Predict: The Next Generation Console Tech

[ninelven]

DNRTMFT....

Nintendo: I don't know where they go from the wii... they will be expected to look better than 360/PS3 games while rendering at 1080p... so a completely new architecture seems likely.

MS: Really they have the easiest path and could probably put a console out by Dec '09 if they really wanted to.

5 core Xenon + 2xL2 @ 4Ghz + 2x bandwidth to memory

ATI DX11 hardware 25:1 scalar/tex ratio... 1600shaders/64TMUs/20ROPs @ 650MHz
= 2TFlops

320bit GDDR5 w/ 6Gbps memory = 1280MB UMA @ 240GB/s (no e-dram)

8GB flash built in for OS/saves

250GB HDD on Premium Model

Bluray Drive

$399 Premium $349 No HDD.... on sale for Christmas 2009.

 

[pc999]

MS: Really they have the easiest path and could probably put a console out by Dec '09 if they really wanted to.

Why would they release a console so soon? 360 is being profitable, they are the biggest player in the market they wanted (core gamers) and a lot can still to happen for 360 for some 2-3 years (althought it may start to not compet with higher end PCs...) without such a major investiment. Not counting that there is a economical crisis that may yet became worst that better in the near future.

320bit GDDR5 w/ 6Gbps memory = 1280MB UMA @ 240GB/s (no e-dram)

The only problem is that this kind of bus mean a very expensive chip. Anyway even a 32bit would mean more or less the same than 360 (not counting edram).

 

[function]

MS and Sony both want to get into the next generation before the other.

As current last place with a big loss maker as their current system, the pressure will be greater on Sony, but they may not feel confident investing huge resources into a new platform at the moment. This is where the rationale for a cheap(er) to develop and produce system in the not too distant future comes from.

MS are currently profiting on the 360 and don't want to cut it short, but if they let Sony get established in the next gen before them they lose the chance to make mega profits in the next round. MS will balance a good run for the 360 with introducing a next gen system that will (hopefully) be fast enough and expensive enough initially to differentiate itself from the 360 and allow some overlap for the system (like Sony managed to do going from PS1 to PS2).

Nintendo can do whatever the hell they want and people will love them for it.

 

[grandmaster]

Bearing in mind the rumours that hit the trade press, the talks between platform holders and developers etc etc that usually precede a console launch, the chances of 2009 or even 2010 next gen consoles are somewhat remote.

To a certain extent games are insulated from the financial crisis, but we're still looking at one of the most impactful economic recessions ever - it's a time to consolidate positions rather than chance your arm on a premium price release.

 

[function]

Bearing in mind the rumours that hit the trade press, the talks between platform holders and developers etc etc that usually precede a console launch, the chances of 2009 or even 2010 next gen consoles are somewhat remote.

I don't subscribe to a 2009 launch, but Sony in 2010 or 2011 seemed possible until recently. 2010 is looking increasingly unlikely now (no leaks or strong rumours as you say), but 2011 is still a strong possibility IMO.

To a certain extent games are insulated from the financial crisis, but we're still looking at one of the most impactful economic recessions ever - it's a time to consolidate positions rather than chance your arm on a premium price release.

I'm not sure how much consolidation Sony can do though. If they chase the 360's price down they're likely to keep bleeding on the PS3, and even if they don't they're continuing to spend a lot with little chance of significant returns. PS3 is simply the wrong product to be competing with, especially at a time like this.

I know 2011 is unlikely to be a great time to launch a new system, but when the alternatives are not being in the console market or pushing on with a system that's hurting you, there may not be much of a choice. And if Sony does go in 2011 I think MS will feel compelled to go as well (and maybe even if Sony don't).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I know 2011 is unlikely to be a great time to launch a new system, but when the alternatives are not being in the console market...

Sony have sold ~20 million units! That's with an expensive console, with much cheaper alternatives. Just because they're third place, doesn't mean there's nothing at all in this industry for them. There's very good chance they'll be up to 40 million+ by the end of the generation, selling software and content to those owners. PS3 will just become more and more profitable as time goes on. Not as profitable as consoles that sell more, but profits are profits none-the-less.

It's not about being first every time!

 

[Sound_Card]

MS and Sony both want to get into the next generation before the other.

As current last place with a big loss maker as their current system, the pressure will be greater on Sony, but they may not feel confident investing huge resources into a new platform at the moment. This is where the rationale for a cheap(er) to develop and produce system in the not too distant future comes from.

MS are currently profiting on the 360 and don't want to cut it short, but if they let Sony get established in the next gen before them they lose the chance to make mega profits in the next round. MS will balance a good run for the 360 with introducing a next gen system that will (hopefully) be fast enough and expensive enough initially to differentiate itself from the 360 and allow some overlap for the system (like Sony managed to do going from PS1 to PS2).

Nintendo can do whatever the hell they want and people will love them for it.

I completely agree to all of this. My exact thoughts on all 3.

 

[Asher]

It's not about being first every time!

You're right -- it's about making money. Which they won't do for a long time on the PS3.

 

[specwarGP2]

I think Sony will be the first to launch next gen with PS4. I think it will be modestly more powerful than PS3, and have 100% PS3 BC. I also I think PS4 will incorporate technologies from the TV side such as motion estimation and 3D to differentiate it from the next xbox.

 

[BadTB25]

The next consoles besides being bigger, better and more bad ass-I wonder what new tech they will bring to the table.

My list would include:

I figure IPTV should be a standard, same with some type of DVR and streaming capability with Netflix, Hulu, etc.

Full BC for all the PSN and Arcade titles that you've bought with the ability to transfer them to the next gen system free of charge (you own them right?).

Compatibility to stream video, music, and photos with wireless devices (Zune, IPOD, PC, etc) yes this means built in wireless N or better.

Some type of motion control device.

What else?

As for who will launch first, I think it's likely that between MS and Sony, that MS will again launch first--maybe in 2012. If this generation has taught them anything, is that first to launch provides all kinds of leverage to secure developer support and exclusives. I think that even if the X360 is going strong that they will be unwilling to cede the first mover advantage to Sony.

 

[pc999]

They could launch at the same time...

 

[BadTB25]

Very True as well

Something to consider: What are the chances of another player entering the market? Resurgence of SEGA, new player in Apple, or maybe the vaporware Phantom?

I mean if videogames is bigger than the movie business, why not?

 

[V3]

I doubt other player will enter the market. I can see Sony and MS dragging this gen for as long as they can.

 

[Nano]

I still get the feeling the chance is slim for new entrants.

The investment it takes, and the uphill struggle to get consumers to choose your one system over several rivals; ones with more experience, developer support and installed base.

That said, I won't rule out the possibility entirely. For one; with Apple I have a feeling that iphone's long-term success in handheld gaming (vs Sony & Nintendo) may equate to the likelihood of a venture into the console market. I also believe that if a big company came along with a system comprising very similar architecture to another, it may influence support.

For some reason, I've always felt there's a chance MS will license Xbox to 3rd parties, if we think about the nature of their business, they don't really need to sell proprietary h/w to expand their OS platforms, and perhaps they would indeed gain higher returns if other big, international companies were making systems that could play the same set of Xbox compatible games.

 

[geeQ]

For some reason, I've always felt there's a chance MS will license Xbox to 3rd parties, if we think about the nature of their business, they don't really need to sell proprietary h/w to expand their OS platforms, and perhaps they would indeed gain higher returns if other big, international companies were making systems that could play the same set of Xbox compatible games.

Interesting idea Nano. One that if executed properly could I guess turn into a trojan horse for MS or anyone else for that matter.
One of the disadvantges that I can see though is that allowing others to market and sell your product means you lose some of that brand identity that you have invested considerable time and energy in. 'XBox' as a brand could potentially become faceless to the public at large and so I think this would have to be considered by MS or any other console manufacturer before making such a move.

On the plus side though if you have other companies including your hardware in set top boxes, cable boxes, PC's?, and perhaps even incorporated directly into TV's then clearly you have one serious advantage over the competition right there.

Anyone rememeber Nuon aka Project X? :smile:

 

[catisfit]

I doubt other player will enter the market. I can see Sony and MS dragging this gen for as long as they can.

I still get the feeling the chance is slim for new entrants.

I would definitely like to see it, but the first thing a new entrant would do would be to examine the last time a new entrant tried to break into the market (XBOX), and see a $4bn loss. Microsoft could afford that cost of entry, but not many others will be prepared for the possibility of that size (or even larger) barrier to entry.

 

[Sound_Card]

I could see Apple as a possibility. Though, given how much they over price all their other products, I don't think I want to know how much they would charge for a console.

 

[Nano]

Interesting idea Nano. One that if executed properly could I guess turn into a trojan horse for MS or anyone else for that matter.
One of the disadvantges that I can see though is that allowing others to market and sell your product means you lose some of that brand identity that you have invested considerable time and energy in. 'XBox' as a brand could potentially become faceless to the public at large and so I think this would have to be considered by MS or any other console manufacturer before making such a move.

Yes, many considerations to make.

I don't think it would hurt the brand too much, only give it a new identity. Afaik MS really wanted to bring Windows to the console market (which some argue is eating into the PC's market grabbing a lot more support and sales). The answer was to make a whole new proprietary system powered by this subset of Windows/DX, but I guess really they could at this point (with so much dev support) push the services and Xbox OS in multiple directions without the h/w bit, which is still to some extent 'out of their element'.

As you mentioned other companies, I would say Sony for example (who really wants to be #1 in consumer electronics) would have way too much to lose selling Playstation as just a software platform, in addition it has no ties with the established Windows & DirectX 'household names in software'.

On the plus side though if you have other companies including your hardware in set top boxes, cable boxes, PC's?, and perhaps even incorporated directly into TV's then clearly you have one serious advantage over the competition right there.

Yes, that's the vision. And products from the likes of Toshiba or Samsung could *potentially* grab customers from the tough Japanese/Asian market knowing favourite brands play 'all the games'.

Expanding on that, you could see a lot of competitive pricing; Toshiba and Samsung can fabricate their own chips based on IP too so there's another possible advantage.

It would be difficult for a h/w company not only to compete with several other strong ones (i.e Samsung, Panasonic, Toshiba, LG, Philips) but then the fact they all run the same games.

...its a crazy vision but who knows

Anyone rememeber Nuon aka Project X? :smile:

Just looked it up, never knew of it before

I would definitely like to see it, but the first thing a new entrant would do would be to examine the last time a new entrant tried to break into the market (XBOX), and see a $4bn loss. Microsoft could afford that cost of entry, but not many others will be prepared for the possibility of that size (or even larger) barrier to entry.

100% agree.

 

[Entropy]

I could see Apple as a possibility.

Apple already makes handheld devices that plays games. The App Store has 15000 (!) applications, and the number of downloads jumped from 300 million in december to 500 million a few days ago. Astonishing even considering the holidays.
But Apple is not likely to ever build a stationary game console. At the iPhone introduction, Steve Jobs showed a graphic representing the volume of various electronic devices, and consoles were of course way down, much much smaller than the number of personal computers. And Steves main point during that slide was that cell phones has a volume four times greater than that of personal computers as a whole, and therefore made sense for Apple to target. Stationary consoles is a market a factor of 50 or so smaller.
However, Apple may approach the console market from the side by allowing their iPhones/iPod touches to connect to TV sets. (Indeed that is a possible path for Nintendo as well - playing the same game using a stylus on the portable screen, and a Wii-mote on a stationary screen, unifying mobile and stationary gaming.) We know that Apple has a long term deal with IMG Tech, we know that they have ARM licenses, and they have SoC design capabilities in-house, strengthened by purchasing National Semiconductor. They will have even more graphically capable handsets, and developent environment and application distribution is already in place. Although they aren't likely to ever build a stationary console, they most definitely are already competing for developer attention.
What games that will result in remains to be seen. That scene is already a big, (and growing,) pond so there is room for developers to seek out niches. As always, more ambitious projects take longer to reach fruition.

 

[specwarGP2]

For some reason, I've always felt there's a chance MS will license Xbox to 3rd parties, if we think about the nature of their business, they don't really need to sell proprietary h/w to expand their OS platforms, and perhaps they would indeed gain higher returns if other big, international companies were making systems that could play the same set of Xbox compatible games.

Very doubtful it will ever happen. Remember Plays For Sure? How did that turn out against ipod/itunes?