's saving grace will be that the hardware is practically the same. There exist the possiblity of them retooling mid generation to accomodate a multi sku system based on performance. It would have been much harder if they were to use big high TPD desktop based hardware they squeezed into a smaller form factor.

 

[expletive]

How long would Microsoft support different revisions? 3 years, 7 years, 10 years?

I dont think its about supporting hardware revisions as much as it about support feature support as the new versions come out. The same way some features on iOS are supported on all phones, some would only be supported on newer machines.

Won't this stifle innovation?

When I get a new console it's not just the improved graphics that I look forward too, its more often the game play advances that the improved hardware allow.
If three generations of hardware have to be supported, which seems fair assuming a 2 year update cycle, then all that's going to improve is image quality and non gameplay related effects.
For example a grand theft auto style city won't be able to grow in complexity.

So you have Durango now. Then you have Durango 2 in 2 years, but in the meantime sony has only come out with one Orbis, How is having a more powerful Durango 2 existing along side Durango 1 and Orbis stifling innovation and preventing levels from growing in complexity?

 

[AlphaWolf]

So you have Durango now. Then you have Durango 2 in 2 years, but in the meantime sony has only come out with one Orbis, How is having a more powerful Durango 2 existing along side Durango 1 and Orbis stifling innovation and preventing levels from growing in complexity?

Durango 2 launches with a user base of 0, why would devs care about it at all. Orbis becomes the target platform for every game as the durango base is split.

 

[Xenio]

So you have Durango now. Then you have Durango 2 in 2 years, but in the meantime sony has only come out with one Orbis

and after that, a bigger durango 3 will come, and still same orbis

 

[dagamer]

and after that, a bigger durango 3 will come, and still same orbis

There's good reason why the average length of a console generation is about 5-6 years, because any shorter and a few bad things happen:

1) Console manufacturers never have time to take advantage of the tail of a generation when they are most profitable.
2) Developers never get to produce games that take the most advantage of a system.
3) Console install base is the largest, so a hit game has the best sales possible.
4) Not enough time to develop a new IP and make a trilogy.

The original Xbox -> 360 transition was a fluke that it went over so well despite being on 4 years in between. Sega only had 4 years between its consoles and that didn't end quite so well.

 

[expletive]

Durango 2 launches with a user base of 0, why would devs care about it at all. Orbis becomes the target platform for every game as the durango base is split.

1. It wont launch with a user base of 0, it would launch with a user base of launch day sales.
2. I turn up and down the IQ on PC games all the time. Change the resolution, set stuff from good to ultra, etc. Why cant devs do the same thing?
3. The Durango user base is not split, it just has a lowest common denominator of Durango 1, which is the same LCD as Orbis.

In fact, you could make the argument that incremental hardware upgrades energize the brand and spike sales of Xboxes in general, which is really what MS wants. They dont care if you buy the $299 or $199 or $99 version, they just want an Xbox in every living room.

 

[MrSpiggott]

So you have Durango now. Then you have Durango 2 in 2 years, but in the meantime sony has only come out with one Orbis, How is having a more powerful Durango 2 existing along side Durango 1 and Orbis stifling innovation and preventing levels from growing in complexity?

That's very interesting. Your example reminds me of someone that's happened to me recently.
I've just upgraded from a faulty IPad 1 to an IPad 4. There's a considerable difference in CPU and graphics power, but ive not noticed any real differences in games. Higher resolutions certainly, but that's about it.
To make financial sense games are still targeted towards the Ipad1 spec.
I can't see the Durango being any different if it went this rapid upgrade route.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Yes in 2 years they'll launch a console more than 3x as powerful. Guess everyone should just wait for that.

This is true of all technology. Wait 6 months and get a better device. Only then instead of buying that device, you can wait just 6 months more and get an even better one. Consumers are used to this and know to make their purchase when they have the money and a product they like the look of. Sometimes they get pee'd off such as buying a new iPad only to hear a new one is coming out 6 months later, but a two year upgrade cycle is far less than the annual updates of TVs, cars, computer, tablets, etc.

 

[-tkf-]

Only because he has phone-envy. His 3GS has more functionality now than was ever promised by apple at purchase and no less than it would have had if the 4,4s, 5 were never released.

Totally of thread there but NO, many apps just stops working because you can't upgrade them past iOS version X. I have an old iPod the amount of apps that supports it is low to non. If i remember it correctly my Squeezebox is dead on my iPod, support is gone. I am not even sure if the old versions of my current apps is still available on iTunes. So at some point the iTunes store simply dies and i wouldn't be surprised if at some point i can't update my music anymore when iTunes stops supporting my old iPod.

*Note i don't buy music on iTunes just an example

 

[AlphaWolf]

This is true of all technology. Wait 6 months and get a better device. Only then instead of buying that device, you can wait just 6 months more and get an even better one. Consumers are used to this and know to make their purchase when they have the money and a product they like the look of. Sometimes they get pee'd off such as buying a new iPad only to hear a new one is coming out 6 months later, but a two year upgrade cycle is far less than the annual updates of TVs, cars, computer, tablets, etc.

And a lot of people wait many many years before buying into those new technologies. Look how long it took to get people to move to HDTV, look at the slow uptake for blu-ray. I know I won't touch another iOS type upgrade device until at least the 3rd iteration.

 

[joker454]

Year 0: 1.2TF ------------------- $350
Year 2: 1.2TF, 2.4TF, 4TF ---- $250, $350, $500 ---- 4K and HQ 3D games!
Year 4: 2.4TF, 4TF, 8TF ------- $200, $350, $600 ---- Next gen begins early for the hardcore gamers (and cloud beta access)
Year 6: Let's go to the cloud! -- $300 - 600 / yr ------- Games, cable, Internet, phone, etc

I think I'll get Orbis at launch and wait for Year 2 to get Durango Elite sku if Orbis doesn't upgrade.

There's no need to have a fixed release schedule like that, that's not what forward compatibility and/or writing to api's is for. Aside from the obvious benefits like saving devs a fortune in development costs, having great launch titles, easy compatibility across different platforms, forward compatibility, etc, the other benefit is that it let's them release a new revision of Durango as needed rather than being forced to ride it out on a fixed 7 year schedule.

The old (and to me now broken) console development model was throw everything away, spend a pile of money re-writing everything for a new box that has no audience, and milk that cow for 7 years because you have to recoup your investment and not piss of every dev on the planet in the process. With forward compatibility and writing everything to an api then can now release a new Durango as needed. If by 2016 Durango is still very popular, selling great and there haven't been many new hardware advances then cool, keep riding it out, no need to release a revised model. If sales slow or if some new must have hardware development emerges then also cool, ship a Durango 2 that plays all existing games and leverages said new hardware developments.

It gives them the freedom to do whatever they want, and no one is hurt in the process because all code written to whatever platform can be re-leveraged on whatever other compatible platform. Developers will now actually have an investment in code and in their knowledge base of the platform, rather than having to throw it all away every few years. Developers also don't have to risk the bank on a new platform because the new platform isn't really new anymore, it's compatible with a bunch of other platforms so they can target a Durango 2 safely even if it has an audience of 6 because that same code will get re-used on the myriad of other compatible platforms.

 

[-tkf-]

so PC devs did not make different resolution textures and switch ON/OFF effects depending on hardware?
in my world this happens all the times


and for PC they have to support hundreds hardware combinations, with durango, two or three.

Afaik the idea with consoles is to have a locked down hardware to target. The way this is done is that everything is made with the console as target. The difference with PC games is that the use a more crude way to scale games, making the "low" versions uglier than it would have been if the developers have targeted the "low" version from the start.

Someone correct me if i am wrong, just making educated guesses here.

 

[AlphaWolf]

Afaik the idea with consoles is to have a locked down hardware to target. The way this is done is that everything is made with the console as target. The difference with PC games is that the use a more crude way to scale games, making the "low" versions uglier than it would have been if the developers have targeted the "low" version from the start.

Someone correct me if i am wrong, just making educated guesses here.

Any effort used to support other devices could certainly be used to make the one version option look better.