Lunchtime Discussion: Who wants the Next Gen?
Does anyone really want to shell out any time soon?Published 02/12/2009 at 12:00.
By Kris L [raen].
Lunchtime Discussion: Sessions [34]
Lunchtime Discussion: Engines [27]
Lunchtime Discussion: Spoilers [78]
Lunchtime Discussion: One Wish [52]
Lunchtime Discussion: Mobile [32]
So today’s Lunchtime Discussion falls to me, and it’s something that’s been cropping up more and more recently. We’re starting to get into what used to be considered the tail end of a generation, I mean the Xbox 36o is now four years old. The PS3 and Wii are now around three as well. Taking a quick look through the wealth of knowledge that is Wikipedia it seems the average time between releases in recent generations seems is around 5 years (and yes I did the maths, it’s 5.17), so surely we should at least have heard of Microsoft’s next console by now and we should be hearing rumblings from Sony and Nintendo as well. But what do we have? Well we have a few very indications of the parts that Microsoft and Sony could possibly use in the next generation, and (as far as I’m aware) not a single hint from Nintendo yet. The big difference? I don’t want a new console.
See I’m perfectly happy with my 360 (and playing on DJH’s PS3 until I can afford one). I don’t have any real desire for a new console. For a start the games aren’t starting to look old or dated at all. People can argue back and forth all day about whether a game looks better on the PS3 or 360, but it doesn’t matter really. For the majority of titles they look absolutely stunning on both consoles. As for the Wii? Well I don’t own a Wii and my purchasing focus is on the PS3 right now, but I’d like to own one in the future. Every time I play on one I enjoy myself and with the Wii Motion Plus it really does seem to be at the right level of accuracy for playing virtual table tennis or sword fighting.
I mean sure with a new generation maybe we’d get better graphics but what we’re seeing from developers shows that there’s still a lot of grunt we can get out of the boxes sitting under our TV right now, and titles like God of War 2 show what really is possible with hardware that was considered ‘last gen’. Throw in the new motion sensitivity of Natal and the Wand further adding new game mechanics to our current generation and I don’t really see a need to upgrade when the average I mentioned earlier would apply. 2010 just seems like an insane time for a new console to me. Even the rumours of 2012 releases seem too near for me. I’d be happy waiting until 2013/2014 to shell out a large chunk of my cash on a new shiny, shiny box. But this is a lunchtime discussion, so enough of my old man rambling (and after falling down the stairs last night I feel surprisingly old for a 22 year old) when do you lot want to buy a new console?
Not logged in
Log in to join the TSA Community, see your PS3 Trophies, check your PMs, take part in TSA Meets and earn TSA Points.
Most Comments This Week
- Lunchtime Discussion: Spoilers [78]
- PS3 Browser To Get “Big Upgrade” Soon? [75]
- Pre Order Bonus for Scott Pilgrim [73]
- Infamous 2: Cole Changing Back [70]
- PSN Store Update: 28/7/10 [70]
- PS3 Firmware 3.41 Adds “You May Also Like” [67]
- PS3 Sales Up 118% Year On Year [62]
- Rumour: GTA V Set In Hollywood [45]
- PS3 Assault Rifle [44]
- Microsoft On Kinect Pricing: “You Do The Maths” [44]
bunimomike | 02/12/2009 12:15
Member
8861 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
I’d like to keep (and play on) my PS3 for the next 3 years definitely. Are we finally seeing an industry where the graphics have become good enough so that developers are no longer overly-hindered by hardware limitations and visualisation is now down to them. If you look at the likes of GTA (from a massive environment) or UC2 (from a stunning looking title with all the bells and whistles it deserves) can we now not make any game we fancy. Sure, there’ll always be a trade or compromise between real-time and pre-rendered graphics but they’re diminishing every month that goes past. Not because we demand better and better but because we demand something believable. That, for me, isn’t far off. Every story has the ability to be told on the current hardware. With that minor ramble in mind… I’m in no rush at all. :)
DeathByNumbers | 02/12/2009 13:00
Member
730 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
I hope my new ps3 lasts for 3 years…My last one only made 18 months! I’m happy enough with the way things are at the minute. I wouldn’t have the money for a new shiny console, especially when (in Sony’s case) all that will happen is it’ll take it a few years till the developers get the hang of making games for it. Concentrate on getting the best out of the current hardware first!
jtuck | 02/12/2009 14:06
Member
122 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I don’t think we can make any game we fancy. We’re close, but not quite there. Have you seen the DMM they used in Force Unleashed. Amazing. But because systems aren’t powerful enough yet not much of the environment could be built with this technology. Most of the scenery was static.
Look at Res Evil 5 – One of the best looking multiplats, but it came at the expense of zero environment interaction (Try shooting leaves).
Call of Duty has to go to 640p in order to run at a smooth 60fps. Killzone 2 looked phenomenal, with loads of interactions, physics, AI, lighting but only ran at 720p, at 30 fps.
Santa Monica studios has already said that GOW 3 will dip below 60fps when the action gets intense.
Red Faction had full destuctibility, but had to take a graphical hit and be built on a barren planet to be able to cope with the physics.
At the moment we are still at the stage where one element in a game has to suffer in order to max out another area.
And don’t forget we still have low res textures and still have aliasing and jaggies.
When we hit 1080p, locked 60fps, high res textures, 8 / 16 x AA, environmental destructibility using DMM, euphoria self preservation systems, Killzone style Mo-cap/rag doll blends (still not surpassed) and with loads of light sources. Then we’ll be good enough.
….but then I would say because I’m a complete technophile / graphics wh*re nerd, and I’m ready for the next gen to start as soon as possible.
Raen | 02/12/2009 14:16
Team TSA: Writer
4647 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
I’ve never got why the output res is such a huge issue. Yes you paid for a 1080p TV and console, but unless you sit really near your TV or have a huge TV it’s really a non-issue. Frame rate is a far bigger issue, but again only if it noticeably stutters. I’d rather a game runs consistently at 30fps than runs at 60fps with dips.
jtuck | 02/12/2009 15:49
Member
122 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
Higher output res is just a nicer picture. Of course, I’d take super high res textures and 16 x AA over a super high screen resolution. But a super high res makes it easier to cover up various alaising issues / jaggies which some say is why devs are so keen to go high res. (so I hear – I’m not a dev)
Under 32in I’d say 720p is fine, but 37in / 40in then 1080p is nice to have.
Don’t you find that MW2 is a little too low res / pixelly at 640?
If it was 640p with plenty of AA passes then it wouldn’t be so bad, but the graphics have taken quite a hit to get 60fps out.
“I’d rather a game runs consistently at 30fps than runs at 60fps with dips.”
Me too. So lets have a new console that runs everything at 60fps with no dips! :-)
Raen | 02/12/2009 16:02
Team TSA: Writer
4647 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Here we are! This is why screen res isn’t a big deal for a lot of people. It depends on the size of your screen and viewing distance. So for a 1080i/p TV you need to be sitting about 7.5 feet max away from the TV to get the benefits. It’s a really useful chart that shows that the human eye can only see a finite amount of detail.
“Don’t you find that MW2 is a little too low res / pixelly at 640?” No I haven’t played MW2. However Halo 3 and ODST run at that which I have played on large TVs and (to my eye) those games look fine.
mugsybalone | 02/12/2009 12:15
Member
582 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I don’t think I’d consider picking up a next gen console released in the midst of a recession. As BMW found out with the 8-series way back when, releasing an expensive product at a time when noone has any money doesn’t tend to work out too well!
I’d agree on a date of around 2013, not just as a case of a time when I think tech would’ve developed enough, but also as a time when it’d be financially viable.
Severn2j | 02/12/2009 12:15
Member
2019 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
I definitely dont want a new console, the current generation hasnt even been maxed out yet, imo, especially on the PS3 side.. I dont think Sony/MS want to bring out a new generation yet either, there was too much investment this time round that needs to be recouped. Maybe 2013/14, like you say would be okay, but definitely not now.
seedaripper1973 | 02/12/2009 12:18
Member
2332 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Not me!! ive already forked out for a launch 60gig (£540-total) then it broke out of warentee (i will get it fixed at some point as its bac-compac) then shelled out on the slim at launch as well…i want my bloody sodding mones worth outta this gen…plus i think theres a lot left in the old bugger, ark back to the 1st PS2 games and then the end ones, ala god of war…
keep your next gen for a good couple of years yet, well unless Microsoft get cold feet again :(
KeRaSh | 02/12/2009 12:20
Member
1144 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2009
I hope they don’t shell out the next gen too soon. There are so many great titles to come in 2010 and even more that currently don’t even have a release date so I’m perfectly happy with this gen. The PS3 was pretty expensive and Sony put a lot of money into it. I don’t think they can afford to end the PS3 era so quickly by making people wait for the PS4. Especially now that the PS3 is gaining ground. As for the PSP I was pretty bummed when I read of plans for a new PSP so soon. I got a PSPgo at release and Sony let me down with the small amount of downloadable games. I hope they boost the PSPgo before they focus on a new gen. Nintendo might be the first one to enter a new generation with an HD upgrade of the Wii. Many developers claim that they have reached the max of the PS3s performance but that would be pretty sad. I hope there are still devs that can max out the Cell and shed out some very nice games before Sony releases the PS4. I can wait a few more years. The current graphics are nice and now that 3D games are in sight I think there is enough to explore before new hardware is due.
bunimomike | 02/12/2009 12:23
Member
8861 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Meant in the nicest way possible but I don’t think I’ve read about any developers maxing out the PS3 hardware. If anything, most developers are only now getting to grips with it all (eg. Uncharted 2). Hell, if all the other developers had the graphical prowess of the UC2 engine we’d all be in heaven! :)
heedbaw | 02/12/2009 12:50
Member
522 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2009
I’m sure seen an article somewhere claiming that Naughty Dog had told the author that the were using nearly 100% of the PS3s processing power with the U2 engine.
But I would agree with you on that bunimomike, I’m sure that like the PS2 developers will start to get the best from the system after working with it for 4-5 years.
bunimomike | 02/12/2009 12:54
Member
8861 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Remember the same article and yes, they were saying how they thought they were using so much more of the hardware but I guess that’s still got the limitation of “we’re using as much as of the hardware as possible… well… as much as we know we’re using of it” as they always find different ways to eek out more juice. However, my comment still stands (not aimed at you). Developers… make all your games look as good as UC2 :P
Raen | 02/12/2009 12:59
Team TSA: Writer
4647 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
Naughty Dog are also on record as saying something along the lines of “everyone uses 100% of the console”. The difference is in what you can squeeze out of the 100%. New tricks and new tools come out that let you get more performance. For example Splash Damage have some crazy stuff in Brink that lets them load textures something like 5-10x the size of normal textures.
Vandix | 02/12/2009 13:00
Member
1228 TSA Points | Member since: Mar 2009
@heedbaw,
That’s true, but they also said that you should see the 100% as a glass filled with stones. These stones represent different parts of a game. The more time they spend on developing games they they can replace one of the stones with a pebble, leaving more room for more stones. Even more time spend, they can replace a pebble by a grain of sand, thus leaving even more room in the glass. They also said that nobody could ever achieve a glass full of water, though…
I hope anyone can follow this…
KeRaSh | 02/12/2009 13:24
Member
1144 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2009
Volition Inc. also claims to max out the Cell with Red Faction Guerilla’s Physics. It might be true that it all comes down to how efficient the devs can program for the PS3 but who knows if they will be able to make significant improvements in the near future?
Thechunkymunky | 02/12/2009 12:20
Member
266 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2009
I don’t think the next gen is nessessary yet. With things getting into their stride in this gen, I can’t see the point of Xbox 720/ PS4. Even if they did release in a couple of years, I would wait another 2 years for all the bugs to be ironed out of the systems.
kevatron400 | 02/12/2009 12:24
Don't call him Kevatron400.
2125 TSA Points | Member since: Dec 2008
I’d be suprised to find someone who is in favour of the idea of a new console right now, although would make for a better discussion. That way we wouldn’t just have a list of ‘Hear hear’s and ‘Well said’s.
jtuck | 02/12/2009 14:23
Member
122 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I want a new console!
1) I run my own business and have 2 kids so I don’t have as much gaming time as I’d like – so I’d be happy with one or two decent launch titles. (Preferably single player games while I’m waiting for all my friends to adopt)
2) I run my own business so can afford any console whenever it comes out.
3) I’m a complete graphics wh0re, but not enough to buy a PC. (I’d have to buy one pre-built because of having limited spare time – which is more that I’d be willing to spend considering that I’ll be playing with strangers because it was hard enough convincing all my friends to buy launch PS3s).
I would get an expensive gaming rig, but then who would I play multiplayer with? (see previous point)
My friends are all lawyers, doctors, property developers, writers, etc. They aren’t going to build gaming rigs themselves and they sure as heck aren’t going to fork out for super expensive pre built rigs.
So there you have it. I have to go the console route, but I want amazing graphics and I’m getting used to the current gen and even enticed by high end PC graphics.
So I’m happy for the Next gen to start as soon as possible. But I suppose I am in the minority.
AcidCrashX | 02/12/2009 12:26
Member
694 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
I’ve probably invested more money in this generation than any other. partly because I’m now an ‘adult’ and i have disposal income but mainly because the quality of titles aimed at me are really high on all 3 platforms (uncharted, gears and no more heroes for example). I think we could go another console cycle without an actual new console so maybe announce in 2013 and release in 2014? My PS3 doesnt need to be swapped out for quite some time and i believe Sony when they say they have the 10 year cycle
bunimomike | 02/12/2009 12:30
Member
8861 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
It’s a fair point. The PS2 is now the middle-aged hooker of the docks but it’s still earning the pimp (Sony) some money. :)
djdustb | 02/12/2009 12:31
Member
1430 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I think my PS3 (or the PS3 in general incase mine dies) has a good few years left in it for me, I still don’t feel the average game is making the most of what the hardware can provide, and so we don’t need anything else as yet.
Shotgun75 | 02/12/2009 12:31
Member
89 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2008
I have no desire to see a ‘next gen console’ anytime soon (in fact Ive no desire to see a next gen console at all). I’d much prefer to see enhancements in service to the current crop. I’d like to see the next offerings from Sony/Microsoft being ‘entertainment delivery systems’, by that I mean something built around providing fast/decent Gaming, Film, Music, TV and Web Services into peoples home. Im not too concerned about what the hardware is that delivers it, wether its streamed to a set top box or a shiny new ‘console’. I’d like to see this generation of consoles be the last that are defined by there graphical prowess, if fact the term ‘console’ should be abandoned completely. Intergrated entertainment is were its at for me.