Oh dear god this upcoming generation will be interesting

[Mulciber]

Er, he said XBox2 and XBox3. PS3 didn't figure at all in his post.

i must have misread it then, because my mind couldn't accept that anyone would fathom trying to code a game for a system that could be anywhere beyond 5 years away from its yet to be released predecessor. or speculate on it.

plus ive been up for 2 days, meh

 

[GwymWeepa]

Er, he said XBox2 and XBox3. PS3 didn't figure at all in his post.

i must have misread it then, because my mind couldn't accept that anyone would fathom trying to code a game for a system that could be anywhere beyond 5 years away from its yet to be released predecessor. or speculate on it.

plus ive been up for 2 days, meh

Umm well if what I wrote in the post could be a possibility, it would only be implemented once the xbox3 came out. So imagine MS cuts the lifespan of their consoles short to only 4 years, well to minimize the trauma to some people, they could have a year or two of transitional titles that had code for both machines, one version would be simpler graphically than the other and run on the legacy hardware, the other would be the higher end graphical experience and run on the xbox3.

 

[Mulciber]

Er, he said XBox2 and XBox3. PS3 didn't figure at all in his post.

i must have misread it then, because my mind couldn't accept that anyone would fathom trying to code a game for a system that could be anywhere beyond 5 years away from its yet to be released predecessor. or speculate on it.

plus ive been up for 2 days, meh

Umm well if what I wrote in the post could be a possibility, it would only be implemented once the xbox3 came out. So imagine MS cuts the lifespan of their consoles short to only 4 years, well to minimize the trauma to some people, they could have a year or two of transitional titles that had code for both machines, one version would be simpler graphically than the other and run on the legacy hardware, the other would be the higher end graphical experience and run on the xbox3.

i for one, hope nothing like this would ever come to pass. developers have a hard enough time as it is.

 

[GwymWeepa]

Er, he said XBox2 and XBox3. PS3 didn't figure at all in his post.

i must have misread it then, because my mind couldn't accept that anyone would fathom trying to code a game for a system that could be anywhere beyond 5 years away from its yet to be released predecessor. or speculate on it.

plus ive been up for 2 days, meh

Umm well if what I wrote in the post could be a possibility, it would only be implemented once the xbox3 came out. So imagine MS cuts the lifespan of their consoles short to only 4 years, well to minimize the trauma to some people, they could have a year or two of transitional titles that had code for both machines, one version would be simpler graphically than the other and run on the legacy hardware, the other would be the higher end graphical experience and run on the xbox3.

Let's see if this example would make it clearer. Let's imagine MS had planned ahead and decided to do this for this upcoming generation. Xbox2 releases, Halo 2 is still hot, fans are still clamouring for Xbox content...well they could put say, a simpler rendition of Halo 3 on a special layer of hd-dvd (kind of like how they can put cd layer on dvds) that would have the same graphics engine as Halo 2, and naturally it would be playable on the Xbox. Now, once you pop that sucker into the Xbox3, the game would run on the more advanced graphics engine.

 

[GwymWeepa]

Er, he said XBox2 and XBox3. PS3 didn't figure at all in his post.

i must have misread it then, because my mind couldn't accept that anyone would fathom trying to code a game for a system that could be anywhere beyond 5 years away from its yet to be released predecessor. or speculate on it.

plus ive been up for 2 days, meh

Umm well if what I wrote in the post could be a possibility, it would only be implemented once the xbox3 came out. So imagine MS cuts the lifespan of their consoles short to only 4 years, well to minimize the trauma to some people, they could have a year or two of transitional titles that had code for both machines, one version would be simpler graphically than the other and run on the legacy hardware, the other would be the higher end graphical experience and run on the xbox3.

i for one, hope nothing like this would ever come to pass. developers have a hard enough time as it is.

Oh I know it'll probably never happen, I was just wondering if it would be possible.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

It's possible. The big thing that developers hate is that they have to start from userbase=zero every new generation of hardware. If MS can minimize this by moving the price point low enough to get a faster adoption rate on the new hardware and by providing tools for allowing developers to tap both the new and old userbases with new games they might have a winning formula. It's especially true now when early titles won't have the budget to truly push the new hardware anyway. As the new userbase expands the game dev budgets increase and they can afford to tap more and more features of the new hardware. It's certainly possible, but is it truly feasible? Hard to say.

 

[see colon]

sega tried shortening the lifespan of it's console (saturn), launched it's next generation part with a solid line-up and at an extreamly affordable price ($199.99US) a year earlier than the competition, and still got taken to the cleaners when the ps2 was released.

 

[Jov]

As I stated in the other thread: I think it will all boil down to games/marketing/branding as it always does.

What do I think this means? Well, Xenon has an advantage in that the games have a one-year head start, but PS3 will have the later advantage of being more powerful and exploitable. This is why I think MS will try to counter that advantage by releasing Xbox 3 in 2009. I'm thinking they will attempt to shorten the cycle to launching at $249 every 4 years instead of $299 every 5 years, mainly to reduce the effectiveness of Sony's big investments in fabs. They'll likely support two hardware iterations simultaneously starting with Xbox 2 (but not Xbox) possibly through XNA.

Once again, I'll state that it's a risky strategy trying to get consumers to buy new hardware quicker, but it might work if the hardware is cheap enough, backwards compatible (beginning with Xbox 3), and uses similar peripherals. I'm mixed on whether or not I think it's a good idea.

You're making it sounds like MS taking the Sega route with shorter cycles.

I have a feeling if anything the cycle will be longer, look at the PS2, and as games take more resources to develop, devs houses will want to stay on that generation where they have developed their tools to exploit their investment, even with or without XNA.

 

[wco81]

Well if Xenon launches in 2005, the Xbox will have had a 4-year cycle.

I think what drives transitions to new hardware is sales. For this generation, sales peaked in 2003, right?

So we're on a downward trend, which is why the industry needs to get the user base to upgrade.

 

[Magnum PI]

Well if Xenon launches in 2005, the Xbox will have had a 4-year cycle.

I think what drives transitions to new hardware is sales.

in the case of xbox that's not the same reasons that drove the transition.

 

[Spidermate]

Once the initial shock wears off, I expect the nVidia & Sony news to make everything more boring than before. It basically secures the PS3 as a far more conventional machine (with more conventional APIs, etc.) than previously expected.

If anything, it pushes focus even moreso on software developers.

Have we all forgotten about the workstation that quick? :? There was a reason for Sony helping nVidia with the GPU in-house, and I'm sure little of it had to do with cost of fabrication. What you seem to be confused with is Microsoft's alliance with ATI.

 

[Inane_Dork]

Once the initial shock wears off, I expect the nVidia & Sony news to make everything more boring than before. It basically secures the PS3 as a far more conventional machine (with more conventional APIs, etc.) than previously expected.

If anything, it pushes focus even moreso on software developers.

Have we all forgotten about that workstation that quick? :? There was a reason for Sony helping nVidia with the GPU in-house, and I'm sure little of it had to do with cost fabrication. What you seem to be confused with is Microsoft's alliance with ATI.

I can't figure out what the heck that has to do with my post. I'm sorry, but I just don't see any relation there.

 

[Spidermate]

Once the initial shock wears off, I expect the nVidia & Sony news to make everything more boring than before. It basically secures the PS3 as a far more conventional machine (with more conventional APIs, etc.) than previously expected.

If anything, it pushes focus even moreso on software developers.

Have we all forgotten about that workstation that quick? :? There was a reason for Sony helping nVidia with the GPU in-house, and I'm sure little of it had to do with cost fabrication. What you seem to be confused with is Microsoft's alliance with ATI.

I can't figure out what the heck that has to do with my post. I'm sorry, but I just don't see any relation there.

I do...

 

[Inane_Dork]

Great. Thanks for the debate. :?

 

[PiNkY]

I can definitely see Johnny A.'s point. It pretty much matches MS's way of doing business. Take Windows: It wasn't really popular until v3; few people would have guessed the MS would dominate pc's workstations and entry-mid level servers os market with it while v1 and v2 were around. Same holds for Office, Browsers, DirectX, etc.. Also, if the IGN interview is trustworthy you'll be seeing kind of an NV5a in PS3 which should basically result in rough equivalency in regards to gpu capabilities for Xenon and PS3 (somewhere along Longhorn's DXnext requierements).

 

[Li Mu Bai]

Has everyone forgotten a word known as "profitability?" MS is seeking it with Xenon, & have stated as much. ('07 iirc) Stockholders will not sit by idly & watch another XBX scale cash hemmorhage. MS will not singlehandedly shorten console lifespans, too much profit is involved. The Revolution will be as strong, if not stronger than Xenon. I suspect with a unique & efficient architecture, refining & advancing what the GC was. PS3? It will not be the behemoth that many believe, definitely not teraflop power. But a monster nonetheless.

 

[Spidermate]

Great. Thanks for the debate. :?

I bolded the texts, but I believe you didn't see it. Anyhow, I may have misunderstood you. It was pretty LATE, you know. From my interpretation of your message before, I took it as you thinking that because Nividia was behind the GPU, that must mean that Sony's goal is no different from the others.

 

[Spidermate]

Has everyone forgotten a word known as "profitability?" MS is seeking it with Xenon, & have stated as much. ('07 iirc) Stockholders will not sit by idly & watch another XBX scale cash hemmorhage. MS will not singlehandedly shorten console lifespans, too much profit is involved. The Revolution will be as strong, if not stronger than Xenon. I suspect with a unique & efficient architecture, refining & advancing what the GC was. PS3? It will not be the behemoth that many believe, definitely not teraflop power. But a monster nonetheless.

I hate to rain on your parade, but profits are already taking a hit. The closer we get to the next generation, the heavier the hit will become. It is inevitable. However, I do agree with you as far as hype is concerned. IMO, I believe it shouldn't be leaned on nor dismissed as fact.

 

[Johnny Awesome]

MS would shorten the cyle in the short run if it hurt Sony enough to push them out of the game. Then they could go back to 6 year cycles. I'm not saying this is possible, only that it's something they WOULD do if they could.

As for comparisons to Sega... please.

 

[Inane_Dork]

From my interpretation of your message before, I took it as you thinking that because Nividia was behind the GPU, that must mean that Sony's goal is no different from the others.

I believe it is: world domination.

Seriously, I'm not saying they're in the same boat or anything. I'm just saying that an nVidia GPU is way more conventional than a Sony-made GS2. And I think that's a good thing, all around.