Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

This is nitpicking, but it's 640x704.

 

Well maybe by the time they come out with the next-gen, they'll come to their senses and drop 3D entirely.

According to a presentation to SMPTE, maybe up to 20% of the population may not be able to view 3D due to various eye and other problems.

 

3d is gimmik. end ex.

 

I agree. As it is today, it is just a gimmick and wont pick up unless it brings real higher immersion without any loss of picture quality for FREE. Today it sacrifices picture quality for the sake of 3D-ness and it costs you extra. It dims the picture and it flickers like hell with that refresh rates.

 

Am interested in how well crysis2 3D works. Aparently is free (well about a 1.5% performance hit). If it works well enough there will be no reason for it not to be used in every game. If i remember correctly Batman:AA GOTY edition used a similar 'free' technique and the impressions from that were very positive, and although it was anaglyph type 3D the same techniques should be applicable to full colour 3D.

 

Yes, batmann aa goty uses the tech from TriOviz. I could not notice any performance impact between 2d and 3d on the 360. Especially the detective mode looks impessive, normal gameplay not so much because the screen colors get distorted.
Batman is a cheap way to find out if you like 3d in games and if you can tolerate the extra glasses.

 

Interesting thoughts on next gen from David Reeves http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=276488

And also Cevat Yerli

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=277729

 

That's a strange POV especially coming high ranking executive. It's actually scary to which extend this person looses track with reality or let say modernity.
The big battle ahead whether it's for games, bring content to people television (movies, music, whatever services) is not about consoles. the war is about OS and CPU architectures. So between Apple, MS, Google on one side and Intel vs ARM on the other side. (by the way OpenGL may regain dominance under editors pressure). Thanks to the exploding mobility market times ahead are set to be really interesting

In 10/15 years, damned I'm not sure that there's still be console. Next gen may be the last. What would be the differentiator between PC and consoles? Hardware I don't think so. I can't see MS or Sony being competitive at a reasonable cost against whatever AMD/Intel(for X86) or Qualcom/Samsung/Apple (ARM based) put together. The battle will be on OS (and API). PC has we know them may go through a revolution (more/new interfaces, more actors, etc.) but Ms joining Sony? What is the point? Which dynamic?

Honestly it sounds like a fucked up idea.

 

The same differentiators that exist between PC and console now. Massive ease of use differences, and piracy rendering the PC market orders of magnitude less profitable.

I also think Onlive type services could be the boogeyman in the closet, we'll see how it shakes out.

 

OS can be hardware independent. High level metalanguages can be cross-OS. And as for OS, you've explained the tactical application of consoles. Why will people pick MS OS over Google OS next gen? How's about because MS OS is the OS on the PlayStation which is the platform that has far and away the best game experience for every flavour of gamer thanks to MS adding its franchises to Sony's. Alternative, how are Google going to get an extra leg-up in the OS market space if they aren't being targeted for AAA games development? Whereas Google OS on PS4 makes a machine that covers all bases.

Consoles aren't redundant yet. Mobile phones won't be competing. Set-top boxes are the same thing as consoles, but they tend to be low-spec for financial reasons and can't compete with consoles designed for the task. Unless PC gaming can make a dramatic come-back such that a PC is used for all purposes, there's room for a gaming platform, and if there's room for a gaming platform, there'll either be competing platforms, or a converged device where all parties decide it's in their best interests to compromise rather than fight against each other.

I don't think it'll happen next gen, but I think both side are considering strategic alliances, only Sony have more possibilities there as they aren't tied to an OS. PS4 with Intel offering a Larrabee design cheap, or AMD offering a Fusion cheap, with Google offering an OS platform to grow their install base...lots of options.

 

We're speaking of 10/15 years ahead of now, that's a lot of time. I can't envision PC as devices locked in "nineties" from the twentieth century. Pc will evolve both in form factor and interfaces. Actually PC has we know them may disappear from most houses. Plenty of things are at work to back up my claims. Tablets are on the raise. It's only the beginning still today in the subway I saw an advertisement for the new HP printers that allow you print from your smart-phone from anywhere (as long as you have wifi/3G network available). But there are also possible form factor, a computer "fitting" in the keyboard is another one that I expect to appear at some point, tech like intel wireless display make this all too tempting.
PC gaming will evolve (or disappear as it is), if you look at the sales previsions for the upcoming years (not even 10 15 year from now which is 2020/2025 Shifty we're not speaking PS4 and xbox3) the trend is that desktop sales are to crumble in share. "computers" as generic devices are too big of a market for games and many things to let a fraction of the users that want to run +300watts GPU card in a big tower set the requirement for the whole market. For greater good they need to be discard.

Spoiler

I'm trying to make friends here

.

The truth is that modern computer are ridiculously powerful in regard to their intended use and windows incredibly heavy in regard to its intended use too. This is true for plenty of users not only personal users actually most of the users. I believe that Ms is well aware of that and that things may improved with future renditions of Windows.

As you state Rangers on top of that there is cloud computing where it will be in 10 15 years? I guess we will no longer speak about it the same we're no longer speaking of standard cell phone, it will there absolutely necessary but people we no longer aware of it, they will consider it a given.
But I guess you're speaking of services as Onlive/Gakkaï. For those likes actually in 2020/25 the size of the market they might be able to address could be quiet healthy. But I don't expect those services to address the whole gaming market but they could be more significant than we're inclined to think.

Shifty I don't think that smart-phones are to compete or that consoles are redundant now or by the time next gen consoles are to launch. But in 10/15 I can't see portable consoles as relevant devices, way too limited. More generic devices would no longer be portbale consoles tho. May cloud services (onlive/gakkai/etc.) could be a link between mobile and home gaming.

Where I agree with you is that would make more sense for Sony to team up with Google than with Ms. Ms has already its own resources for games, support from third party and Os (ans more API, working programming languages, etc.), Sony misses the latter. Looking forward I can see a fight between directx/compute and openCL/GL. I'm not sure Ms can afford to "ignore" PC (or whatever replace that and the shares they get out of this market) as gaming device. If they don't leverage this user base fighting against OpenGL/CL may prove even tougher (I believe OpenGL/CL will gain momemtum as the mobility markets expand). Once directx is dead and game portability trivial Ms may a lose a selling point for its OS.

Spoiler

In 2025 I'll be a fifty years old guy, damned I should quit this discussion that make me think of less trivial matter like waking up three times per night

 

Well given the thread title, we should be!

 

The whole reason why game consoles are affordable is that they spread the development costs over a wide base. The real implication of what he said is that the costs are so high the pressure in releasing a platform is astronomical. My guess is that words were spoken in the background that they will never again eat their whole suit in losses when they launch their next console. The cost structure works so long as you sell your console but if the console market doesn't gravitate to your console then the development costs would eat any console maker alive.

To spread the development costs you would need to cater to as many markets as possible. This presents a dillemma as current generation consoles are more than adequate for all of the media functionality which they could care to add. Then theres also the wider market to consider which hasn't really been turned on by graphics above and beyond other considerations and the high end which represents a lot of core and hardcore buyers whom purchase a lot of software and whom will be the early adopters of 3D technology. So where to position the console?

If nothing else, this generation shows the danger of overshooting the market. By positioning a console too high and leaving the last generation console as a rear guard can let that position get over-run by a cheaper and lower performance console variant which is coming in fresh to the market. The two more expensive consoles were well over $300 at launch for the 'good' versions and that left a hole in the sweet spot. If the graphics card market has a sweetspot at $200-250 to maximise revenue then the console market may very well have one too.

I believe that Sony and Microsoft both recognized they were overshooting their market because of the existance of cheaper cut down variants of their mainline consoles. However we have to also recognize that as they add functionality to the consoles the number of background tasks would also increase. However the cheaper version which likely doesn't have a HDD doesn't have the ability or need to perform as many background tasks. So why not take a leaf from the GPU makers handbook and disable a core and some functional units on the GPU as a form of cost management, especially at the start when yields are bad? Why keep resources active on the cheaper console variants when they cannot make use of them? They can always re-enable them at a later date when they revise their console with larger internal storage etc.

 

Take this with a huge grain of salt:

http://www.kitguru.net/software/gaming/jules/microsoft-chooses-amd-fusion-ii-for-xbox-720/

Another story on the same subject, but not in english: http://www.tomshw.it/cont/news/xbox-720-con-amd-fusion-ii-pronti-a-scommettere/28379/1.html

Another mention of the original KitGuru article:

http://www.techeye.net/hardware/foxconn-motherboard-gtx-460m-sli-xbox-720-processor#ixzz16stsNwRq

 

The interesting thing is that AMD are exploring multiple unique memory technologies which have incredibly high densities. I don't think Fusion would be a problem so long as the GPU has access to 20+ MB of cache on die. The thing is these technologies require SOI. I wonder if GF are keeping SOI for 22nm.

 

These seem completely ridiculous, and as far as I can tell dont even claim to know anything. The original "kitguru" article doesn't even say anything vague like "sources say". It honestly says nothing at all except...well nothing really.

I can say this for sure, dont expect the next Xbox until fall 2013 at the earliest. We know Gears 3 is fall 11 tentpole, and we essentially know 343 Halo (4?) is fall 2012 tentpole. Therefore 2013 is the earliest.

Also, dont expect next Xbox to use any Fusion or other low end product.

This one sentence seems to be the "meat" of the article

Hardly compelling.

 

that article is so wrong and light that i can't take it seriosly

 

Indeed the article seems pure speculations but I would see nothing wrong with Ms going with AMD.
On the other side I don't expect Krishna product to be up to the task in the slightest. I'm pretty confident that those chips will have a pretty fucked up CPU/GPU power ratio.

Something more custom why not. On top of it I expect the next xbox to offer more than directx11 capabilities.

 

I disagree that MS and Sony overshot the market this gen.

Two mistakes were made:
Sony: BR
MS: RRod (engineering)

Both of which cost the platform makers a ton of lost revenue, but the tech inside each box was spot on.

Xbox arcade was functionally identical to the premium and later Elite models. The HDD was not necessary. The functionality of the Arcade unit was based on the existing usage model proved successful by PS2's 100+ million userbase (memory cards, wired controllers, disc based media).

Sony's issue was core to all versions offered and was gamble on potential movie revenue, but the core tech was again roughly equivalent to xbox360 if slightly more expensive. The use of BR also "forced" HDD to be included standard which also increased baseline cost.

Nothing in the GPU/CPU/ram selection in either console was insurmountable cost wise. From what I remember, they both were similar to the losses given to ps2/ps1 (roughly $100/console).

It's safe to assume we will have a similar loss/console next gen but without the issues experienced by both ps3(new expensive media) and xb360 (poor industrial engineering design).


Die-size and ram I expect to scale roughly the same as what we experienced with xb360/ps3.

The only safety precaution I'd expect both to be wary of is the future of process shrinking to enable future cost reductions.

 

http://games.on.net/article/10946/R...e_Chosen_AMD_Fusion_II_for_Next_Xbox_Hardware