Wondering what type of platform features are needed for next gen. We had a lot of discussion about what the hardware would do for the games, but not the platform.
My xbox is currently being occupied by my kids watching netflix, but with HT and enough CPU, it could be playing a game on another screen or streaming it elsewhere.
I get the idea but it is better from a manufacturer POV to sell you another system, especially if through a tiered market approach manufacturers pass on the (failed) selling at loss (or close) business model.
I don't know for the platform but clearly people want to play on "movable" system.
Just something I'm thinking about right now, trying to figure out if this is an important aspect for the platform developers. I know the common rebuttal is 'my smart tv has netflix, don't need it on xbox etc'. But smart tvs are (a) slow in general, and (b) only support the most popular media services. Take longer to update etc. We are still discounting blu ray playing while playing a game.
Smart is a bad idea, TV last far too long compared to whatever hard and software platform is integrated, then there are "the things" provided by the ISP which are equally bad for the same reason. That's something that need standardization like we saw in the PC realm say there is a standard slot in the tv you plug whatever "smart thing you want (from Apple to Android or windows powered devices).
There is a cross over point for MS, if they have tons of CPU and memory such that one person could be using the device for games and the remaining power could be used for another app by another user. That would be an almost weird mainframe style model, where all the processing could occur on on a single device and it would stream out to other devices if needed. I don't see that as being prominent, but I can't help but see a future where there are multiple users on 1 device. Whether it be M/KB or controller. We're talking supporting multiple cursors and keyboards etc, so that everyone can take advantage of this one device.
I don't feel the same power is still more the leading concern to me, you have powerful system you want it to consume its "fair amount of power compared to the task it executes. This gen of console lacks proper power management as seen on mobile devices, laptop even desktop.
The server/client approach is sensible for manufacturers want to target specific markets or locations (with high optic fiber overage) and reach phone, tablets but also TV.
There's too much computing power out there for all of it to be wasted on a single workstation. Usage graphs will show that PCs are unlikely to be really pushed to it's maximum capability unless doing heavy professional work and even then, only a handful of workstations are going to be pushing the box to load 24/7. We are good at pushing GPUs to their limits. But in a non niche task, we are not good at pushing CPUs to their limits. And we continue to see more innovation in moving over more CPU work to the GPU such that it continually frees up more CPU to do other things.
Again I see what you describe as an opportunity to save power, it is not like performance comes without heat, noise, etc.
When I look at the stack for MS, I think we'll see Windows move in this direction. Users can build beefy machines that multiple users in a house hold can draw from, or a company etc. They could collaborate on a single screen locally or work on the device separately etc. But they could also have their own hardware to support it, and a powerful enough xbox may be able to do the trick to act as a central machine. It would be next gen for sure, and something I wouldn't expect until next gen. The question is whether they would go for that. Perhaps a pro model. But this time the differentiating factor is more GPU but instead it comes with more CPU and memory to support other users leveraging the hardware, the remaining game hardware is still 'locked' to perform the same as the base unit.
If computing power turn inot such a commodity it is more economically sensible to sell multiple devices making a profit on hardware.
I would add that through the Switch we can the extend to which modern games are scalable, the truth is a lot of laptops can do as good a job as the Switch. PC editors are pushing the bar with system requirement and minimal config also to drive hardware adoption (I don't know if they get money or help/man hours in return). The thing is the lowest common denominator which is pretty much the suckiest windows set-up is mostly up to the task (running Switch games) or really soon will. Then it is commercial will to push gaming. MSFT should work on "pocketable/practical" pad (so something pretty flat) that looks a little like their surface smart cover, something you can conveniently put into you pocket or slide into you bag and use it to play on phone, tablte and laptop.
I don't suspect next gen will simply be just this gen with better games. There needs to be more to it to get people like myself to upgrade. And it can't just be 'becomes more PC like', they need to develop a whole solution that is easy and sensible and makes sense to use as an offering.
I don't expect a jump, I would make sense for manufacturers to introduce hardware that are pretty much XBX slim+ and a PS4PRO slim+ for Sony.
The main improvement would(should) be on power consumption and
CPU power. They could also target a relatively low launch price and a sexy form factor.
Through that approach you keep customers that same way Applle does for example. Customers are pretty much stuck to your environment, you offer BC even forward compatibility with old games taking advantage of new hardware.
This generation has been great but still greatly paralyzed by install times; slow application loading etc. it's certainly something that can be improved upon. How to solve these issues I don't know, but if games could load and install faster, I would already consider that a win.
I can't see that changing, storage is still slow, faster storage is too expensive, games are
huge so are patches. Faster CPU will help but only that much.
I would say that editors should consider lighter version of games (simpler asset from graphics, to sounds) they could deploy on the windows store targeting laptop use for example (OT I know).
Consider the future of multiplayer in the same house hold.
1 console, but instead of 1 screen of 4K you have 4 instances of the same game running at the same time but at 1080p, streaming to 3 other users in your house and 1 on the main screen so that all four of you can play. That fixes a lot of the problem of needing to have multiple xboxes in a single household just to play some games together.
Every body wants crossplay and somehow affordable handheld that would play modern games. There are clearly way to do that, through software that can run on laptop (targeting a proper lower common denominator or a tiered approach to software) or through other "movable" affordable gaming devices.
On the matter of affordable "movable" gaming device I think it is every as doable as 199€ laptops. Though the form factor must evolve.
Long story short I think that manufacturers as well as editors should look at the Switch success as well as the public reception of their mid-gen upgrade and go with a more global approach of gaming. People wants to play the same-ish (the ish is important) games without being bound to TV or their living room.
As you said smart-tv suck => there is role for console here but they have to be affordable (at least a SKU).
, yes I recall such a dream. Maybe it will work after all.
