No New Game Consoles Until 2013, If Ever

TheCAD said:
I think it will be a while, but at some point the line between PCesque devices and PCs will blurr.

If you have a box under your TV that can browse the internet with firefox, play games w/ a controller, record TV shows, stream movies,etc....

Is it a gaming console, a DVR, or just a computer?
Click to expand...

exactly, i have been saying for a long time, consoles are no longer just consoles as many know them, a box to play games, consoles are turning into PC's really, HTPC's to be more acccurate, how long until you can add more ram to your console, or add your own new harddrives of any spec, not special ones....Soon it will all be in one box.
 
lostinseganet said:
I Think that the consoles greatest strength is that the hardware is the same. This allows developers the ability to maximize their efforts on gamming not compatibality.
Click to expand...



which they fail to do most of the time by "dumming" down console games and making them so simple.
 
They're right for so many reasons. Though the main reason is because consoles are becoming extremely PC like in cost and hardware.

Consoles were made when PC's cost $10k+, which brought cheap computer gaming to homes. Today, you can have a decent gaming PC for $800. With consoles costing originally $400-$600 it's a wonder if we'll ever see another gaming console released after this generation.

Sony nearly went belly up with their Playstation 3, and Microsoft is still barely breaking even on their console sales. I can see Nintendo releasing another console, because they're just one of those companies that refuse to do anything with PCs.

With game development becoming more and more costly, then why not stick to one universal platform like PCs?
 
MrGuvernment said:
which they fail to do most of the time by "dumming" down console games and making them so simple.
Click to expand...

Dumbing down is necessary for console games. While PC gamers are primarily interested in becoming immersed in the title, console gamers are more interested in "the win".

I prefer to game on a PC because console graphics are weak (compared to a PC), the game pad sucks and the majority of the console titles are laughably bad.
 
This is doing exactly what it is supposed to, which is to make a lot of noise to drive page hits and views. That is all there is to it. No truth anymore in the media it seems, its all just sensational swine flu bullshit.
 
last rumor i heard was they were wanting to stretch the consoles that are currently out a bit longer but to say they wont make another console ever???? haaa yeah right.
 
ICOM said:
I prefer to game on a PC because console graphics are weak (compared to a PC), the game pad sucks and the majority of the console titles are laughably bad.
Click to expand...

The majority of all games are laughably bad, PC or console. I look at the size of my Steam folder versus the console games I have (360, PS3, and Wii), and its all roughly the same ratios at work.

As for graphics, yeah, you'll have the PC ranking out higher framerates and better graphics in the high end (Far Cry 2 still blows me away), but a console on a high end home theater system has its own benefits. I played the demo of FEAR 2 on my PC and my 360, and in the end I went with the 360 version simply because of my home theater setup. Significantly better audio and an excellent plasma display made me go that way, even though I much prefer mouse+keyboard control. The better audio makes it much more engrossing for me.

Of course, it can get very expensive relative to a PC to do this; my pre-amp alone (not even counting the separate amplifier) costs more than my PC, my iMac, or my MBP do. My plasma display alone costs more than all of those things combined. I think my left and right channel speakers costs more than my PC, and this is before we get into my center, my sub, and my surrounds.

If you're doing console games on a regular system, smaller LCD with HTIB speakers, that sort of thing, then you'll clearly get a better experience with a PC. The thing is if you're willing to go in with just a fraction of what I paid for my home theater (and I went FAR with mine, its a good thing I can write all this crap off), consoles have their own advantages as well. Its like how I would much much rather watch a Blu Ray movie on my home theater instead of on my PC, no contest there.

To me its just about the game itself. There are PC games that are compromised by porting them to console and there are console games that are compromised by going to the PC. Then there are genres like RTS and turn based strategy games that have absolutely no business living on a console, or fighting games that have no business being on a PC. I've always liked all kinds of games so I just keep my bases covered. :)
 
defuseme2k said:
This is doing exactly what it is supposed to, which is to make a lot of noise to drive page hits and views. That is all there is to it. No truth anymore in the media it seems, its all just sensational swine flu bullshit.
Click to expand...

Yup, hits are all that matter, its why all you see everywhere are sensationalist headlines that bait people into flamefests.
 
Doesn't matter that much to me. I just use my wii when friends come over and stuff. My pc is what gets my attention the rest of the time. ;)
 
What? they have consoles that came out after the Atari 2600? that was the bomb for graphics!
 
NympH said:
Good, because PC gaming is the way of the future!
Click to expand...
Of course it always has been. The problem is these companies think that consoles are the way of the future because that's where the dumb down people think it's so hard to build a gaming machine so they "force" themselves into buying a console. That and pirating is the excuse by the publisher as the reason not to distribute it to the PC market.
 
I'm glad Wedbush Morgan Securities don't have any of my money. With analysts that stupid, no wonder so many financial institutes are in trouble.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody"
 
DukenukemX said:
With game development becoming more and more costly, then why not stick to one universal platform like PCs?
Click to expand...

Microsoft stands to make more additional money with console sales. They already own the OS market. Businesses (which are more profitable to them than consumers anyway) are going to buy Windows licenses no matter what. Many consumers will also have Windows as well. You'll have some go to OS X or Linux but the number is negligible, especially since MS owns business no matter what.

Even though Microsoft took longer to get profitable with the 360 due to the hardware being defective (it took them two extra years to get into profit due to support and extending the warranty), the potential rewards they could reap are greater by selling hardware. Why stop at making money on just selling an OS to a gamer who is probably going to have Windows anyway? No, you sell that same gamer hardware, accessories with massive profit margins (those hard drives, wireless controllers, and chargers cost very little to produce and are pure profit at the cash register), and games where every single game has a license fee attached to it which goes straight to Microsoft. Unless a PC game is published by Microsoft, it don't have this, but every 360 game out there has a piece that goes to MS.

If Blizzard has a blockbuster title, Microsoft doesn't get any additional cash, and at worst it still won't drive new Windows sales (their games will run on everything from XP to OS X). However, you get a blockbuster on the 360 and people will buy new consoles, new accessories (made in China for nothing), and a piece of that blockbuster will go to MS no matter which studio made it. Microsoft doesn't see a piece of PC game sales unless they publish it themselves.

So yeah, it makes sense to me. PC gamers don't make Microsoft nearly as much additional cash as you would think, not since people run Windows anyway, and not compared to when MS could control the entire hardware and software ecosystem that a game console has. Sure, some people might decide to switch to OS X or Linux and keep a 360 for gaming (I know lots of people that have done this), but the majority of consumers and gamers out there will have Windows no matter what.

There's a ceiling with the PC for Microsoft as far as gamers are concerned, and that's where the 360 comes in: total control of profit within that ecosystem with hardware and software sales and a potentially higher ceiling of new users in addition to their Windows users.

And yes, I put a LOT of blame on the decline of PC gaming on Microsoft. Thank goodness for Valve and Blizzard for keeping the torch alive. :)
 
BladeVenom said:
I'm glad Wedbush Morgan Securities don't have any of my money. With analysts that stupid, no wonder so many financial institutes are in trouble.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody"
Click to expand...

Why are you quoting Bill Gates? :confused:
 
delusional said:
Dream on. When you have companies like Ubisoft going to the press and hinting at moving all their development to consoles because "the pirates made them do it", you can imagine that other development houses will also follow along soon. You can bet that over the next few years we're going to see less games being developed for the PC. You have to remember that as these game development companies grow in size, their emphasis changes from building new, innovative games, to milking their "game franchises" for every damn penny they can.
Click to expand...

that is their excuses for making shitty game....

and why do most console game start making a PC version out of it :p

there we see more PC game coming than console crap....PC is the future....
 
It's a famous example of a bad prediction. I also didn't attribute it to Bill Gates, since fanboys and the Microsoft PR machine like to pretend he never said it.
 
They are right in a sense. This current generation of consoles has met an important point for longevity. That point is the "good enough" quality of the graphics and overall immersion. When it is "good enough" the complexity involved isn't making the game look good technically but to create a good GAME. I have no problem holding onto my xbox360 for 4 more years if the games keep being innovative and... GASP... FUN!

So yea, they have plenty of time to make fun games that appeal to different markets with the strength of the current gen systems now. Unless you have been drinking Sony's koolaid and think you need 1080p totally photorealistic graphics and rather watch your games(MGS4), then you can see how gaming is more than PPUs, GPU's, and CPU's.

COD4 great game, looked pretty damn sweet graphically. Esplosion Man, simpler art direction but has very very promising gameplay on a simpler level.

To make your game look good nowadays, it tends to fall on the art direction rather than how much bloom and motion blur you can show off.
 
BladeVenom said:
It's a famous example of a bad prediction. I also didn't attribute it to Bill Gates, since fanboys and the Microsoft PR machine like to pretend he never said it.
Click to expand...

He never said it. He was on an interview where they asked him personally about that. I still tell people the joke because it does make a point. Someone very smart can be wrong sometimes, and that technology moves faster than we can predict. But in all reality, he actually never said that.
 
Kaitian said:
The cost to build a good gaming machine is coming down especially with the Radeon's line is offering excellent option to get the best performance for the buck.

X3 processor + 4770, etc you can come away with a better gaming system rather than the old outdated shit that they still have for the consoles that cannot be upgraded. However people like us knows that we can upgrade and we're the ones paying for games to play because we expect the best and full experience of playing a game.
Click to expand...

It's not about the hardware specs, it's about quality of software. When you can show me PC titles that can even begin with the quality of exclusive software available on consoles, then your point will have some merit. There are now a handful of PC only developers, namely Valve and Blizzard, the former of which has been developing titles on the 360. Even Crytek is looking to console development, making CryENGINE2 likely the last PC only engine.

Meanwhile, pretty much any title worth talking about, again except for those coming out of Valve and Blizzard, can be found on consoles. The same can't be said in reverse. Moreover, the few console games that are ported to the PC suck and require a controller to even be playable (think Lost Planet and Devil May Cry), which is truly the icing on the cake: you need a 360 controller to play a console game on a PC, which needed to be upgraded due to shoddy programming (GTA4 anyone?), because you refused to buy a 360. Until you can show me that the PC has a superior library of software, saying PCs are superior because they can upgrade is pointless.
 
DukenukemX said:
They're right for so many reasons. Though the main reason is because consoles are becoming extremely PC like in cost and hardware.

Consoles were made when PC's cost $10k+, which brought cheap computer gaming to homes. Today, you can have a decent gaming PC for $800. With consoles costing originally $400-$600 it's a wonder if we'll ever see another gaming console released after this generation.

Sony nearly went belly up with their Playstation 3, and Microsoft is still barely breaking even on their console sales. I can see Nintendo releasing another console, because they're just one of those companies that refuse to do anything with PCs.

With game development becoming more and more costly, then why not stick to one universal platform like PCs?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's just a BIT of an exaggeration. Sony hardly went bankrupt and Microsoft has been making a profit on each 360 sold for more than a year now, hardly what I would call "barely breaking even".
 
Ardrid said:
Until you can show me that the PC has a superior library of software, saying PCs are superior because they can upgrade is pointless.
Click to expand...

I'll take a few quality PC titles over a slew of drivel console titles any day. I hear Bethesda makes some pretty good PC titles, too.

The alleged demise of the console might be due to the market being flooded with total garbage console software. The only console games worth playing (IMO) are those originally ported to PC.

PC's are superior gaming platforms because a PC's hardware is superior to that of a console. A console is a toy. After all, you can buy a console from Toys R Us...
 
What makes this topic even more convulated is the fact that the distinct line between, console, device, and computer is now very blurry. Without the clear distinction we enjoyed before, alot of arguments and points made will be based off of vague concepts and nothing concrete.
 
well dragon age is coming to both pc and 360/ps3 but was orginally a pc only game. So I'd have to say that publishers want the larger market of pc+360+ps3 vs pc only or console only. Games like dragon age and fallout will be better on the PC simply because you can mod them and when people start trading mods you get free games.

As far as Serpico's setup nothing is stopping you from sending the HiDef video and audio to your home theater, if you check out some of the setups on the avsforums the nicer ones are pc based. :)

I do have to agree that some games work better on consoles, I just don't like the controls on the xbox/ps3, but we won't get better controllers until MS and sony let us remap the controlers any way we want.
 
ICOM said:
PC's are superior gaming platforms because a PC's hardware is superior to that of a console. A console is a toy. After all, you can buy a console from Toys R Us...
Click to expand...

And when you use a PC for gaming, it too is a toy.
 
drakken said:
As far as Serpico's setup nothing is stopping you from sending the HiDef video and audio to your home theater, if you check out some of the setups on the avsforums the nicer ones are pc based. :)
Click to expand...

Oh believe me, the thought of setting up a gaming PC in my living room has crossed my mind more than a few times, I just can't justify spending another $1000 or so on a fourth computer for my place, especially one that would only be used for games.

My spending on tech toys is pretty out of control but even I have my limits. ;)
 
No new console till 2013, it may be very possible. But there's no way in hell that current gen of console is the last.

Current gen console are doing just fine. Releasing another new gen of console just for better graphics and physics is not going to sell it (maybe except for Wii). Whats more, its going to cost them money all over again, going through the cycle of losing money first before they can start making profit.

Might as well carry on with current generation of console. I doubt most mainstream games out there are demanding for better looking graphics anyway

We just need good games, be it console or PC
 
IMO the whole keyboard, mouse, controller thing is getting a bit tired. All games are getting tedious to me. Its all been done. Nintendo made a step with the Wii but i think for people not to just get bored with games and stop altogether like they did in the early 80s something entirely new is going to have to happen.

A working virtual reality helmet, the interactive room filling game like nintendo had as a demo a few years back. I am amazed people still get excited about new releases, eh, yeah, we have played that. Several times.

The whole bit of new graphics with the same control layout has to end someday.
 
I would hope there'd be no new consoles for a few years. Instead, I'd like to see Sony and MS focus on providing a better service to their customers and extending the life of their current cash cows. Extending console life is the key to the loyal, longer lasting consumer. Pumping out new systems every few years is the way to make quick cash, at the expense of your long time loyalty factor.

Kaitian said:
Doesn't affect me. I don't own a console. If anything I'd like them to change their emphasis back towards PC gaming.
Click to expand...

I want Beer under my pillow, but we don't get everything we want, in the realm of nevergoingtohappensville. :(
 
A lot of PC fanboys came into this thread quite early...

According to the article, it seems the prediction of no more consoles hints at a "console" that is merely a set top box that streams/downloads games with cloud computing. Something like that isn't a console in the sense we know them now, so the prediction doesn't seem that far fetched.

PC gaming isn't going to take over the marketshare of consoles. People who play consoles and people who play PCs are two different animals. The graphics are barely the point anymore. The experiences are radically different, and this is mostly why consoles aren't going anywhere even with an "extended" life span.

For one, I hope he's right.
 
How about no new game consoles ever again? They are ruining my PC gaming experience much more often than they did in the 90s.
 
I predict that Miley Circus will be the last mindless popstar ever.... :eek:
 
We wont see another console for a while, the reason is the investment required is massive and has a slow return, if you understand the console sales model you'll understand why.

Consoles are designed and sold at a loss, a massive loss in fact, when the PS3 first came out bluray drives for the PC were still in the £300-400 mark which was about the price of the console, if you take into account the rest of the hardware you have a unit that costs a lot to make and sold at a relatively low price.

The idea is to get punters hooked in with cool technology and then charge developers royalties to use the platform, that forces the costs of games to go up since a slice of money from the games goes to sony/microsoft/nintendo.

This means it's in their best interest to keep the platform running for as long as possible. Which suits me fine actually...

The longer the consoles rott in their own stench of static technology, the more attractive the PC platform becomes, lets face it well specd up modern PC's are playing multiplatform titles like FEAR2 in 2560x1600 with 16xAA and 16xAF and still get awesome frame rates.

Yeah so the epic retreated to the consoles, so did crytek, but they're first and foremost engine developers, they build game engines not games, whats the plan for them I wonder, sit around and wait for the next console itteration...take a guess at the next set of specs and hardware and base the next gen engines off a guess?

Despite graphics not being everything, businesses are going to gravitate towards a platform that allows growth in technology itself, the PC is a perfect example of steady growth of technology over time, the consoles don't have that, they take these horrible unnatural leaps in technology that aren't even possible without the R&D going on all the time on the PC (i've said it before, consoles rely on PC gaming to survive in the state they do)

Hopefully with new ideas constantly flowing in, that inevitibly require more processing and rendering power, we'll see developers harness the PC more and more and leave the consoles in the dust.
 
Serpico said:
The majority of all games are laughably bad, PC or console. I look at the size of my Steam folder versus the console games I have (360, PS3, and Wii), and its all roughly the same ratios at work.

As for graphics, yeah, you'll have the PC ranking out higher framerates and better graphics in the high end (Far Cry 2 still blows me away), but a console on a high end home theater system has its own benefits. I played the demo of FEAR 2 on my PC and my 360, and in the end I went with the 360 version simply because of my home theater setup. Significantly better audio and an excellent plasma display made me go that way, even though I much prefer mouse+keyboard control. The better audio makes it much more engrossing for me.

Of course, it can get very expensive relative to a PC to do this; my pre-amp alone (not even counting the separate amplifier) costs more than my PC, my iMac, or my MBP do. My plasma display alone costs more than all of those things combined. I think my left and right channel speakers costs more than my PC, and this is before we get into my center, my sub, and my surrounds.

If you're doing console games on a regular system, smaller LCD with HTIB speakers, that sort of thing, then you'll clearly get a better experience with a PC. The thing is if you're willing to go in with just a fraction of what I paid for my home theater (and I went FAR with mine, its a good thing I can write all this crap off), consoles have their own advantages as well. Its like how I would much much rather watch a Blu Ray movie on my home theater instead of on my PC, no contest there.

To me its just about the game itself. There are PC games that are compromised by porting them to console and there are console games that are compromised by going to the PC. Then there are genres like RTS and turn based strategy games that have absolutely no business living on a console, or fighting games that have no business being on a PC. I've always liked all kinds of games so I just keep my bases covered. :)
Click to expand...
I agree with everything this man said. The main reason why I had to hang up my hardocre pc gamer card, 42in Plasma + 5.1 surround system for the living room. some games are more fun/engrossing/enjoyable on a 42in screen rather than a 22in LCD. The worse your home theatre setup is, the easier it is to like PC gaming more. Another big point I think is, more of my real life friends are on XBLive. Very few of my real life friends are into Tech like I am and bother with a PC's upkeep to play the latest games TWIMTBP style.

What do you guys think? Are more of your real-life friends on console games or pc games?
 
That's just silly to say there won't be any new consoles ever. But it's quite possible that the next gen arrives somewhere after 2012-13, which would be my guess also. There aren't any need for a new console anytime soon, especially when it feels like that they're beginning to be mature enough and we're supposed seeing good games coming, also the manufacturers must make profit. Though I don't care myself much of consoles nowadays, gaming only on the pc, and actually most of them are pretty old titles already. Maybe I'm getting to old.
 
XamediX said:
I agree with everything this man said. The main reason why I had to hang up my hardocre pc gamer card, 42in Plasma + 5.1 surround system for the living room. some games are more fun/engrossing/enjoyable on a 42in screen rather than a 22in LCD. The worse your home theatre setup is, the easier it is to like PC gaming more. Another big point I think is, more of my real life friends are on XBLive. Very few of my real life friends are into Tech like I am and bother with a PC's upkeep to play the latest games TWIMTBP style.

What do you guys think? Are more of your real-life friends on console games or pc games?
Click to expand...

You can of course wire up your PC to a TV no problems, and also wire up console controllers to your PC, so as far as setup goes, it's all perfectly possible.

Or you could spend as much on your PC setup as your home theatre like I did and shoot for a 30" screen which sports twice the resolution as so called "High Definition" (1080p), actually most console games run far less than that, any graphically intensive ones tend to run at 720p which is a laughable resolution for 42".
 
Well, my newest consoles are the PS2 and the GameCube.

I used to be into consoles a lot more, but to tell the truth, the older consoles were a lot more fun.... with the exception of games like StarFox and Zelda on the GameCube.

One of my favorites is still the TurboGrafx 16 with CD addon and Arcade Card. Lots of perfect arcade ports and a ton of other games that were way better than other consoles of the same era. Own about 100 original games plus a whole bunch of burned games as well.

And I want to know why Sega quite after the Dreamcast. With the VGA adapter it still has graphics that rival the PS2 and at the time it was released, it blew everything else out of the water. I still have one and like to break it our every once in a while.

Never was impressed with XBOX... never wanted to spend the money on PS3 or XBOX360

Still have NES, SNES, N64, GameCube, Genesis, Nomad, TG-16, PS2, GBA, and Dreamcast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top