It's impossible to call either the next PlayStation or Xbox CPU or GPU, either in terms of transistor counts, fabrication processes or capabilities. I'm sure Sony were sincere with their ten year life cycle for PS3, they've done it before - twice - and I'm sure a lengthy cycle is equally appealing to Microsoft. Both companies have invested a lot of cold, hard cash in their current consoles and it's in both their interests for the consoles to be around as long as possible.
So if we are looking at a 2015/2016 for the nextgen consoles, then both Microsoft and Sony will be tracking emergent technologies for another three or four years before committing to hardware and in three or four years, fabrication processes and transistor counts will likely be markedly different, Moore's Law accepted.
If we go ultra conservatist and assume Microsoft and Sony want lower-priced consoles, I think we can expect Sony at least to pickup significant performance improvements from going to a unified shader model - assuming there's not some new architecture paradigm (Larrabe + ?) - pus both companies will likely have smaller, cooler, faster GPUs with more shaders (and we're still using rasterized-graphics) and more importantly, more RAM. Perhaps we won't see the exponential leaps in performance we saw from PSone to PS2 and PS2 to PS3 but I can imagine we'll see console graphics improve to a degree, probably beyond what we can foresee changing in PC 'space' in the next year or two.
I wouldn't be surprised to see parallel console launches for both Sony and MS where a mocon interface is standard on one and a traditional controller is standard on the other, leaving the hardware between the two largely unchanged.
ie:
natal 720 & xb720
Sony ps4 & Sony mocon
This follows the multi sku offerings that currently exist by both ms and sony, but puts a stronger brand on these different sku's.
price structure being:
core model (wired controller?)
core + mocon (natal, sd cables)
core + hardcore gamer (regular wireless controller, hd cables, HDD, wifi)
Still leaving the option for anyone to buy specific pieces they need, but saving the consumer a bit on packaged deals.
This would enable manufacturers and developers to get significant push for mocon interfaces into homes and a large enough base to dev on just as Wii has.
It would also enable them to not dilute the traditional markets they've been selling to and even stock in areas and stores that typically wouldn't stock an xb360 or ps3.
These mocon sku's would have their own games and advertising and essentially be treated as separate platforms even though they share the same core hardware. This is cheaper for devs, cheaper for manufacturers, and cheaper for consumers if they want to cross over from mocon to traditional or traditional to mocon.
They really are two separate ways to play games and game types will differ significantly. Once in a while a game may take advantage of both, but
if they can't pack BOTH control interfaces in the box, the best avenue is to treat them as separate platforms.
With this approach, manufacturers will have to offer something significant enough for hardcore gamers to upgrade. They will also have to take into account Wii's smaller attach rate. The mocon packages cannot have significant losses per console expecting them to make up the difference in software.
A Wii type approach would work for the mocon platforms as the star of the show isn't the graphics, but don't expect hardcore gamers to jump onboard with a faster clocked xb360/ps3. These are the gamers that are buying software en masse so they should not be overlooked.
One thing to keep in mind also is the deteriorating rate at which these consoles will easily show improvement on their predecessor. When xb360 first came out, most looked at the wares and saw what looked to be xbox1 games. When xb720/ps4 come out, what could they possibly have to show an immediate impact that differentiates themselves from ps3/xb360?
1080p?
4xaa?
16xaf?
It will be very difficult to make an immediate case unless the hardware is SIGNIFICANTLY better than what we have today. The interesting thing is as we move forward in graphics tech, the existing standard becomes more and more acceptable as "good enough" to consumers.
We are very close to this point now IMO. I think this factor alone makes the longer cycle more bearable.
Another interesting thing about this longer cycle is it allows technology to step forward in other ways. As has been mentioned, die sizes get smaller, but also internet bandwidth and latency issues will get better also which may allow enough time for an onlive type system to take foot.
In summary, we've seen how difficult it's been for Nintendo (and 3rd parties) to produce traditional games on Wii. To assume these game types and the desire to play them will go away is foolish at this time. This market needs to be addressed. In addition, Nintendo has proven there is another market that can be tapped. In some cases these two factions can be brought together on a game or two, but they are mostly different tastes with different hardware requirements.
Two platforms is the best way to address these differing tastes. I hope MS and Sony realize this moving forward.
