Will there be Next-Gen consoles at all?

[Morgoth]

I read this article at Gamestar.de (translated into German), where Alex St. John, one of the co-inventor of DirectX and now the GM at WildTagent, thinks that there won't be a Next-Gen of consoles anymore, because the business model just isn't sustainable anymore, MS, Sony & Co. still making tons of losses with each hardware sold (how do they justify these losses to their shareholders?), and blames Intel, Nvidia, MS & Co. for the lack of attention why the PC just doesn't get more focus/isn't advancing so fast as it used to be.

It's funny, because if you ask Sony or MS about the their next "big thing", you won't get an answer. Sony says the PS3 will have a life span of 10 years, but that's because they can't afford developing another CPU (the CELL costed several billions to develop, and they still make tons of losses despite some return of games sales), MS is here clearly in the advantage as they're just using mass-market hardware for their 360, but whenever questioning about their next Gen console, they won't answer either. Except they're talking alot about their future online prospects, so at least they got that right. Graphics starts to distinguish over different hardware generations less and less, so what point do you have introducing a new gen. of consoles, if it doesn't bring you a huge jump of graphics quality into your living room? It made sense from Xbox to 360, but what's to expect next? What capability should Sony, MS & Co look instead to distinguish their hardware? Weird control schemes a'la Wii remote or Guitar Hero? Online? But that's what you got the PC for. The electronic distribution model becomes more and more prevalent, so why should publishers/developers continue to pay MS/Sony fees for retail copies if it would be much more profitable to expend the electronic distribution model instead? So, I'm not myself sure what/how the next-gen consoles should look like, and what they should offer...

 

What do the devs think? Will consoles finally exctinct in the next 5-10 years, MS & Intel finally smart up and invest into the PC/Windows market to advance the medium (both hardware and economical models), is this after all an requirement, and most importantly, will we still get story-orientated, singleplayer RPGs despite the lack of the retail console market? Discuss.

[Slowtrain]

Wait. Are you saying we're going to pcs again? I kinda liked the fact that hardware requirements for games has leveled off so drastically over the last 2 years. Now we have to switch back again?

 

 

Technology makes me so confused.

[Humodour]

Wait. Are you saying we're going to pcs again?

 

Pretty much, and it doesn't really surprise me, either. I expected it ever since the Xbox came out.

 

Although I highly doubt consoles will disappear completely. You've got things like the PSP and Gameboy which filled a niche that PCs simply can't fill (or can they...? maybe we'll see fancy shaped netbooks)

 

Consoles thrived because they were cheap, PC's were expensive, they were common, PC's were rare, they were stable and constant, PC hardware was always improving exponentially.

 

None of those are true anymore. The only thing consoles still have going for them really is the social factor. But that alone won't really keep them alive since it's easy enough to port to PCs. It'll be interesting to see if we experience a resurgence of gamepads and such for PCs.

 

The Wii is an interesting one. Something like that could well stick around despite the PC simply because of the unique input device which the devs can guarantee every Wii user has - that's hard on a PC.

Edited February 1, 2009 by Krezack

[Meshugger]

Nintendo will rule them all.

[Mamoulian War]

I dont see gaming going back to PC soon, Look how many people complain about high cost of PS3 everywhere, and it is still less than a PC cost... ever seen how GTA IV plays on $3000 PCs ???

 

one smaal hint, it plays terrible... and lot of longtime PC customers switch to consoles just because SecuROM, limited activations etc... Going 100% steam is out of question next few years aswell, because small download speed in most of the countries... PS3 games can have up to 50GB atm, with Pioneer already introducing 400GB BD medium which can be read with current BD players...

 

http://digitimes.com/news/a20081201PD212.html

 

Can you imagine downloading 50GB game with 2-10Mbit/s line or with a line which has 1-10GB limitation per month?

 

When there start to going out games which fully use the capacity of PS3 and BD customers will demand say thing for PC...

 

And besides, the capacity of cables which are laid around atm is not high enough to hold up to the growing demand of digital streaming content, if there will not be invested tens of billions of dollars worldwide, people predict collapse of internet...

 

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/81331

 

I dont think that this will happen anytime soon, but if the time of the global crisis like we have atm, i dont think that governments around the globe will prioritize funding internet backbones much over other more important things...

 

yes yes another doom story :D

[Kaftan Barlast]

Consoles have existed for 30 years, and I dont think they will disapear until PCs become so cheap and easy to use that there is no way to justify paying for something thats just a toy.

 

 

Nintendo will rule them all.

 

 

Yes, just like SEGA.

[Humodour]

I dont see gaming going back to PC soon, Look how many people complain about high cost of PS3 everywhere, and it is still less than a PC cost... ever seen how GTA IV plays on $3000 PCs ???

 

Pro-tip: everybody already has a PC these days, so the cost of a PC, however high you may think it is ($3000 would get you a PC far superior to any current console) is not terribly relevant.

 

one smaal hint, it plays terrible...

 

I know a lot of people who like PC gaming just fine. If you can't get GTA IV working properly on your computer, that's unfortunate.

 

Can you imagine downloading 50GB game with 2-10Mbit/s line or with a line which has 1-10GB limitation per month?

 

I'm pretty sure this isn't a referendum on digital downloads, since physical stores will exists regardless of whether or not consoles do.

 

And besides, the capacity of cables which are laid around atm is not high enough to hold up to the growing demand of digital streaming content, if there will not be invested tens of billions of dollars worldwide, people predict collapse of internet...

 

Again, what's the got to do with it? Consoles use the Internet these days, too. The Internet will exist, and people will use it, with or without consoles.

 

I dont think that this will happen anytime soon, but if the time of the global crisis like we have atm, i dont think that governments around the globe will prioritize funding internet backbones much over other more important things...

 

Actually, governments typically spend money on infrastructure (which includes communications) during big recessions because it creates job and loosens credit.

[Morgoth]

Tim Sweeney (the brain behind the Unreal Engine) thinks that software rendering will be the future, and API's like DirecX and OpenGL will finally cease to exists. Click

 

So, where's my software rendered

[Slowtrain]

I really don't understand this though.

 

Haven't we been told for the last 2 years that PC gaming is dead (REALLY dead this time)? Even hardcore pc developers like Crytek have just recently embraced the console.

 

 

What and then suddenly, BOOM!, everyone is all back onto pc gaming gaming again?

 

SOmebody needs to go get CGW's old offices cleaned up and ready to go.

 

 

 

Makes absolutely no sense.

[Morgoth]

I really don't understand this though.

 

Haven't we been told for the last 2 years that PC gaming is dead (REALLY dead this time)? Even hardcore pc developers like Crytek have just recently embraced the console.

Really? What console games has Crytek made? Is there a console SDK for the CryEngine2? No?

 

 

What and then suddenly, BOOM!, everyone is all back onto pc gaming gaming again?

 

That's very exaggerated formulated. Tim Sweeney, holiness of graphics programming, thinks that by 2010 (or later), there will be new CPU's that feature 10 cores and more, GPU's might take the same route, so this enables of course new possibilities for programmers. Like if well coded, the confining nature of DirectX could be replaced by direct software rendering, so the communication wouldn't run through hardware via drivers, but like with Vista and soundcards, through software. Sweeney also hopes that CPU's will be directly programmed through C++, not some other sort of language like you need one for the graphics, one for general purposes, and an additional for the CELL. PC's of course will be the first platform that will indroduce such CPU's/GPU's, or maybe a mix. Who knows. And then Crytek will introduce CRYING, the next awesome FPS using Crytek3 that will be PC exclusive again.

[Slowtrain]

I thought all of crytek's whining over piracy and the lack of sales for Crysis and their swearing off of the pc was pretty definite. Perhaps I was mistaken.

 

 

So basically the idea is that once again, new technology will make the pc the higher performing platform? But how does that make it any more viable for generating sales?

 

All I've been hearing pretty much non-stop for the last few years is that the pc is not a viable platform for game developement because it doesn't generate enough sales. Publishers don't care if their games utilize next gen features if nobody buys them. Publishers would rather have old gen game features and oodles of sales on an old gen platfrom.

[Mamoulian War]

Pro-tip: everybody already has a PC these days, so the cost of a PC, however high you may think it is ($3000 would get you a PC far superior to any current console) is not terribly relevant.

 

Pro-question 1... does everybody who have PC, have PC capable of playing current gen PC games? No... I have 3 working PCs at home only 1 is capable of playing current gen PC games. 75% of PCs sold today are not suitable for gaming... Most of the people buy desktops/notebooks for work school or internet browsing...

Pro-question 2... does everybody who have Xbox 360/Playstation 3/Wii have Xbox 360/Playstation 3/Wii capable of playing current gen console games? Yes... 100% of consoles sold today are suitable for gaming.

 

That is the difference, people spent much much less money on console gaming in a span of 5 - 10 years than on PC gaming. And i dont believe it will ever change... So the cost of the PC is very relevant to gaming... Most of the people who are buying Wii or Xbox 360 arcade (because of they low price), never played on PC anything beyond minesweeper

Edited February 1, 2009 by Mamoulian War

[Morgoth]

All I've been hearing pretty much non-stop for the last few years is that the pc is not a viable platform for game developement because it doesn't generate enough sales. Publishers don't care if their games utilize next gen features if nobody buys them. Publishers would rather have old gen game features and oodles of sales on an old gen platfrom.

That's because MS don't want to. The money is now with the 360, because that's what MS lobbies for. And because they make a profit for each sold retail copy, somthing they can't do with a PC copy or electronically distributed copy. MS and Intel (with it's crappy "look we push OEM PC's with our crappy intel gfx chips outside") just don't really see the fact that the PC fanbase is just much larger. With a wee more focus, more standards and some better services, this could dramatically change.

 

That about Tim Sweeney was a seperate subject, more hardware related. But calculating instructions directly through software would really push things forward. You'd only need DirectX for backward-compatibility.

Edited February 1, 2009 by Morgoth

[Kaftan Barlast]

CryTek didnt swear off the PC ffs, they said just they would begin to release games on consoles aswell.

[Morgoth]

Pro-tip: everybody already has a PC these days, so the cost of a PC, however high you may think it is ($3000 would get you a PC far superior to any current console) is not terribly relevant.

 

Pro-question 1... does everybody who have PC, have PC capable of playing current gen PC games? No... I have 3 working PCs at home only 1 is capable of playing current gen PC games. 75% of PCs sold today are not suitable for gaming... Most of the people buy desktops/notebooks for work school or internet browsing...

Pro-question 2... does everybody who have Xbox 360/Playstation 3/Wii have Xbox 360/Playstation 3/Wii capable of playing current gen console games? Yes... 100% of consoles sold today are suitable for gaming.

 

That is the difference, people spent much much less money on console gaming in a span of 5 - 10 years than on PC gaming. And i dont believe it will ever change... So the cost of the PC is very relevant to gaming... Most of the people who are buying Wii or Xbox 360 arcade (because of they low price), never played on PC anything beyond minesweeper

That's why every Notebook and every friggen Dell OEM computer needs a decent graphics card by default. Not the crappy Intel Onboard ones.

Edited February 1, 2009 by Morgoth

[Slowtrain]

CryTek didnt swear off the PC ffs, they said just they would begin to release games on consoles aswell.

 

 

IIRC, they made it clear that they would no longer develop high end pc games and that the XBOX 360 would be their lead dev platform. That may not be the same as not developing for PC at all, but it definitely is an embrace of the console as the revenue generating platform of the future.

 

 

Nobody is going back to PC's as their lead development platform. The concept is absurd.

 

Unless all the info we've been fed by publishers and console developers is simply lies and pc sales actually do generate revenue.

[Hurlshort]

Eventually I think you'll just have one box that controls everything.

 

But thank goodness there isn't a new generation of consoles coming out soon. The current gen is excellent and has plenty of life left in it. I think the Xbox/PS2/Gamecube generation was way too short as is.

[Morgoth]

I presume MS won't jump on the next-gen tohuwabohu before there isn't PC hardware available on the market that makes a huge difference graphics and gameplay wise. Doesn't make sense to push out hardware that runs on, let's say DX11, but gets too quickly obsolete. So if Sweeney is right and Intel/Nvidia and who knows else finally establish some news standards that don't require sloppy drivers and confinig APIs, I think then MS will start to have an idea about the hardware specs of their next console. 2012 maybe? Or longer? And what will Sony do? Using 16 CELLs? Wasting money on a new CPU/GPU multimonster?

Edited February 1, 2009 by Morgoth

[Slowtrain]

Eventually I think you'll just have one box that controls everything.

 

 

Isn't "one box that controls everything" just a wordy way of saying pc though?

 

A console is a game optimized computer, still a computer, but one with a very specific purpose. Going back to a general purpose "one box that controls everything" is going right back to the pc again. If that approach didn't generate sufficient reveune for game devs and pubs before, why is it going to do so in 2 or three years?

Edited February 1, 2009 by CrashGirl

[Maria Caliban]

Can you imagine downloading 50GB game with 2-10Mbit/s line or with a line which has 1-10GB limitation per month?

 

I don't see games hitting 50 gb anytime soon.

[Mamoulian War]

That's very exaggerated formulated. Tim Sweeney, holiness of graphics programming, thinks that by 2010 (or later), there will be new CPU's that feature 10 cores and more, GPU's might take the same route, so this enables of course new possibilities for programmers. Like if well coded, the confining nature of DirectX could be replaced by direct software rendering, so the communication wouldn't run through hardware via drivers, but like with Vista and soundcards, through software. Sweeney also hopes that CPU's will be directly programmed through C++, not some other sort of language like you need one for the graphics, one for general purposes, and an additional for the CELL. PC's of course will be the first platform that will indroduce such CPU's/GPU's, or maybe a mix. Who knows. And then Crytek will introduce CRYING, the next awesome FPS using Crytek3 that will be PC exclusive again.

 

Problem with multiple cores is that it needs parallel programming for full utilization, which is btw the biggest whine reason about programming for PS3, atm only about 0.5% of all programmers are able to design and code fully parallel piece of software... until this number grows much much higher, adding more and more cores to procesor will not make algorithms execute faster, because non-parallel programmed applications are capable of using only one core of your multi-core processor.

 

As an example... 32-bit procesors came on the PC market around 1985. The first games which were coded only for 32-bit architecture were released around year 1990... It lasted even more until programmers fully switched to 32-bit. So it was 5 years while game programmers were able to use the technology at hand to full potential...

 

64-bit procesors are on the PC market from around 2000, until today we do not have a single game that is coded only for 64-bit operating systems. Now try to imagine to how long it will last until programmers switch into fully 64-bit architecture while using more than 1 core!

 

I do not believe it will be in 2010 tbh, like Mr. Sweeney predicted

[Morgoth]

Eventually I think you'll just have one box that controls everything.

 

 

Isn't "one box that controls everything" just a wordy way of saying pc though?

 

A console is a game optimized computer, still a computer, but one with a very specific purpose. Going back to a general purpose "one box that controls everything" is going right back to the pc again. If that approach didn't generate sufficient reveune for game devs and pubs before, why is it going to do so in 2 or three years?

That's because publishers are now all greedy and hawt on consoles and treat the PC like it doesn't exist. And because they fear they become one day unnecessary when they finally realize developers could earn their money on PC games thanks to STEAM and whatnot. Seriously, don't you make more profit if you sell 500k units on Steam (you get 60% of that) rather than a console game that sells 2 million (and you only get 10%?).

[Hurlshort]

Eventually I think you'll just have one box that controls everything.

 

 

Isn't "one box that controls everything" just a wordy way of saying pc though?

 

A console is a game optimized computer, still a computer, but one with a very specific purpose. Going back to a general purpose "one box that controls everything" is going right back to the pc again. If that approach didn't generate sufficient reveune for game devs and pubs before, why is it going to do so in 2 or three years?

 

But consoles are no longer serving a very specific purpose. My 360 plays movies, and not just from DVD's, it streams them over the internet now. It works as a social networking platform. I can create chat rooms and sen messages to people. The only drawback is the lack of a keyboard, but with a headset I can send it over voice chat.

[Mamoulian War]

Can you imagine downloading 50GB game with 2-10Mbit/s line or with a line which has 1-10GB limitation per month?

 

I don't see games hitting 50 gb anytime soon.

 

I see one comming this year for example Final Fantasy 13, but it will not be the 1st game with around 50GB, the 1st was Heavenly Sword, released in 2007 (only the sound effects alone have over 10GB)!

Edited February 1, 2009 by Mamoulian War

[Slowtrain]

Regardless of the specifics of the technology involved, the fundamental reasoning is flawed.

 

Computers were miles ahead technology-wise of consoles for many years. Consoles closed the gap and maybe even pushed in front a bit when the next gens were released, but even now as the technology rush forward has slowed, pcs are once widening the tech gap between themselves and consoles.

 

I haven't upgraded my computer for more than a year, except for a slight graphics card upgrade, and I can still run all the current games well. That would have been unheard of three years ago.

 

 

But despite the almost constant technology gap between consoles and pcs, consoles have ALWAYS generated far greater revenues. Which platform is technologically superior it not relevant in game sales. In fact, it tends to be the opposite. Less tech advanced = greater revenue.

 

Again, I am just going on what we have been told over the years by publishers and what not. Maybe they have all been lying.