What has been the lifespan of consoles over the years?

T

tybert7

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
2,763
I ask because it seems like this generation of consoles has no end in sight, with nothing on the horizon after 5 years.


nintendo, super nintendo, gamecube, wii?

genesis, dreamcast?

psx, ps2, ps3?

xbox, xbox360?




How much time was there historically between previous gen consoles and new releases?



Many modern games are retarded because they need engines that will do ok on the consoles. The ridiculously ancient console hardware seems like it is artificially damping pc gaming graphics, but maybe I am completely wrong. If so talk me down.
 
I ask because it seems like this generation of consoles has no end in sight, with nothing on the horizon after 5 years.
Click to expand...

Things have changed, people aren't going to shell out money for updated graphics anymore, we have reach a point where the general consumer (read 95% of the market base) isn't concerned with counting Duke Nukem's ball hairs. They want to kick back on teh couch and have some fun.

The ridiculously ancient console hardware seems like it is artificially damping pc gaming graphics, but maybe I am completely wrong. If so talk me down.
Click to expand...

Yes it is, but once you realize you are in the minority and there is not a thing you can do about it you might actually start to enjoy some games instead of constantly tweaking your settings to get the best looking sweat drops.
 
it's when the console manufacturers want to change them. I doubt it will be when new tech comes out; current consoles are already getting adaptive (hd-dvd add on, upgradable storage, new controllers to fit existing hardware ala kinect and move)

i don't think many developers are really pushing for heavier graphics, i'd have to imagine the longer a console has been out the easier it is to develop a game for it.

i think it's when sony, ms and nintendo decide they have enough new tech or goodies to bundle together and can convince consumers and developers that it's a good time to start switching to next gen.
 
Back in the early days, it ws comon for consoles to average 5-6 years. Since the 360, Wii, Ps3 era, ecomonical times have hit and the big three are adding features instead of releasing brand new hardware. We may be looking at a new generation of 10 year consoles.

True, they may be lacking (compared to PC's) in the graphics department, however many developers are able to push the graphics further since the hardware never changes. Well, the Wii is another story. LOL.
 
Around 5 or so years before they would release a new platform but in general 10 years or so. Now since all of the consoles are on the internet and with DLC and updates along with the economy they are planing for 10.
 
Companies actually lose money on consoles. Why make new tech and lose more money when the current generation is starting to pan out in terms of hardware/software?
 
I wonder if Nintendo will look to catch up graphically (which they can do cheaper now) if Wii sales continue to slow down.
 
next-Jin said:
Around 5 or so years before they would release a new platform but in general 10 years or so. Now since all of the consoles are on the internet and with DLC and updates along with the economy they are planing for 10.
Click to expand...
Exactly, about 5 years between new releases but they are supported much longer. The last NES game came out in what, 1996? Hell, some companies are still making PS1/2 games. Another in Japan is making DC games.

I would expect PS4/Xbox Next announced in 2012 for a 4th quarter 2012 release. It definitely does not feel like it's time though. The PS2 and Xbox showed their age by the time new systems came out. The 360 and PS3 are still rocking it heavy right now. ZERO reason to replace them.
 
What I'm curious about is whether Nintendo's next console will be comparable to the other companies next-gen system or if it will be more close to the HD systems we have this gen.
 
Azureth said:
What I'm curious about is whether Nintendo's next console will be comparable to the other companies next-gen system or if it will be more close to the HD systems we have this gen.
Click to expand...

Hopefully it will be more powerful. I can see the hidden disappointment in Reggies eyes when he has to talk about the great wii games that I am 100% sure he has alot less interest in compared to say some latest gen shooter.


For Reggies sake, I hope it's more powerful. But then, Nintendo is still making plenty of money so..
 
tybert7 said:
seems like it is artificially damping pc gaming graphics, but maybe I am completely wrong. If so talk me down.
Click to expand...

Yep, that's why we have single cards driving 3x 1080p+ screens. Everything has kind of hit a wall.
 
I was a disgruntled former PC hardware enthusiast who jumped ship about 4-5 years ago and have been console gaming since then.

To me, the PS3 and 360 are starting to look and feel croaky. Tearing frames, sub-par resolutions starting to show on bigger TVs etc.

So i'm coming back to PC gaming with a new build shortly, and from my point of view, it is incredible what I can now get for my money and more importantly the performance it offers.

I'm not alone in thinking this neither although I will probably be the only person in the queue for Call of Duty Black Ops buying the PC version.
 
I have a strong feeling one of those console company's is going to announce a new system at the next E3. Its been long enough and they could just announce it and peg it for 2012 without screwing up any 2011 releases.

MS has been working on the next gen xbox for a while now and Sony has silently been doing the same. Nintendo has been the most vocal (although still pretty quite) about its intent for its next major console release which will likely be the same thing as Wii but in HD.

I don't mind the slower console cycles , I loved them when I was a kid but I'm an adult now and I don't really care anymore. I would rather blow my cash on PC parts but even that is starting to slow a bit as the PC games out now just don't push them like they use to (and please don't cite Crysis , that piece of shit unpatched crappy benchmark-made-into-a-game doesn't count).
 
I feel I have a completely different X-box 360 from the one I purchased a few years ago.


OK, I actually do have a completely different X-Box 360, but it feels like with NXE and the features they keep adding, it has progressed beyond what I originally purchased.
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
I was a disgruntled former PC hardware enthusiast who jumped ship about 4-5 years ago and have been console gaming since then.

To me, the PS3 and 360 are starting to look and feel croaky. Tearing frames, sub-par resolutions starting to show on bigger TVs etc.

So i'm coming back to PC gaming with a new build shortly, and from my point of view, it is incredible what I can now get for my money and more importantly the performance it offers.

I'm not alone in thinking this neither although I will probably be the only person in the queue for Call of Duty Black Ops buying the PC version.
Click to expand...

tearing is the direct result of a developer not properly doing their job
 
Arthur Hucksake said:
I was a disgruntled former PC hardware enthusiast who jumped ship about 4-5 years ago and have been console gaming since then.

To me, the PS3 and 360 are starting to look and feel croaky. Tearing frames, sub-par resolutions starting to show on bigger TVs etc.

So i'm coming back to PC gaming with a new build shortly, and from my point of view, it is incredible what I can now get for my money and more importantly the performance it offers.

I'm not alone in thinking this neither although I will probably be the only person in the queue for Call of Duty Black Ops buying the PC version.
Click to expand...

YeuEmMaiMai said:
tearing is the direct result of a developer not properly doing their job
Click to expand...
:p +1

If you want to look at programming marvel on consoles, look at anything SCE publishes. If it's not right, it doesn't ship.
 
Personally, I am more than ready for a new generation of consoles so the PC isn't kept waiting and tapping its feet. Or perhaps we will see a resurgence in PC gaming, it has always been with its ups and downs. Perhaps as the consoles stagnate, the PC may pick up instead of being saddled down alongside with it.
 
Wii is slowing down since everyone has a Wii already. I don't think the Wii is holding back the pc but the ps3/360 is. Ps3/360 has games which are on the pc so they have to keep it within console specs so it can run on consoles while the Wii gets totally different games usually not on any other platform. Its going to be awhile before another comes that pushes boundaries again like Crysis. Crysis is still hard on many rigs it seems like. Probably a few more years before anything big changes. It would be good if the Wii got a firmware update to support HD resolutions.
 
Conker said:
Wii is slowing down since everyone has a Wii already. I don't think the Wii is holding back the pc but the ps3/360 is. Ps3/360 has games which are on the pc so they have to keep it within console specs so it can run on consoles while the Wii gets totally different games usually not on any other platform. Its going to be awhile before another comes that pushes boundaries again like Crysis. Crysis is still hard on many rigs it seems like. Probably a few more years before anything big changes. It would be good if the Wii got a firmware update to support HD resolutions.
Click to expand...

Is that even possible? I didn't think the Wii was powerful enough.
 
I think the main reason why the current generation of consoles is lasting a long time is that CPUs have long since stopped getting any faster.

Since we can't make them any faster, now we're adding more and more cores, but there's realistically only so many cores you can use for gaming and still make the thing reasonable to program for, and today's consoles already are probably maxxed out on the number of cores they're gonna use.

So the next generation of consoles would have CPUs which were no faster than the current generation. Yeah, the graphics processing would be more powerful, and they'd have more memory, but truthfully the games wouldn't look all that much dramatically better that there is any great incentive to make another generation of consoles.

And the success of the Wii has told Sony and Microsoft that gamers aren't really looking for top of the line graphics anyway, they just want good games.

So why make another console generation? Every time they do, it costs them a few billion dollars in R&D and losses for every hardware sale, and why bother when the money's all in the games anyway and those are selling as well as they're going to sell no matter what they do?
 
The console business model sells the hardware at a loss and makes money back slowly by taking a cut of the profits for the games, it takes many years to see a return on your investment and I think the current generation of console are not performing like investors would like, so will be kept in circulation as long as possible to milk game sales.
 
PrincessFrosty said:
The console business model sells the hardware at a loss and makes money back slowly by taking a cut of the profits for the games, it takes many years to see a return on your investment and I think the current generation of console are not performing like investors would like, so will be kept in circulation as long as possible to milk game sales.
Click to expand...

Nintendo's been selling Wii's for a profit since day 1, and MS has been selling 360s for a profit for over 2 years now. Kinect will be profitable with each hardware sale as well. Sony sold PS3s at a loss for years and I believe within the last year started making a small profit (slim) but with so much change I'm not sure thats the case any longer.

Aside from initial profits, each of the 3 get huge cuts from game sales, licensing and other features. MS for instance reported in or around $300 million from XBL Gold subcriptions alone last year. That doesn't count all of the digital content they're selling on XBLA, Zune, Games on Demand, Avatar accessories and DLC. Sprinkle in advertising both in and out of games and its a healthy model if you were a business minded person.

They'll stretch the cycle because they can, and because they know people aren't drooling for upgraded graphics (just yet). I suspect we won't hear about the next round of consoles until ~E3 2012 to be released in 2013. Move, Kinect, 3DS all need more time in the oven before any of the big 3 should be talking about successors.
 
XvMMvX said:
Yes it is, but once you realize you are in the minority and there is not a thing you can do about it you might actually start to enjoy some games instead of constantly tweaking your settings to get the best looking sweat drops.
Click to expand...

Heresy!
 
They are probably waiting for the scaling to get down to pack a viable fusion CPU-GPU that can deliver performance beyond today's consoles.

I think they would have to wait around for rockwell, the 16 nm shrink of haswell, in Q4 2013 if they are to follow their roadmap.
 
I know one thing, and that's that the 60GB PS3 was really expensive when it came out at $599. I know it was the premium model and had a good Blu-Ray player built in, but I don't want to see $600 consoles becoming the norm. I think $300 is a great price point, with a premium model costing $400 or maybe even $500, but I don't want to see PS4 priced at $600. Not like I can't wait to buy it, but I don't want to see the trend continue or we'll have PS5 for $800 and the gen after that at $1,000. For a console?! No thanks...
 
Aren't they still releasing new games for ps2? i wonder how long they're gonna milk that, but i think usually people just get new consoles and forget about the old once they come out.
 
Microsoft and Sony may not have a choice to wait around if Nintendo releases a next gen Wii with modern tech in it. The capability of running cross-platform games at higher fidelity than the 360 and PS3, plus first party Nintendo games and second generation motion sensing would leave them crippled if they didn't respond.
 
I say the 10 year life cycle has a 4-5 year overlap in it. After the ps2 came out 6 years later we had the ps3 but games were still made for the ps2. Even first party titles like God of war 2.

I think this generation is pushing it. There kinda doing a refresh with this motion control to stretch out the lifespan and do a live research on we respond to the move and kinetics for the next generation. Also as long as Nintendo doesn't go HD there isnt much of a reason for the ps4 an 3rd generation xbox.
 
imyourzero said:
I know one thing, and that's that the 60GB PS3 was really expensive when it came out at $599. I know it was the premium model and had a good Blu-Ray player built in, but I don't want to see $600 consoles becoming the norm. I think $300 is a great price point, with a premium model costing $400 or maybe even $500, but I don't want to see PS4 priced at $600. Not like I can't wait to buy it, but I don't want to see the trend continue or we'll have PS5 for $800 and the gen after that at $1,000. For a console?! No thanks...
Click to expand...

You're content with paying for an i7, GTX 480, SSD, 2x 30" LCDs, and lots of other pricey stuff that will be surpassed within a year or two but you feel $600 for a gaming console that will last 5+ years is a ripoff?
 
z3r0- said:
You're content with paying for an i7, GTX 480, SSD, 2x 30" LCDs, and lots of other pricey stuff that will be surpassed within a year or two but you feel $600 for a gaming console that will last 5+ years is a ripoff?
Click to expand...

1. Yes, because I use my PC for a lot more than games and I like the speed that my PC provides in those areas.

2. I never said the PS3 @ $600 was a ripoff. Just that it was expensive compared to the price previous consoles, and that I'd hate to see Sony try to raise that bar with the PS4.

3. This is [H]ard|Forum. Many of us spend a crapton of money on our rigs because we like fast hardware. If this were the Gamespot console forums, I might be in the minority, but here it doesn't matter what kind of parts I put in my rig because there are plenty of people that have spent more money than me. ;)
 
I can understand MS and Sony wanting to drag the current generation out as long as they can since they both lost billions, but Nintendo should stick to the typical 5 year plan. Nintendo could easily come out with something far more powerful than their competitors at a cheap cost thanks to Moore's Law.

The PS3 and 360 are antiquated shit now. Put them out of their misery.
 
It works out to about five years per console, although with this generation it seems like all three companies are insistent on maximizing the life of their systems.

As far as continual support goes, both Nintendo and Microsoft chose to almost immediately stop issuing licenses to publish for the Xbox and GameCube and halted manufacturing (effectively discontinuing them), while Sony chose to continue to support the Playstation 2. In fact, Pro Evolution Soccer 2011 is releasing on the PS2 this month.

I'd expect a new round of consoles to start popping up in another 2-4 years. At that time, I could see Microsoft and Sony pushing the 360+Kinect and PS3+Move respectively as the casual gamer's solution, while bringing out new devices to serve the core gamer market.
 
I read an interview with Alex St John many moons ago about how badly Sony and Microsoft burned themselves on this current generation of consoles. Blew millions and millions of dollars getting these consoles to market and he says there is no way they will ever get all that money back.
Here is a quote from that interview, I Googled it:

"And the thing that's interesting in this era, that I think is significant, is that Sony and Microsoft severely overextended themselves. Burned themselves. Burned more money than they could ever hope to get back on these consoles. Even if the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 are wild successes, they will never get their money back.

Billions of dollars. Billions of dollars. And, to say that they will have—for one, to say that they will be eager to do that to themselves anytime soon, is highly improbable, which means that this generation of consoles could be in the market as the only generation of consoles available for a very long time."

If he is accurate about those numbers I don't think there will be a PS4 at all. Sony couldn't afford another console launch. Microsoft could afford it, but they won't bother if there is no profit in doing so.

If anyone launches another console it will be Nintendo. But it wouldn't be a PC competitive machine, just something that will work with a HDTV. Consoles can't keep up with PC development and it is foolish for them to try.

I think the future is going to widen the gap between console gaming and PC gaming to the point where they are two distinct platforms because PC development will leave console hardware in the dust. It is almost that way now if you are running a high end PC gaming rig. Consoles are stuck in DX9 with limited processing power and system ram. PCs are moving on to DX11 and beyond with multi core processors and 8GB of system ram. How can consoles keep up with this? They can't, and it is bad business to even try.

I really think these consoles we have now are the last generation of high end PC competitive consoles we will see. Unless they want to make and sell them for $1,000 or more, which kind of defeats the whole purpose of getting affordable gaming to the masses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top