What will define the next generation of consoles in your mind?

[Pressure]

I'm thinking how we interact as players will be a defining aspect, much less graphic prowess.

Are people fine with the status quo? I could see Nintendo excel here with their "multiplayer"-singleplayer experience, just take a look at the new Rayman for example.

What makes or breaks an experience is pretty much how we interact with the technology and players.

I was reading this piece at Penny-Arcade and found myself agreeing more than I would have thought.

 

[ERP]

Did they use a $10,000 dollar camera because they wanted the best possible results or because it was necessary? I understand that Kinect has infrared illumination capabilities so that is covered but the question really is what resolution would be required? Are we talking HD, 1080P, 4K or 8K camera? And at what framerate?

I don't know the resolution of the actual camera they were using, but it was "much" higher than 1080P. I believe the demo I saw was at 60Hz.

You have to be able to determine the position of the pupil and it moves <2cm to view even large screens, as well as the position of the head.
The resolution depends on how much the camera takes in, the demo I saw the camera was capturing an area perhaps 3 heads wide.

 

[Nesh]

But it won't cost less! The hardware is the same, the difference is only software. Buy a cheap ass phone now and it still has texting, music playing, etc. which adds virtually nothing to the cost of the device. Remove those features and you'll produce a simple phone that costs the same as its rivals but offers less value. Likewise, a console that just plays games alongside one that costs the same and offers media and social functions is throwing value away for no good reason. Even Nintendo, stoic proponents of the 'it;s all about the games' mantra, have grasped this and are clumsily trying to develop the necessary software and services to add value to their console beyond just games.

The real problem is the naffness of execution more than anything IMO, like Sony's PS3 browser being more trouble than it's worth, still, after the update. I'd much rather have that browser work well when wanting to look something up in the living room rather than having to get up and go looking for my tablet.

You base your arguments on what you see in the market whereas the market can provide much cheaper solutions at lowest prices for basic functions although it doesnt provide it.
As time passes even the cheapest phones appear to have 5MP< cameras, better processors to run applications that some people like him may not care about, or fancier media players that obviously need some additional performance and hence better hardware etc. The current components are a direct result of current technological evolution but unnecessarily costlier for simply making phone calls and texting. Technology of more than a decade ago is capable of texting and making phone calls only and can be produced extremely cheap considering the efficiency manufacturing processes have reached at producing more powerful components in volumes
All PCs have much stronger GPU's and CPU's compared to a decade ago running OS's that are heavier than necessary because the OS is ready for many other functions whereas a much much cheaper hardware and less hungry OS are capable of doing the simple working tasks
Likewise this gen a much less OS memory footprint would have sufficed if the consoles were designed to just pop in a disk and play a game. As consoles evolve into multifunctional devices that do multiple tasks simultaneously, the hardware and the software will be designed so that performance can be shared between multiple apps and games. More memory is reserved for a more hungry OS. In that case, cost could be identical in terms of money, but if you are a person who just wants games you may experience directly or indirectly a cost that is related to gaming performance, as resources that otherwise would have been dedicated solely for gaming performance, will now have to be shared so that the given hardware enables seamless transition from app to app or app to game or running multiple tasks at the same time

 

[Bagel seed]

I think 3D and screen sharing type tech is what will define next gen. Like multiple viewers on a single tv, some playing games and others movies, etc. It should be a pretty sellable idea to the regular family. And the media hub features spins off of that too.

3D didn't get a proper chance this time around but we'll have enough horsepower and trickery next gen to pull it off I think. I'm willing to bet that visuals should be realistic enough that people will want to be even more immersed in them by going 3D.

 

[eastmen]

Microsoft pushed it hard and there are 122 released Kinect titles and 20 upcoming titles. If it didn't move any software there wouldn't be games for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kinect_games

There are also a lot of Wii Fit balance board games too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_that_support_Wii_Balance_Board

So why wouldn't they continue pushing Kinect given the fact that they can make it better next generation?

a lot of games will get made when a product sells a lot.

The wii fit sold a lot of hardware units and thus a lot of developers wanted to make money off the fad. its the same with the Kinect.

I don't know anyone actually using the wii fit anymore and the Kinect has ended up largely as a just dance player and voice control for the 360 .


Mabye there are people out there buying all this software , but I doubt it .

 

[Squilliam]

a lot of games will get made when a product sells a lot.

The wii fit sold a lot of hardware units and thus a lot of developers wanted to make money off the fad. its the same with the Kinect.

I don't know anyone actually using the wii fit anymore and the Kinect has ended up largely as a just dance player and voice control for the 360 .


Mabye there are people out there buying all this software , but I doubt it .

Dance and voice are pretty decent uses for Kinect even if you can't find anything else you want to do with it. It's pretty good at both and therefore worth a buy. If they can get it working even better next generation then based off these two alone it is worth keeping around.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Dance and voice are pretty decent uses for Kinect even if you can't find anything else you want to do with it. It's pretty good at both and therefore worth a buy. If they can get it working even better next generation then based off these two alone it is worth keeping around.

But not at the price that MS tried to flog it... imho of course ;-)

If they can get a Kinect 2.0 to do proper fine granularity tracking of fingers and what not then its actual gaming applications would be much better realisable, and it would better justify its existence.

I've never personally been a fan of what hands-free gaming can offer. To me its too limited, even with finger tracking, but that's beside the point.