Next Xbox already in planning
- Thread starter Angelcurio
- Start date
Megadrive1988
Veteran
doubtful, but I have thought of that myself. wireless AV connection? maybe, but probably not.
I'm hoping next-gen console eliminate optical media as their main format. I don't mean having downloadable games only, I mean having media that is solid-state to decrease loading speed, access times while increasing streaming capability and so data can move from media to RAM memory MUCH MUCH faster. optical disc drives should only be in place for backwards compatibility, if at all, something i don't really care about.
having solid-state media would reduce the cost of the console, less moving parts, less breakdowns, drives dying, increasing durability. if there could be a cheap solid-state media with reasonable storage capacity (even if it was only a 4-5 GB like single layer, single sided DVD, I'd take the trade off. FMV/CG could be done away with, and compression plus new rendering methods would make 4-5 GB enough storage space, even concidering textures.
probably this won't happen either. maybe the following generation (Xbox4, PS5).
I'm hoping next-gen console eliminate optical media as their main format. I don't mean having downloadable games only, I mean having media that is solid-state to decrease loading speed, access times while increasing streaming capability and so data can move from media to RAM memory MUCH MUCH faster. optical disc drives should only be in place for backwards compatibility, if at all, something i don't really care about.
having solid-state media would reduce the cost of the console, less moving parts, less breakdowns, drives dying, increasing durability. if there could be a cheap solid-state media with reasonable storage capacity (even if it was only a 4-5 GB like single layer, single sided DVD, I'd take the trade off. FMV/CG could be done away with, and compression plus new rendering methods would make 4-5 GB enough storage space, even concidering textures.
probably this won't happen either. maybe the following generation (Xbox4, PS5).
I can't reply to your whole post as I would be here all week with the way my kb works
This point here is interseting though. doesnt this go against the notion that Sony would wait _ years after MS if x720 launched in 2010?
Overall I think you're assuming "generations" though and I'm envisioning something more along the lines of overlapping generations independant of eachother. If you bought xb720 and wanted to stick with xbox then you'd get the new version in 6 years. It would be a generational jump compred to what you had before and would be priced accordingly. If you were curious as to what this whole "playstation" thing was all about then you may want to try the new ps4 as by that time it would have been on the shelf for 3 years with a good software library.
As you said (and I agree) the hardware would be very similar (lower dev cost for transition). And most likely the hardware would not be drastically different from it's direct descendant anyway. I expect ps4 touse cell along with ps5 and ps6. I expect whatever direction ms goes with xb720 they will build on that lineage for future generations ala cell. I also expect that regardless what direction Ms takes with their hardware, it will be well supported with ms dev tools to get them up to speed.
Overall this scenario I feel would encourage more multiconsole ownership and a bigger market in general.
Comparing the concept to dreamcast is off as this is suggesting one manufacturer should repeatedly release a new console every 3 years which is not what I've been saying. Every 3 years consumers would have a new console option but if they were a fan of x company then they would just wait for their nwe consoles every 6 years. If they want the latest and greatest at all times then they would be looking at owning both platforms which would be better for the industry anyway.
Does anyone have numbers on multiconsole ownership region based or worldwide?
-Regarding profitability - I was not speaking in terms of profitable for the whole platform as that would take many years! $ billion in the red on xbox1 is a big whole to climb out of. I was speaking strickly on a balance sheet for the time period. And when I stated 2007 I meant literal year not fy2007 for ms balance sheets. I think that by the end of this actual year xbox business will be profitable (baring unforeseen programs or updates which would pay dividends in the long run).
-"Flip the question" - obviously flipping the question does not work as Sony needs the ps3 to siton the shelf for a much longer time for them to turn a profit this gen. Ms doesn't have this problem as they are already making profits on the hardware at current retail. From what analyst are saying, ps3 is losing $200-300 per console. And that while selling for $200 more than their closest competitor and signs of sales slowing. Obviously Sony wants this generation to hang on for as long as possible to get back in black. Would it benefit MS to lengthen the generation as well? Sure it would! That's obvious! Would it help them for the xb3/ps4 generation? No. If nothing else ps2 and xbox360 have taught us that if you launch first with a VIABLE platform then you significantly increase your chances of platform success.
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly, wasn't that the original point. I'm not sure where the notion of 3 year cycles came in, it was always about normal 6 year cycles with a 3 year overlap.
Acert, is this where we are confusing each other?
If that is a real factor you're only undermining your claim about Sony doing the 2x thing with PS5/XB3.Acert93 said:
2x power difference doesn't translate into tangible improvements on screen in any shortterm (5-10 years from now, the impact of that difference will only be smaller, probably to the point of irrelevance) - heck PS2 power advantage over DC was approaching an order of magnitude and it took a year for obvious signs of it.
If you reread my arguement it is only a factor, and more of a mindshare one at that. The real factor I was stressing is that if Sony releases in 2010, and MS in 2013, Sony will have 50M plus customers and the publisher support and software library to keep significant mindshare. What possible incentive is there for publishers to move to the Xbox 3 in 2013? None. And that was the point, in context, of the "2x PS5" arround the corner. There is more value in buying a $200 PS4 with 3,000 games on the market -- and a ton in the pipeline due to the huge install base -- than to get a $500 Xbox 3 with none of that (i.e. risk)... the "2x PS5 waiting in the wings with backwards compatibility" is just an incentive NOT to endorse the new, weaker platform, and instead buy a PS4 with all the great, 3rd generation software coming out.
Since you replied and you are a Playstation developer, how 'bout I put you on the spot:
Do you think Sony should go this route, let MS launch in 2010/2011 and hold off until 2013/2014?
If your publisher supports the Xbox 3 in 2010/11, are they going to want to fully support the PS4 in 2013/14 when they know (a) the Xbox 3 has tens of millions more clients, probably in excess of 35M (b) their toolchain is robust and (c) there won't be much disparity between PS4 launch titles and Xbox 3 3rd generation titles and (d) the Xbox 4 is just a couple years away and MS will be pushing the marketing angle of "even more power" to drown out the PS4 noise?
Seems like swimming upstream to me.
While performance is a factor in new hardware (and PR and mindshare), we have seen a number of technologically average consoles win out in a generation more than once. Once a new console takes hold that is demonstratably better than previous hardware, and publishers and consumers begin investing in it, they are not too eager to buy "the next big thing" when it really isn't significantly better technically and
* Has a much smaller install base, hence
* Lacks the breadth of Publisher support and
* Has a Smaller software library and lacks a library of AAA budget software
* Has a much higher price point
* Lacks general momentum and mindshare.
In THIS context a new platform has a very hard time taking off -- and that is when if you have a sequaled console just beyond it that can proclaim even MORE power that (a) publishers don't seem as interested and (b) the lack of support/value for the new platform and the 'old' hardware coming into its own create a huge barrier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrFloopy
Exactly, wasn't that the original point. I'm not sure where the notion of 3 year cycles came in, it was always about normal 6 year cycles with a 3 year overlap.
Acert, is this where we are confusing each other?
No, I was assuming an overlapping schedule, 6 years, but 3 years between Xbox/PS launches.
2011 - Xbox 3
2014 - PS4
2017 - Xbox 4
2020 - PS5
I think the price point, install base, software library and bargin software, and mindshare along with the imminent release of the "next" console would make whoever "went second" get the short end of the stick.
If the PS4 launches in 2011 and MS says they are launching the Xbox 3 in 2014, I won't even bother waiting/thinking about the Xbox 3. Or vice versa. The benefit of "more power" in 2014 will be offset by all those other factors.
And I know in 2017 Sony will have the PS5 which will be a huge jump over the PS4 and a nice jump over the Xbox 3, but the difference being backwards compatibility and the majority of the market would then transition to the PS5 out of necessity.
At the rate publishers are transitioning now I just don't see them jumping on a platform in 2011, and then jumping on another in 2014 and then in 2017. I think the business side says: 2011 and 2017 and screw 2014. And in general I don't believe the consoles have such an unwavering fanbase to overcome all these factors. Playstation fans were Sega and Nintendo fans before; Xbox fans are previous Sony/Sega/Nintendo fans. It is a fickle market.
IMO the arguements by theChefO relate to his perception of Sony's Playstation. That is why I flipped the table: PS4 in 2011 and Xbox 3 in 2014. I seriously doubt he would be happy with that
I cannot think of many console platform fans who would want to wait until 2014 to get their new console while the competition got a free bill of sale in 2011-2013.
Anyhow, you could be right--I just don't see how the market factors that have driven the industry, especially the pockets of publishers--would make them happy about generation overlapping.
If there was signficant platform disparity in regards to customers and features/use, I could see such. e.g. Nintendo can release the Wii2 anytime they want, I don't think it even matters. But the Xbox and PS are pretty much angling toward the same customers... just not sure how market forces can cooperate at all when you are fighting for the same mindshare and publisher support.
The next generation won't bring a significant performance jump IMHO. Manufacturing technology is slowing down, and even if you can build a sytem that's 25-50x as powerful as the current gen, you still can't expect to properly reduce its costs with die shrinks (where do you want to go from 45nm?) - so manufacturers will be forced to build more economical systems, much like the Wii. Thus the advancement and innovation will have to come from software and interface...
I think Intel has been bullish, but it is becoming a factor as you note. IBM seems confident for Cell2 on 45nm in 2010. What I "worry" about to a degree is that the power is making current design schemes more difficult and complex. If the average development schedule has increased 20-50% with an equal increase in staff, what will the following generation bring? The PS4/Xbox 3 generation won't have the power RT/GI either, and you may be the person to ask on this: In an interview of industry people last year about the future of graphics the industry seems to be on a path for RT because of the simplicity of getting a renderer up and the control it puts in the artists hands. In a "perfect" world allowing artists and game desginers have a lot of control over the game's content is a good thing and increases productivity. Now I don't know if RT will help that as much as they suggest (Laa-Yosh?), but it does seem the current path we are on seems to be driving toward more complicated technologies.
Maybe that is where middleware comes in. UE3 has focused a lot on the content creation chain, both for art and level/gameplay design with their scripting engine.
I am not a developer, but from developers I get the idea that all the power in the world isn't relevant if they don't have the ability, tools, and time to actually maximize it. I guess that is why we hear so much about paradigm shifts and so forth.
That's why I think Sony will bow out of the technology race before next gen. MS will be the one to chase raw power and a traditional game experience imo next gen.
Really? I kind of look at it the other way. I think technologically Sony is in a great position with Cell. I think they can be bullish and aggressive with Cell2 in the PS4 and have a huge legacy of compatible code and experience that scales well. I see the PS3 as "biting the bullet" with future windfalls being pretty nice. I think Cell as a platform should scale nicely to whatever limits silicon allows and hopefully the investment developers have made in Cell programming (like multicore physics engines) will scale right along with it. Sony has a nice "hardware platform" strategy.
I think in this regards MS is kind of sitting on the outside looking in. Their direction is software, but I wonder how that interfaces with the future where you have crazy stuff like Fusion, Terra-scale, multiGPU, etc all on the horizon. I could easily see MS going the software+services route, especially with a graphic-centric design. But it is hard to guage MS right now as well as the long term market. Expect surprises
Hmmm not all surprises are pleasant...Megadrive1988
Veteran
I highly doubt that. I think that the PS4 variant of CELL2 will be reasonably powerful, say at least 10-20x the CELL in PS3, while Sony and Nvidia go for a much larger leap in graphics rendering performance like the one we say from PS1 to PS2, in addition to some attempt at REYES and/or a streamlined realtime version (aka a hack) of RT/GI even though it won't come close to movie-grade CG.
in addition to a much better way of controlling games. while dropping new & expensive optical disc media. the R&D and cost of production should all go into gaming, not multi-media.
otherwise, Sony might as well bow out.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
My current take is that MS will probably launch in 2011, possibly in the Spring instead of the Fall just to limit shortages in the first holiday season. They might even launch in Spring 2012, depending on when they think Sony will launch.
As for technology: Cost reduction is going to be tougher next generation, so I agree with the notion that they will take this into consideration before building really expensive machines. As always, game development will be the key. It's quite possible that we won't see anything that clearly outshines X360 graphics (GoW) on a PS3 until 2008, mainly because of how hard games are to develop now. I think that exploiting hardware is going to get more and more expensive and time consuming.
As for technology: Cost reduction is going to be tougher next generation, so I agree with the notion that they will take this into consideration before building really expensive machines. As always, game development will be the key. It's quite possible that we won't see anything that clearly outshines X360 graphics (GoW) on a PS3 until 2008, mainly because of how hard games are to develop now. I think that exploiting hardware is going to get more and more expensive and time consuming.
archangelmorph
Veteran
But will that really be the motivations of games developers by the time PS4 and Xbox3 rolls along?
I really question how much more games developers are going to care about developing the next uber-rendering engine when they realise the potential of cash cow game development in lifestyle/casual games and developing cheap, fast and creative titles for distribution platforms like EDI and XBLA..
Also considering how far creativity will get this gen once developers have successfully built up there code bases, frameworks and toolsets capable of providing movie-quality production values for excessively creative game ideas which STILL utilise the latest and greatest rendering tech..
I'm really hoping the games industry reaches it peak in the "ferverent persuit of photo-surrealism" and we hit a renaissance era whereby games developers really begin to push towards creating emotional, compelling and interactive experiences which are driven by the ideologies and motivations of amazing game design and not by a desire to show off the software/hardware tech..
If this happens then it's possible that we may see hardware platform holders put off releasing the next iteration of hardware for a considerably longer time then we all expect, leaving the software in terms of games, services and multimedia, to drive the evolution of the brand..
Imagine.. PS4 as nothing more than a massive firmware/OS update..
Panajev2001a
Veteran
But will that really be the motivations of games developers by the time PS4 and Xbox3 rolls along?
I really question how much more games developers are going to care about developing the next uber-rendering engine when they realise the potential of cash cow game development in lifestyle/casual games and developing cheap, fast and creative titles for distribution platforms like EDI and XBLA..
Also considering how far creativity will get this gen once developers have successfully built up there code bases, frameworks and toolsets capable of providing movie-quality production values for excessively creative game ideas which STILL utilise the latest and greatest rendering tech..
I'm really hoping the games industry reaches it peak in the "ferverent persuit of photo-surrealism" and we hit a renaissance era whereby games developers really begin to push towards creating emotional, compelling and interactive experiences which are driven by the ideologies and motivations of amazing game design and not by a desire to show off the software/hardware tech..
If this happens then it's possible that we may see hardware platform holders put off releasing the next iteration of hardware for a considerably longer time then we all expect, leaving the software in terms of games, services and multimedia, to drive the evolution of the brand..
Imagine.. PS4 as nothing more than a massive firmware/OS update..
Graphics are not the only reason why it IS a good thing if we get next-next generation consoles that have higher processing power and larger and faster memory pools (amongst other things) IMHO, and they are a way to push gaming forward even as far as amazing game design as you say.
Else, why did we ever purchased anything beyond a Dreamcast ?
That is in line with my own thoughts too. But I guess there will be ways (besides 32nm) to futher reduce costs, just not as soon/good as they used to be.
Anyway I wonder how much performance will be avaiable to innovation, ie we know that MS and intel are in R&D for HW to things likes voice recg (personally I love it), so how many new and advanced tech (ie, things that are today in R&D labs like AR, voice recg. and motion sensing) could we see before it requires too much performance/silicon.
Last edited by a moderator:
Acert - xbox launch date:
I think we're crossing here. Obviously I like what MS has been doing lately a lot more than what Sony has been doing and you know that but I don't think that is muddying my opinion on this matter. You're saying:
1) If Xbox launches in 2010 you're saying that Sony would hold a press conference and say, "We will launch ps4 in 2012 and it will be a quantum leap above xbox3". People would then weigh this information and holdout on an xbox3 purchase based on ps4's impending release.
2) If Sony launches in 2010 and MS waited three years later for xbox3, it would be over before it started as MS would be facing a 40 million unit ps4 headstart.
In my opinion Sony will be close to xbox360 in sales by 2010.
This places them close in mindshare as well. With that said, I'd say whoever launches first next gen has all but won that console generation (if the market continues to produce traditional console "generations"). All things being equal in that example of course. If one of the two vastly screws something up like: price point, availablity, nonstandard formats, or limited software that doesn't take advantage of the system, then those things will obviously affect how that platform is accepted in the market.
So all things being equal, how would it be bad for MS to be late (2012-2013) but good for Sony? Or am I missing something?
I think we're crossing here. Obviously I like what MS has been doing lately a lot more than what Sony has been doing and you know that but I don't think that is muddying my opinion on this matter. You're saying:
1) If Xbox launches in 2010 you're saying that Sony would hold a press conference and say, "We will launch ps4 in 2012 and it will be a quantum leap above xbox3". People would then weigh this information and holdout on an xbox3 purchase based on ps4's impending release.
2) If Sony launches in 2010 and MS waited three years later for xbox3, it would be over before it started as MS would be facing a 40 million unit ps4 headstart.
In my opinion Sony will be close to xbox360 in sales by 2010.
This places them close in mindshare as well. With that said, I'd say whoever launches first next gen has all but won that console generation (if the market continues to produce traditional console "generations"). All things being equal in that example of course. If one of the two vastly screws something up like: price point, availablity, nonstandard formats, or limited software that doesn't take advantage of the system, then those things will obviously affect how that platform is accepted in the market.
So all things being equal, how would it be bad for MS to be late (2012-2013) but good for Sony? Or am I missing something?
No, I never argued that Sony would wait 2 years. You are the one positioning a large gap, like 2 or 3 years. Everything I have written has been exactly against such! i.e. They will stick to the current generational system. If MS launches in 2011 Sony will in 2011 or 2012.
And as I mentioned to you personally, because of Sony's architecture as a *platform* I think they have some leeway with design (scaling) that MS doesn't have and could launch a system in 2010 with MS without displacing the PS3, and have the horsepower/forward thinking of a design from 2011 or later. Credit Cell for this. I definately see a higher probability of PS4 coming sooner as a "very high end" initially device than Sony leaving MS to have their way with the market for 3 years. But more than likely the show won't begin until 2011 and a lot can happen in that time and Sony may be able to just jump on board after 5 years "like normal".
I think some people are way to optimistic regarding launch schedules. Finnancial costs just say no before 2013/4-6, and current technology advancements are reaching its limits.
I hardly doubt Sony would launch a new game console before Christmas 2014, i doubt they are willing to take huge finnancial risks again after the costs of the current generation. Even if M$ launched by say Christmas 2012 in order to try again and conquer the new media platform, im not convinced that Sony would repeat the same mistakes it did this generation. In my pov it would wait and refine the sw/hw tools, the manufacturing and focus on stock consolidation before launch, this time definitly worldwide in order to penetrate the market more abrutply and re-gain its market-share, with more focus on its software line-up.
Finally someone mentioned voice-recognition and i wonder if all 3 companies (M$,Sony,Nintendo) will focus on voice-recognition as a new interface feature. Would that result in a patent war of some sort? uh nasty...
I hardly doubt Sony would launch a new game console before Christmas 2014, i doubt they are willing to take huge finnancial risks again after the costs of the current generation. Even if M$ launched by say Christmas 2012 in order to try again and conquer the new media platform, im not convinced that Sony would repeat the same mistakes it did this generation. In my pov it would wait and refine the sw/hw tools, the manufacturing and focus on stock consolidation before launch, this time definitly worldwide in order to penetrate the market more abrutply and re-gain its market-share, with more focus on its software line-up.
Finally someone mentioned voice-recognition and i wonder if all 3 companies (M$,Sony,Nintendo) will focus on voice-recognition as a new interface feature. Would that result in a patent war of some sort? uh nasty...
My guess is that xbox launch date will depend heavily on 360/PS3 ratio.
If the PS3 catches on and surpasses 360 this year in total numbers, threatening to become the next PS2 in sales - MS will launch the next xbox in 2009, so that Sony cannot respond. It will not be the same leap in power as 360 is to the xbox1, but it will be the most powerfull console on the market for probably 3-4 years.
If 360 manages to stay close to the PS3, then MS will be more inclined to capitalize on that and stay for another 2-3 years, until 2011-12.
Sony will not get PS4 out until 2012 or 2013. I guess it will be 2013 in the case MS launches in 2009 (depending on the sales of PS3 at that time, but if the manage to stay at PS2 levels, sony has no reason to hurry), and 2012 if MS launches in 2012 (to avoid the scenarion currently developing).
If the PS3 catches on and surpasses 360 this year in total numbers, threatening to become the next PS2 in sales - MS will launch the next xbox in 2009, so that Sony cannot respond. It will not be the same leap in power as 360 is to the xbox1, but it will be the most powerfull console on the market for probably 3-4 years.
If 360 manages to stay close to the PS3, then MS will be more inclined to capitalize on that and stay for another 2-3 years, until 2011-12.
Sony will not get PS4 out until 2012 or 2013. I guess it will be 2013 in the case MS launches in 2009 (depending on the sales of PS3 at that time, but if the manage to stay at PS2 levels, sony has no reason to hurry), and 2012 if MS launches in 2012 (to avoid the scenarion currently developing).
No, I never argued that Sony would wait 2 years. You are the one positioning a large gap, like 2 or 3 years. Everything I have written has been exactly against such! i.e. They will stick to the current generational system. If MS launches in 2011 Sony will in 2011 or 2012.
And as I mentioned to you personally, because of Sony's architecture as a *platform* I think they have some leeway with design (scaling) that MS doesn't have and could launch a system in 2010 with MS without displacing the PS3, and have the horsepower/forward thinking of a design from 2011 or later. Credit Cell for this. I definately see a higher probability of PS4 coming sooner as a "very high end" initially device than Sony leaving MS to have their way with the market for 3 years. But more than likely the show won't begin until 2011 and a lot can happen in that time and Sony may be able to just jump on board after 5 years "like normal".
I apologize then as I misunderstood you.
I thought you were under the impression that if MS launched in 2010 then Sony would launch in 2012 and dominate the market via a vastly superior spec machine. As for my opinion on 3 year overlaping generations it was just a thought. That's why I bring it here so the smart people can explain why it would or wouldn't work.
RIP Acert - Hello Joshua!
Similar threads
