• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

The next console generation

I'm hoping Microsoft's console doesn't have any sort of drive bay, blu-ray or otherwise. By the time they launch I'm hoping it's just digital distribution. The next systems will have to account for complete motion control and 3d, I'm sure they'll be more powerful than my current PC at the very least. I'd imagine that they're going to try to ride Natal until about 2013. The timing isn't right for them to create a console any earlier than then. Probably something similar to a 6-8 core processor and more powerful than the 5970.
 
Decko87 said:
I'm hoping Microsoft's console doesn't have any sort of drive bay, blu-ray or otherwise. By the time they launch I'm hoping it's just digital distribution. The next systems will have to account for complete motion control and 3d, I'm sure they'll be more powerful than my current PC at the very least. I'd imagine that they're going to try to ride Natal until about 2013. The timing isn't right for them to create a console any earlier than then. Probably something similar to a 6-8 core processor and more powerful than the 5970.
Click to expand...

I don't think any console next gen will go optical driveless, it's too soon. Gen after next, maybe.

What I think is that next gen's consoles will likely be iterations of today's hardware. In the case of PS3 and 360 that means probably a revision of Cell/Xenon and a modern GPU, with maybe 2GB of RAM. Motion controls for sure, but 3D is going to flop because it requires glasses and/or a special tv set; the former is ridiculous and uncomfortable for regular or extended use, the latter is expensive and the market has barely tipped in favor of HDTV, they simply are not ready for a new iteration of living room display type.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
I don't think any console next gen will go optical driveless, it's too soon. Gen after next, maybe.

What I think is that next gen's consoles will likely be iterations of today's hardware. In the case of PS3 and 360 that means probably a revision of Cell/Xenon and a modern GPU, with maybe 2GB of RAM. Motion controls for sure, but 3D is going to flop because it requires glasses and/or a special tv set; the former is ridiculous and uncomfortable for regular or extended use, the latter is expensive and the market has barely tipped in favor of HDTV, they simply are not ready for a new iteration of living room display type.
Click to expand...

I agree 100%

And I think 3D is just going to be a novelty as DMA said, the glasses are a pain for extended use and who the fuck is gonna fork over another 3,000 for a new Sony 3D TV? I've got a TV in the living room and my HT room and those both ran together around $4,800 so I'm sure as hell not buying another one for awhile.
 
Last edited:
Rash said:
3d is going to flop just like bluray.......right?
Click to expand...
The two have next to nothing in comparison.

3D isn't going to flop as such. But it's going to be niche as hell because it'll only be available on the highest end TVs for a long while.
 
Rash said:
3d is going to flop just like bluray.......right?
Click to expand...

Honestly I don't think Bluray flopped at all, I love um myself. But I have to wear glasses all the time and putting 3D glasses on over regular glasses is a pain in the ass, had this experience recently watching Coraline in 3D on Bluray.

I just think it's something that will be really hard to catch on when it comes to games because we've purchased HDTv's already and if they can incorporate the technology into our exsisting TV's then it will be more likely to catch on but if we have to buy one of the rumored Sony Tv's that has it built in that's supposidly coming out this year, the attach rate will be low I'm sure.
 
Psychotext said:
The two have next to nothing in comparison.

3D isn't going to flop as such. But it's going to be niche as hell because it'll only be available on the highest end TVs for a long while.
Click to expand...

just like bluray/skyhd and hd tvs except most people already have 1 part of the equation for 3-d which is ps3s (probably 360s aswell) and sky hd being 3d ready (although i think sky are going for a different method of 3d than sony samsung and most of the other major tv manufacturers). 22" 3d monitors are already around the 300 quid mark with a pair of nvidia 3d vision glasses!!(for comparison purposes a 32" 1080p lcd tv with some bizzare make is the same price, i think i recently saw an lg 32" for £339) obviously for the first couple of years the bigger 3d tvs 37"+ are going to be a horrendous price. i think 3-D tvs will be much more affordable in a quicker time frame than normal 32"+ lcd tvs did, i mean the manufacturers of tvs need to make a bigger profit somehow or their pofits are going to go to shit. I must admit that wearing 3-d glasses for 3 hrs didnt really irritate me one bit, the only problem i see is people that already need to wear specs for everyday use!! I cant wait to upgrade some of my TVs (32") as they are only 1080i which i now cant stand!!

Creepingdeath1977 said:
Honestly I don't think Bluray flopped at all.
Click to expand...
i dont think it flopped either, i supported it from day one, infact i probably had one of the first bluray players! but most said it would fail with bluray players being £1000+ and the movies costing £20+
 
Last edited:
You addressed the problem in your text...

"the manufacturers of tvs need to make a bigger profit somehow or their pofits are going to go to shit"

Which is exactly why 3D will be sold as the premium models for as long as possible, hampering adoption. They need the profit, and this is how they think they're going to be able to get it. HD adoption is still fairly low as it is, 3DTV adoption will make up a small percentage of that... and hell, first we actually need the TVs to be on the market.
 
I really hope the next Xbox has Blu-Ray, because if they don't then Microsoft will prove they are sore losers.
 
zamardii said:
I really hope the next Xbox has Blu-Ray, because if they don't then Microsoft will prove they are sore losers.
Click to expand...
There's absolutely no reason it wouldn't. It's not like they could have put a HD drive into the 360 and chose not to... the tech simply wasn't available when the 360 launched.
 
Psychotext said:
There's absolutely no reason it wouldn't. It's not like they could have put a HD drive into the 360 and chose not to... the tech simply wasn't available when the 360 launched.
Click to expand...

I agree, with Bluray available through the masses now and the storage benefit's as far as games are concerned, I'm sure it will be in the next Xbox.
 
i don't know anything about 3d; does it render the same as 2d? or does it take more processing power? because that could be a serious limitation.

the other thing is unless sony or microsoft are backers of 3d technology, i doubt either console is going to take a chance and integrate 3d. if anything, they'll jump at the chance for a 200 dollar peripheral that does.
 
It needs about 40% to 80% more processing power depending on how you do it. (That's an oversimplification, but it's basically right)
 
Dome said:
i don't know anything about 3d; does it render the same as 2d? or does it take more processing power? because that could be a serious limitation.

the other thing is unless sony or microsoft are backers of 3d technology, i doubt either console is going to take a chance and integrate 3d. if anything, they'll jump at the chance for a 200 dollar peripheral that does.
Click to expand...

Ow Sony is definately pushing it, at CES they had 3D demo's of GT5,Super Stardust Hd, etc...running.
 
the other thing is cost, i would imagine. even if they keep the performance at the levels of the current generation i imagine costs would still be very high.

Sony did say they wanted their ps3 to last for what? 7-10 years? if microsoft comes out with a super high performance machine without 3d before then, and then sony followed a year or two later with 3d and less ground-breaking performance it might be interesting to see how the game developers would want to handle it. games for both platforms w/ 3d games costing more? would they all switch to 3d?

i'm interested to see how 3d affects gaming, but i doubt it'll happen that soon. of course i also have no expertise with the gaming industry, other than being a longtime customer
 
Rash said:
3d is going to flop just like bluray.......right?
Click to expand...

Bluray WAS flopping until HD DVD bowed out of the race due to publisher issues. Indeed, bluray as a percentage against DVD remains a sliver of the market, and likely will for the foreseeable future.

However, when you're talking about 3D, bluray is not an apt analogy at all. See, using a bluray disk is almost identical to using a DVD disk: I plug in the player, plop a disk on the tray, press play and voila, I'm on.

The current implementations of 3D, however, suffer from an incredibly antiquated mode of operation, requiring you to wear special glasses. You simply are not going to see the market adopt it for that reason. In the first place, people don't want to put glasses on every time they play a game, and wear them for hours. Second, suppose you have friends over and not enough glasses? Everyone watching ends up with a headache because watching the display's offset images is hard on the eyes and looks terrible.

Then there's the expense. 3D TV's so far are ridiculously expensive, and for what? All you get is the ability to see 3D content while wearing glasses. News flash? You can already do that. Sure, not with EVERY movie, but so what? Do you NEED every movie to be in 3D? Are you really going to enjoy On Golden Pond or Buffy the Vampire Slayer more if it's in 3D? Not very likely.

3D with glasses is, first and foremost, antiquated. It's been around since what, the 1950's? It's a gimmick, and a poorly thought out gimmick at that.

3D in the living room will take off when:

1. It requires NO glasses to see it
2. It requires NO massive expense to get it
3. OK, I lied, there is no 3.

Seriously, 3D will be great when it is, in effect, holographic projection into the room or some kind of panoramic display technology that provides the illusion of depth without need for special crap.

Glasses 3D? Antiquated, ridiculous gimmick. It shipped IN THE BOX with the Sega Master System and flopped like a pair of saggy boobs. So will this new nonsense. Audiences are still working on migrating to HDTV, anything else is asking too much.
 
Psychotext said:
There's absolutely no reason it wouldn't. It's not like they could have put a HD drive into the 360 and chose not to... the tech simply wasn't available when the 360 launched.
Click to expand...

That's true. And even if it was available, the fact is that we were heading into a format war, the outcome of which was impossible to know with any certainty, and asking consumers to pay for that was simply a bad business decision.

Honestly, if PS3 hadn't shipped with bluray, BD wouldn't have won. It really was the trojan horse that tipped the scales.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Bluray WAS flopping until HD DVD bowed out of the race due to publisher issues. Indeed, bluray as a percentage against DVD remains a sliver of the market, and likely will for the foreseeable future.

However, when you're talking about 3D, bluray is not an apt analogy at all. See, using a bluray disk is almost identical to using a DVD disk: I plug in the player, plop a disk on the tray, press play and voila, I'm on.

The current implementations of 3D, however, suffer from an incredibly antiquated mode of operation, requiring you to wear special glasses. You simply are not going to see the market adopt it for that reason. In the first place, people don't want to put glasses on every time they play a game, and wear them for hours. Second, suppose you have friends over and not enough glasses? Everyone watching ends up with a headache because watching the display's offset images is hard on the eyes and looks terrible.

Then there's the expense. 3D TV's so far are ridiculously expensive, and for what? All you get is the ability to see 3D content while wearing glasses. News flash? You can already do that. Sure, not with EVERY movie, but so what? Do you NEED every movie to be in 3D? Are you really going to enjoy On Golden Pond or Buffy the Vampire Slayer more if it's in 3D? Not very likely.

3D with glasses is, first and foremost, antiquated. It's been around since what, the 1950's? It's a gimmick, and a poorly thought out gimmick at that.

3D in the living room will take off when:

1. It requires NO glasses to see it
2. It requires NO massive expense to get it
3. OK, I lied, there is no 3.

Seriously, 3D will be great when it is, in effect, holographic projection into the room or some kind of panoramic display technology that provides the illusion of depth without need for special crap.

Glasses 3D? Antiquated, ridiculous gimmick. It shipped IN THE BOX with the Sega Master System and flopped like a pair of saggy boobs. So will this new nonsense. Audiences are still working on migrating to HDTV, anything else is asking too much.
Click to expand...

your comment reminds me of everyones comment when hdtv or even bluray/hddvd came out and it cost a fortune for the tvs/players. you make it sound like you need to wear the 3d glasses everytime you switch a 3d tv on!!

you keep calling it a gimmick, thats fine ill be playing left for dead in full 3d next week, and cant wait for super stardust, wipeout,gt etc
 
So Rash, what's the install base of 3DTVs going to look like by the end of 2010, 2011, 2012? You seem very confident in its success, so I'm wondering just what you think that's going to translate to in numbers.
 
I'm not sure if gimmick is the right word for 3D because technically its fucking astonishing. However, it just does not seem to be a natural progression for the average television consumer or even gamer. I'd love to be proven wrong and have the future me delighted with some compelling reasons to adopt the technology.

For the time being, I'll just keep saving my money for more important things.
 
Psychotext said:
So Rash, what's the install base of 3DTVs going to look like by the end of 2010, 2011, 2012? You seem very confident in its success, so I'm wondering just what you think that's going to translate to in numbers.
Click to expand...

it will be fuck all by the end of 2012, considering the first hdtvs came out before the year 2000 im just saying it will be more affordable quicker, like i said 3d lcd monitors have practically launched at a decent price wether it be for 3d gaming/movies or normal 2dpc gaming at 120hz, but will take. Like others said normal 1080p hdtvs are only just reaching mass markets.
another5 years and youll be debating over ultra hidef tvs and im sure they will be 3d ready 120hz anyway wether it be glasses or non glasses tech.
just think about it, 28"+ widescreen and 4:3 crt tvs didnt really last that long....
 
Which was really my point. I'd be surprised if there's 2 million 3DTVs in homes worldwide by the end of 2012. It may eventually get to the point where (like HD vs SD today) you'd struggle to buy a non 3D model, but that doesn't really speak to their appeal, more to the fact that eventually the technology will be cheap enough that they just simply don't bother making the screens without it. Screens will then get into peoples homes as they replace their old or faulty models.

The problem is, without widespread uptake (which will be a very, very long time) there wont be any great push to provide the content for it... especially if that content is sold at a premium (such as the 3DTV channels). There's a lot of buzz around the technology, but unfortunately it's pure marketing, largely timed to coincide with the release of avatar. I'm sure Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, LG etc would love us to fall over ourselves to get the tech, but even they're hedging their bets when it comes to predicted uptake.
 
Psychotext said:
Which was really my point. I'd be surprised if there's 2 million 3DTVs in homes worldwide by the end of 2012. It may eventually get to the point where (like HD vs SD today) you'd struggle to buy a non 3D model, but that doesn't really speak to their appeal, more to the fact that eventually the technology will be cheap enough that they just simply don't bother making the screens without it. Screens will then get into peoples homes as they replace their old or faulty models.

The problem is, without widespread uptake (which will be a very, very long time) there wont be any great push to provide the content for it... especially if that content is sold at a premium (such as the 3DTV channels). There's a lot of buzz around the technology, but unfortunately it's pure marketing, largely timed to coincide with the release of avatar. I'm sure Samsung, Panasonic, Sony, LG etc would love us to fall over ourselves to get the tech, but even they're hedging their bets when it comes to predicted uptake.
Click to expand...

yer fair dos, it just makes me laugh when they imply that 3d tech failed on the mastersystem or whatever year for film wether it be shutter tech or red and green glasses therefore it will fail on todays tech. Yer Avatar blew me away but not as much as Batman AA, left for dead and other pc games.

3d on the master system was really appealing!: rolleyes:
and no DMA there is no need for every movie to be in 3d just like there is no need for every movie to be in hd!
 
Rash said:
your comment reminds me of everyones comment when hdtv or even bluray/hddvd came out and it cost a fortune for the tvs/players. you make it sound like you need to wear the 3d glasses everytime you switch a 3d tv on!!

you keep calling it a gimmick, thats fine ill be playing left for dead in full 3d next week, and cant wait for super stardust, wipeout,gt etc
Click to expand...

God could you imagine playing Wipeout Fury in 3D?

I would fucking puke all over the place.:eek:
 
Rash said:
your comment reminds me of everyones comment when hdtv or even bluray/hddvd came out and it cost a fortune for the tvs/players. you make it sound like you need to wear the 3d glasses everytime you switch a 3d tv on!!

you keep calling it a gimmick, thats fine ill be playing left for dead in full 3d next week, and cant wait for super stardust, wipeout,gt etc
Click to expand...

Sorry, Rash, but I was always in favor of HD, ever since it was introduced in the US in the late 1990's. It took over 10 years and the advent of Xbox 360 and PS3 to finally SELL some damn HDTV's.

3D has been around in this incarnation since the 1920's-there is simply no reason to believe it's going to take off this time around.

Oh, and if you're watching 3D content on your 3D TV, guess what? You're wearing the glasses. Every single minute of every single time. And that, my friend, is never, EVER going to fly with the mass market.

The "hardcore" will buy into it--because they're idiots, a bunch of mindless sheep who drool for the next hit of technology.
 
theNoid said:
I'm not sure if gimmick is the right word for 3D because technically its fucking astonishing. However, it just does not seem to be a natural progression for the average television consumer or even gamer. I'd love to be proven wrong and have the future me delighted with some compelling reasons to adopt the technology.

For the time being, I'll just keep saving my money for more important things.
Click to expand...

There's nothing astonishing about 3D with glasses. ZERO.

When I can sit glasses free in my living room and watch environments, effects and characters pop out into my world--THAT will be astonishing. This current rehash of 90 year old technology is "been there, done that" with a new coat of paint.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
Oh, and if you're watching 3D content on your 3D TV, guess what? You're wearing the glasses. Every single minute of every single time. And that, my friend, is never, EVER going to fly with the mass market.

The "hardcore" will buy into it--because they're idiots, a bunch of mindless sheep who drool for the next hit of technology.
Click to expand...

thanks for calling me an idiot and a mindless sheep. I have bought into 3d as it makes my movie experience and gaming experience much much better.

you make it sound as if your gonna be forced to watch everything oh 3d if you buy a 3d tv. I for one will just be watching action movies iand gplaying games that justify 3d.

I never said you didn't support hdtv.
sure if 3d tech comes out where you don't require glasses then great, all the better, infact I'm sure I read that Intel have already doneit, but don't slateme if I don't mind wearing 3d glassess especially considering I got into 3d gaming yesterday costing only an extra 320 quid in todays prices. I might be fucking dead in a few years LOL;)
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
There's nothing astonishing about 3D with glasses. ZERO.

When I can sit glasses free in my living room and watch environments, effects and characters pop out into my world--THAT will be astonishing. This current rehash of 90 year old technology is "been there, done that" with a new coat of paint.
Click to expand...

I can agree with this, but some of the 3D shown at CES did not require glasses.
 
Rash said:
thanks for calling me an idiot and a mindless sheep. I have bought into 3d as it makes my movie experience and gaming experience much much better.

you make it sound as if your gonna be forced to watch everything oh 3d if you buy a 3d tv. I for one will just be watching action movies iand gplaying games that justify 3d.

I never said you didn't support hdtv.
sure if 3d tech comes out where you don't require glasses then great, all the better, infact I'm sure I read that Intel have already doneit, but don't slateme if I don't mind wearing 3d glassess especially considering I got into 3d gaming yesterday costing only an extra 320 quid in todays prices. I might be fucking dead in a few years LOL;)
Click to expand...

Hey I'm not saying any particular person is an idiot, just that 3D in its current incarnation has been punted at home users for longer than probably anybody on this forum has even been *alive*. It's not any more likely to take off now than it was before.

All I'm saying is, 3D with glasses is old, outdated tech and very weak. If the 3D TV's that convert everything to 3D means that ALL your content will have to be watched in 3D, they'll flop. If they're substantially pricier than a regular HDTV, they'll flop. If somebody comes out with a glasses-free version that works just as well or better, they'll flop.

In short, there is VERY little going in favor of 3D TV, and a lot going against it.
 
I have to admit that I have trouble following this discussion. I own a PS3 and from experience I know that most games do not take advantage of HD. Obviously there are full HD games out there and they run just fine, so it's not a technical limitation but some other issue.

In addition some of the current games which run on lower resolutions have performance problems which again are not a result of inadequate hardware but crappy programming. So what's really needed isn't new console hardware but software that's actually optimized for the existing hardware.rather than developing a game for the lowest common denominator (Wii) and then porting it to X360 and PS3.
 
Thuleman said:
I have to admit that I have trouble following this discussion. I own a PS3 and from experience I know that most games do not take advantage of HD. Obviously there are full HD games out there and they run just fine, so it's not a technical limitation but some other issue.

In addition some of the current games which run on lower resolutions have performance problems which again are not a result of inadequate hardware but crappy programming. So what's really needed isn't new console hardware but software that's actually optimized for the existing hardware.rather than developing a game for the lowest common denominator (Wii) and then porting it to X360 and PS3.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody develops for Wii and ports to 360/PS3. Typically for HD games, they develop for 360 and port to PS3, though some devs reverse that. Apparently going from PS3 to 360 is easier though, simply because 360 has VASTLY superior tools.

It's funny, yet not surprising: Sony's a hardware company, and their console is built well but their software and network services are lacking.

Microsoft is a Software and Services company, their console is (well, was) built poorly but their software and services are the cream of the crop.

Not surprising, but funny nonetheless :)
 
I am not sure we have seen the current console tech pushed to its limits yet. On the PC side the tech advances so fast few can afford to keep up, you put out a cpl grand to build a gaming rig and it is obsolete almost as soon as you finish your build.Consoles force the developers to make the most of the technology. Whereas on the PC side the hardware keeps improving so much the developers can get sloppyand hog so many resources gamers are forced to upgrade to play the latest games.Console games just seem to get better on static hardware.Hard to say which is better way to go improved tech or better progrmmers and designers.
 
DragonMasterAlex said:
If the 3D TV's that convert everything to 3D means that ALL your content will have to be watched in 3D.
Click to expand...
thats ridiculous, of course your not going to be forced to watch everything in 3d just because you have a 3dtv tv/monitor!!

i think if you ask pretty much anyone what there understanding of 3d films/games was in the past they are gonna say either a) ah yer that big fuckin virtual reality thing withthe massive head peice, b) oh yer those shitty red and green glasses you had to wear for about 1 minute when you watched nightmare on elm street or what ever film (not many films at all) and the effects were fuckin shite. I dont think many were aware of the shutter system and mastersystem version which was shite at the time anyway as who the fuck would want to play a master system game in 3d even if you didnt need glasses? Infact i cant even recall one 3d game for the mastersystem. i had to look on wiki, i didnt even know about3d on the master system it and i was a master system owner!!

Today thanks to the internet/tv ad awareness, cinemas and some cool 3d films were the effects actually are outstanding more and more people are aware, if for the next however many years people have a choice of shutter technology until you get 3dtvs/monitors at an affordable price where you dont need glasses then great im all for it.

Im not saying its gonna take off in a massive way like hd has im just saying it has more of a chance than 20 years ago and its gonna be cheaper to do in a quicker time than hdtvs have, even sky is gonna try and get an extra tenner a month out of its subscribers!
 
Last edited:
quimby999 said:
I am not sure we have seen the current console tech pushed to its limits yet. On the PC side the tech advances so fast few can afford to keep up, you put out a cpl grand to build a gaming rig and it is obsolete almost as soon as you finish your build.Consoles force the developers to make the most of the technology. Whereas on the PC side the hardware keeps improving so much the developers can get sloppyand hog so many resources gamers are forced to upgrade to play the latest games.Console games just seem to get better on static hardware.Hard to say which is better way to go improved tech or better progrmmers and designers.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd say more *experienced* programmers and designers is the way to go in all cases, for cost effectiveness.

So far, every single console generation has told the same story: the best games that make the most of the hardware ALWAYS come later in the console's life cycle. Until the next generation is introduced, you can always say "the best is yet to come" for any given console.

It's true of PS3. It's true of 360. It's true of Wii.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top