In a recent industry newsletter, Michael Pachter, gaming research analyst for Wedbush Morgan Securities has stated that the next generation of consoles will not arrive before 2013, if at all."We do not expect a ‘new' console in 2010. We do not expect the ‘next' generation to begin before 2013, if at all."
The only console that is expected to be released before 2013 is the long-rumored high definition Wii which will likely upgrade the Wii's hardware to current console technology.
Pachter continued to say that it is unlikely that publishers will release any new consoles before 2013 because there is still profit to be made from the current hardware. "We remain convinced that the publishers will resist the introduction of any video game hardware technology that requires a refresh of software, as the publishers have as yet to capitalize on the immense investments made in being competitive in the current cycle."
"We therefore think it is likely that the ‘next' generation will begin after 2013, meaning that software sales are likely to grow by a compounded annual rate of 6–10 percent for another five years."
"Because R&D costs are likely to flatten out with the benefits of a learning curve, we expect earnings leverage as the publishers are able to exploit R&D investments. In brief, we think that investors have it wrong so far this cycle, and think that investment in video game publishers will bear fruit for many years."
Everyone was arguing about the costs for Sony/MS/Nintendo under DL's article, but one thing people forgot about was developers development costs. Quite a few studios shut down, games got scrapped, others posted large losses (even EA) over the last few months.
Right now development costs are still sky high, I'm pretty certain devs would not be keen to move onto new hardware/SDK/development kits early this generation, especially during a recession.
Without the devs you have "no" software, without software your platform is gimped.
Why?
The PSP has an install base of over 50 million, yet because it wasn't very cost effective, no developers went there. Considering they've still got to cater for the 360, PS3, Wii, DS and PSP (now), I'd find it hard to believe most developers would show much support.
If hardware progresses at the same pace, by 2013 an 800$ PC will have enough processing power to emulate an Xbox360, PS3 and Wii at the SAME TIME, and yet they'll be stuck playing ports of console games with bad graphics that have barely changed since 2007. In 2013 a video game made with PC capabilities in mind will make you wanna throw that old, slow PS3 out the window. But I doubt hardware will keep getting better like it does now. No gamers will buy new hardware if none of the games require more processing power, and everything will become stagnant.
Crysis doesn't look brilliant, it has it's goods and it's bads. Killzone 2 has a better atmosphere and better MoCap animations. It's debatable though.
No offense but tat was a really stupid comment.
Crysis doesn't look brilliant, it has it's goods and it's bads. Killzone 2 has a better atmosphere and better MoCap animations. It's debatable though.
i want what hes smoking.
Crysis doesn't look brilliant, it has it's goods and it's bads. Killzone 2 has a better atmosphere and better MoCap animations. It's debatable though.
you need a new pair of glasses.
yes, gaming PC do cost more, but also can do so much more.
Crysis doesn't look brilliant, it has it's goods and it's bads. Killzone 2 has a better atmosphere and better MoCap animations. It's debatable though.
Remember how Kojima said he had pushed the PS3 to the maximum with MSG4 and yet he was still disappointed with the graphics? It's going to be a very rough four years for PS3 developers trying to optimize games.
Most opinions on graphics stem from publisher-induced hype, something PC games don't really get compared to the PS3.
i could like to see an intel core i7 powered ps3, though. that would be SICK.
The CELL processor that is in the PS3 (and 4.0Ghz versions with more memory in IBM QS20 blade servers) are rated somewhere around the 200 - 250gigaflops mark at full pelt depending upon spec. The new intel i7 on the other hand tips in just over the 50gigaflops mark with all cores maxed out.
http://www.opiniopedia.com/viewnode.asp?scitech:20090108-1
I would actually prefer gaming to just be on consoles and for one reason...less cheating. The one thing I hate about PC multiplayer games is the rabid cheating. I like the mouse and keyboard for certain games (FPS and MMO's) but its so much harder to cheat on a console. Plus I'd rather buy a new console every 5-10 years than a new PC ever 2-3 years and consoles are cheaper than a decent gaming PC.
The negatives for consoles is if there is a MOD made for a game MS or Sony will most likely charge for it while a lot of PC MODS are free....plus the F2P games that are only on the PC. Thats the only fault I see for consoles.
Nice reliable source you got there.
Also, raw power is useless if it can't be fully utilized because of poor design.
The CELL processor that is in the PS3 (and 4.0Ghz versions with more memory in IBM QS20 blade servers) are rated somewhere around the 200 - 250gigaflops mark at full pelt depending upon spec. The new intel i7 on the other hand tips in just over the 50gigaflops mark with all cores maxed out.
going by that logic, the radeon 4850 goes up to 1200gigaflops...
these are fast machines, but they arent universal... they are very specific
I don't think so VRam, all they need to do is release some really good 1st party games to hold everyone.
The Wii IMO has the lowest amount of desirable games of all 3 consoles. This is experience talking here as I own one lol.
The Wii IMO has the lowest amount of desirable games of all 3 consoles. This is experience talking here as I own one lol.
I own one as well. Nintendo appears to be running out of 1st party creativity. Do you notice they started releasing Gamecube games with Wii controls added (Mario Tennis)? Its extremely hard to maintain a console on your own. Most 3rd party stuff on the Wii is garbage, which doesn't help things. Alot of respectable developers don't like the Wii because its simply weak hardware-wise compared to the PS3/360. It looks inferior now, imagine it 4yrs from now. The Wii's controllers are another thing holding it back. They really limit what of games you can have and their complexity.
What Nintendo needs is a power console that is easy to develop for (WITH NORMAL CONTROLLERS!) to attract all the publishers they've alienated over the years.
http://www.onlive.com/
http://www.onlive.com/
http://www.onlive.com/
I can't wait I hate consoles. They are ruining PC gaming.
http://www.onlive.com/
No its not, there isnt the infrastructure available for this to become mainstream, especially when i can only download a few Gb before my internet gets capped by 75%, a lot of ISPs have data limits and playing for just a few hours a day you will hit the cap in no time if you are streaming HD video.
Not to mention i dont want to pay a monthly fee just to play the games ive bought. If you lose your internet then all those games youve bought are useless, at least with a console once you buy the disc its yours to play as and when you choose wether you have an internet conenction or not.
I hear this claim-hype every 3-4 years. In order to run personalized content in high definition (1080px60Hz) you must have not only dedicated CPU/GPU running somewhere for you, but amazingly wide data channel which will eat electricity.
I am a PC gamer, I am happy with my mouse and keyboard, for most games. But games like XMen Legends 2, is hard to play with mouse and keyboard, too many keys to keep track of. And it appears I cant use my USB joysticks (Microsoft and LogiTech).
Last edited by Alley Cat on 04 May 2009 - 05:09
Next console will be out by end of 2010 or 2011. There's too much at stake for Microsoft to wait until 2013. THat's just nuts.
As for developers not doing new games? What the hell? They've been releasing PS2/DS/PSP/Wii AND PS3/Xbox 360 versions at the same time. So I don't see why they couldn't do next gen versions for let's say new Xbox and then downscale to Xbox 360, ESPECIALLY if Microsoft continues with compatible development tools for new Xbox to have good ability to downscale for Xbox 360. And that's what they'll do for sure.
I'm totally expecting them to release a new dev tools for next gen that will have a "switch" to downscale or easily recompile the same game for Xbox 360 only with some exceptions.
..., if at all.
HUH?? Well, this article just lost all possible credibility... The next generation very well may not occur before 2013, but I do imagine that AT SOME POINT it will... That has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements I have seen on here in a while (And that's saying something). LOL
It's a statement like "We won't see an improved economy again until around 2011, if at all". It's moronic beyond reason, lol.
Well, assuming you are talking about the Mayan calendar thing, it ends a week before the end of 2012, so we will exist for nearly all of 2012.
i think that by being cheap, it might also be flexible to change.... if it was cheap to be made in the first place, it should be able to be cheaply changed later on too
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.