Looks like that three year old graphics card can last another three years.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6309320.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;2
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6309320.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;2
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Looks like that three year old graphics card can last another three years.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6309320.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;2
they say 2014, but i think nintendo's launch in 2012 will force their hand to release earlier in 2013 like it suggests in the article. unless nintendo's next console doesn't sell so hot, then perhaps it will be 2014. but yeah, at least another couple of years before the next level in graphics when the ps4/ xbox720 arrive.
Ugh.
What can we blame for this unusually long console cycle? The recent economic recession? That gamers in the past bought only games but now buy DLC, accessories like guitars and drums for Guitar Hero, Rock Band, etc. so they have less money to spend on new consoles?
What?
Ugh.
What can we blame for this unusually long console cycle? The recent economic recession? That gamers in the past bought only games but now buy DLC, accessories like guitars and drums for Guitar Hero, Rock Band, etc. so they have less money to spend on new consoles?
What?
New consoles shouldn't come out until developers can figure a way to make HD-level graphics without sinking millions of dollars.
and why do people insist on calling i the 720. whats wrong with xbox 3
People have this misconception that games are expensive to purchase. You spend what, maybe $60 on a brand new game? When you think of expensive software, maybe you're thinking of 3ds Max or Photoshop, which run at $3000 and $700 MSRP respectively. That's nothing though honestly. Some software I've used in the past runs at over $75k per license (that's $75,000 per person).
Unless you're willing to take several steps backwards in terms of technology, price will only increase over time.
You ignore the fact that the cost of photoshop/max is vastly bloated to make it have more "value". They inflate the cost massively to make it appear like its high tech cutting edge stuff. If I gave you a $100 axe and a $100000 axe, which would you think was the more advanced, and would be the "better"? People like expensive things. Do you really think them selling photoshop at $600 would be at a $100 loss? Simple proof of this bloat is similar software which can be had for fractions of the cost yet is of an identical quality. eg. PSP.
why??
the new wii will be just as powerful as the Xbox and ps3.nintendo
and why do people insist on calling i the 720. whats wrong with xbox 3
That's never going to happen.
I'm a professional software developer. My salary is pretty high. I also work with a team, who all have a pretty high salary.
Now, you through in artists, writers, musicians, level designers, etc., and you're talking millions of dollars in one year based on salary alone. Let's not even get into if you hire any professional talent, who charge a pretty penny for their work.
People have this misconception that games are expensive to purchase. You spend what, maybe $60 on a brand new game? When you think of expensive software, maybe you're thinking of 3ds Max or Photoshop, which run at $3000 and $700 MSRP respectively. That's nothing though honestly. Some software I've used in the past runs at over $75k per license (that's $75,000 per person).
Unless you're willing to take several steps backwards in terms of technology, price will only increase over time.
as far as names, i'm just going with what ppl have been calling it - xbox 3 wouldn't make sense as the current system is called 360 already, which might confuse ppl; also, same reason ms didn't go with xbox 2 when they named the 360 - to have perceived parity in the eyes of the consumer along with the playstation 3 (xbox 2 < ps3 while xbox 360 = ps3). so xbox 3 < ps4 as the scenario would go.
[edit: sorry deathprincess, didn't see your post till now]
well if the next nintendo console sells like hotcakes for whatever reason, that will eat into sales of current ms/ sony consoles, meaning they would want to release new flashy consoles asap to gain back consumer mindshare. that's not to say that it won't go to 2014 for them to milk the current consoles as long as possible, but the next nintendo system could play a large role in determining whether ms and sony release in 2013 vs. 2014.
and i don't think nintendo will call the next system wii 2 or wii hd but something else entirely.
You ignore the fact that the cost of photoshop/max is vastly bloated to make it have more "value". They inflate the cost massively to make it appear like its high tech cutting edge stuff. If I gave you a $100 axe and a $100000 axe, which would you think was the more advanced, and would be the "better"? People like expensive things. Do you really think them selling photoshop at $600 would be at a $100 loss? Simple proof of this bloat is similar software which can be had for fractions of the cost yet is of an identical quality. eg. PSP.
Games companies can makes games for much much less than the "$60m, $100m" pricetags they wave around. How much of that goes directly to quality content? How much is "expenses" and other fluff. Software companies have 100s of people working on titles, but its not like theres 100 programmers, or 100 model artists. Look at what "indie" game producers can do with 10 or less people.
That's never going to happen.
I'm a professional software developer. My salary is pretty high. I also work with a team, who all have a pretty high salary.
Now, you through in artists, writers, musicians, level designers, etc., and you're talking millions of dollars in one year based on salary alone. Let's not even get into if you hire any professional talent, who charge a pretty penny for their work.
People have this misconception that games are expensive to purchase. You spend what, maybe $60 on a brand new game? When you think of expensive software, maybe you're thinking of 3ds Max or Photoshop, which run at $3000 and $700 MSRP respectively. That's nothing though honestly. Some software I've used in the past runs at over $75k per license (that's $75,000 per person).
Unless you're willing to take several steps backwards in terms of technology, price will only increase over time.
I'm a professional software developer. My salary is pretty high. I also work with a team, who all have a pretty high salary.
why??
the new wii will be just as powerful as the Xbox and ps3.nintendo
video game developers are way over payed. yall don't make anything amazing, just same old same old garbage. i wish we would get a video game industry crash and layoff tons of developers. $60 is way too much in most cases buddy.
the industry needs to put a $30,000/year cap on your pay and work twice the hours. thats about what yall do is worth.
I think so it wont seem less than the playstation.
With the PS3/xbox 360 if it had been xbox 2, 2 is less than 3, so it might appear to some people less advanced as it was the second stage vs the third stage. The bigger the number the better the product seems, especially in technology. So thats why they went with the 360 i'm assuming, so it was also a "3".
The 360 console really isn't in that bad of shape. I think Microsoft could do themselves a favor to upgrade their hardware so that it can continue to compete for the next few years with some minor changes that would not take a lot of development/testing training and increased cost.
Here is a short list of what they could do on the cheap to really knock anything new from Nintendo out of the water, and make the PS3 feel like it needs to stay out of the passing lane.
- Add more memory, everyone knows this is a given. (I hope whoever made the decision to include 512mb of memory over 256mb got a big bonus)
- Add a 2nd Tri-core processor, most of the games are threaded anyway, would still be able to play original xbox360 games (and xbox)
- Upgrade graphics processor, games should be capable of 1080p @120hz so 3D is possible at full resolution/speed, why not make these GGPU's as well so we can use them for things besides display if we wanted, also up the graphics memory while we are here
- If you really want to get Sony's goat add a couple cell cores for physics/ai/streaming calculations not to mention real time trans-coding etc. Microsoft basically used the work on the Core processor to help create their current processor so why not again?
- Required Hard drive - and let us buy a replacement and stop trying to nickel and dime us
- Blu-Ray - you know you need it and you have to have a disk player to play those old games anyway
So what did we get out of it? 2x the performance(at least), backward compatibility and limited risk by not using new technology, and the developers already have a known development environment and current work can easily ported to the new console.
so what about the new games that would have these requirements being playable on the existing consoles?
people with a 360 now would have to replace their console; what's the point of "upgrading" to the same console with slightly different specs?
Is anyone willing to bet that the next Xbox or Playstation iterations launch with out any sort of optical drive? I feel like with the rise of Steam, and the popularity of digital only media, one of them will be willing to take the plunge into digital distribution only. Unless anyone hasn't noticed, it seems like Gamestop has been preparing for the transition into a world without tangible copies of games. I feel like if anyone is going to take the step, it has to be microsoft, sony has too much invested in blu-ray to not support it. Would it be more cost effective for them to supply users with 500gb or 1TB hard drives and not have any sort of bay for disc?
video game developers are way over payed. yall don't make anything amazing, just same old same old garbage. i wish we would get a video game industry crash and layoff tons of developers. $60 is way too much in most cases buddy.
the industry needs to put a $30,000/year cap on your pay and work twice the hours. thats about what yall do is worth.
why??
the new wii will be just as powerful as the Xbox and ps3.nintendo
and why do people insist on calling i the 720. whats wrong with xbox 3
I'm a professional software developer. My salary is pretty high. I also work with a team, who all have a pretty high salary.
Now, you through in artists, writers, musicians, level designers, etc., and you're talking millions of dollars in one year based on salary alone. Let's not even get into if you hire any professional talent, who charge a pretty penny for their work.
But it is just entertainment software and not mission critical software. A top-tier game cost no more to produce than the average AAA movie, probably less. Why should we pay $60.00 for a game when a movie that costs the same or more to produce I can buy for $20.00 to $30.00?
I do pay $60.00 for some games if I really want it (rarely) but go over that amount and you will just lose money due to loss of customers and not make more money as you seem to think. BlueRay is selling poorly because it is overpriced compared to a DVD version and not because we don't want to buy BD.
The answer is simply economies of scale.
A blockbuster game sells 8 million copies
A blockbuster movie sells:
200 million tickets
10 million dvds
+ network rights
+ merchandising
+ other rights associated with the movie