Orbis Unmasked: What to expect from next-gen


Recommended Posts

They'll have to be emulated, and I don't think current gen HW is really fast enough to emulate the power5 architecture of them fast enough. Though the Wii was also Power 5 as I Recall, and is being emulated by the weak cpu in the WiiU. So maybe the more powerful chips in the new consoles wil be fast enough to emulate the more powerful power5 chips from them... I dunno, we'll have to wait and see, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I suspect they'll go with the "the ones that want to play old games have the old hardware" strategy. compatibility with old hardware isn't really a big deal.

I really have to ask, have you seen it in person? SMB on the WiiU's graphics are awesome, and I'm not sure how anyone can say otherwise. My only guess is they are just watching YouTube videos of it and have never seen it in action. On my 55" TV it looks brilliant. It is still the same art direction the series is known for, but so much crisper. There is a HUGE difference between it and it's Wii counterpart.

I'm basing my opinions on the YouTube videos, though that's how I judge most games. I know there's a difference between the Wii and Wii U versions - there is a huge difference in resolution, for starters - but my point was that I don't like the direction they went in. Everything looks very sharp and clinical, unlike competitors like Rayman Legends. I'm also not a fan of the animations, as they seem very stiff and the jumping looks wrong. I can't say I've ever been a particular fan of Mario games but now they're starting to look very dated.

I don't think it's just me, though. The Metacritic score for NSMBU (84) is noticeably lower than NSMB for Wii (87) and lower than Rayman Origins (87), the most recent Rayman game. People expect more from a generational jump. As I said, to me NSMBU looks like a browser-based game and not a flagship product for a new console. It may be enough for those with nostalgia for the original games but it's not enough to carve out a new audience. It just doesn't appeal to me.

They'll have to be emulated, and I don't think current gen HW is really fast enough to emulate the power5 architecture of them fast enough. Though the Wii was also Power 5 as I Recall, and is being emulated by the weak cpu in the WiiU. So maybe the more powerful chips in the new consoles wil be fast enough to emulate the more powerful power5 chips from them... I dunno, we'll have to wait and see, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

I suspect they'll go with the "the ones that want to play old games have the old hardware" strategy. compatibility with old hardware isn't really a big deal.

Wii is based on the PowerPC 750CX architecture, along with the Wii U. Hence backwards compatibility is easy to do (no emulation, just virtualization).

I don't think we'll see much backward compatibility just as we didn't see much of it this gen ether. Heck, I honestly don't see MS ending 360 production right when the new Xbox comes like they did with the first. We could see one more 360 redesign that will coexist with the new system for at least another 2 years I bet.

Rumour is Sony will be unveiling the PS4 pre-E3. Am I the only one kind of wishing they both unveil at E3? I guess even if that were the plan everything would leak out early as norm for big E3 announcements (besides the usual last minute "we're porting an exclusive!" surprise).

Heck the leaks we have right now are probably fairly solid indicators.

Rumour is Sony will be unveiling the PS4 pre-E3. Am I the only one kind of wishing they both unveil at E3? I guess even if that were the plan everything would leak out early as norm for big E3 announcements (besides the usual last minute "we're porting an exclusive!" surprise).

Heck the leaks we have right now are probably fairly solid indicators.

I think they'll reveal the console pre-E3, and reveal games at E3 with demos. Rumor is Sony wants to launch ahead of XBox, even if it's by a month or so.

Rumour is Sony will be unveiling the PS4 pre-E3. Am I the only one kind of wishing they both unveil at E3? I guess even if that were the plan everything would leak out early as norm for big E3 announcements (besides the usual last minute "we're porting an exclusive!" surprise).

Heck the leaks we have right now are probably fairly solid indicators.

In the past, I said a GDC reveal for the hardware and game reveal at E3 would make sense (for both Sony and Microsoft). If Sony does indeed reveal the PS4 at GDC 2013, then Microsoft would be compelled to do the same.

The rumours are that it'll run on Windows 8 Kernel, I know Microsoft is keen to have consistency between devices. I wouldn't be surprised if it had the ability or functionality of a Windows RT OS geared more for Gaming.

Xbox was always based on a modified NT kernel. I think it's safe to assume that it will be based on NT v8.

So what's going to produce a better result? Less faster RAM, or more slower RAM?

I guess the right question is who will have better tools at launch? Microsoft will for sure but will Sony learn from their mistakes of the past? The Durango schematic also showed a 32MB ESRAM in addition to the 8GB DDR3. I wonder how that makes difference?

I don't think we'll see much backward compatibility just as we didn't see much of it this gen ether. Heck, I honestly don't see MS ending 360 production right when the new Xbox comes like they did with the first. We could see one more 360 redesign that will coexist with the new system for at least another 2 years I bet.

I expect both PS3 and Xbox 360 to continue selling for at least couple more years (till 2015-16?) until next-gen hardware takes off and is ready to take over in terms of sales+library.

Xbox was always based on a modified NT kernel. I think it's safe to assume that it will be based on NT v8.

I guess the right question is who will have better tools at launch? Microsoft will for sure but will Sony learn from their mistakes of the past? The Durango schematic also showed a 32MB ESRAM in addition to the 8GB DDR3. I wonder how that makes difference?

I expect both PS3 and Xbox 360 to continue selling for at least couple more years (till 2015-16?) until next-gen hardware takes off and is ready to take over in terms of sales+library.

i expect the ps3 to sell longer than that, heck you realize sony just recently finally stopped production of the ps2
So the nex-gen console is going to to be using current gen PC specs, by the time these come out the specs are going to be old - I'll stick with PC's thanks

I already game at 2560x1600 @60fps and the new consoles from Microsoft and Sony can't match that. If they're already behind now then it will only get worse, particularly if it's going to be another eight years before they're replaced. And UHD / 4K is just around the corner, like 1080p was when the X360 and PS3 were released. If that's anything to go by then by the time the next-gen consoles are replaced PC users will have already been enjoying 4K / 8K displays with autostereoscopic 3D (glasses-free 3D) for years.

As always, if you can afford PC gaming then that's the best option.

So the nex-gen console is going to to be using current gen PC specs, by the time these come out the specs are going to be old - I'll stick with PC's thanks

Shame PC doesn't get a lot of the console exclusives.

If the PC got Uncharted, Gran Turismo, etc... I wouldn't need a PS4.

So the nex-gen console is going to to be using current gen PC specs, by the time these come out the specs are going to be old - I'll stick with PC's thanks

I already game at 2560x1600 @60fps and the new consoles from Microsoft and Sony can't match that. If they're already behind now then it will only get worse, particularly if it's going to be another eight years before they're replaced. And UHD / 4K is just around the corner, like 1080p was when the X360 and PS3 were released. If that's anything to go by then by the time the next-gen consoles are replaced PC users will have already been enjoying 4K / 8K displays with autostereoscopic 3D (glasses-free 3D) for years.

As always, if you can afford PC gaming then that's the best option.

You guys are right but to be fair, PC gaming will always be ahead in performance and technology. There's no doubt about that. Don't underestimate the benefits of a fixed hardware platform though. Developers will be able to squeeze more out of a console than a gaming PC. This will show as both next-gen consoles from Sony and Microsoft mature in the years following their respective releases.

And not only that, things like having a 64-bit CPU and a D3D11.1 GPU in a console will benefit PC gaming. It's a much-needed boost because of how long developers have stuck with DX9 (which is something that was heavily influenced by current-gen consoles).

I'm a PC gamer at heart so I probably won't buy a next-gen console right away. I'd rather build a gaming PC that will last me a very long time. My current PC was built in late-2007 with minor upgrades in 2008 and it has served me well.

We'll have to wait and see though. My guess is developers will go for a 1080p @ 30 FPS standard. Even with the rumoured specs, I can't see next-gen consoles running something like Unreal Engine 4 at 60 FPS. Something like that requires cutting-edge PC hardware which is far more capable than next-gen consoles.

  • Like 1

It's the premium price as well, you buy a games console for ?300-400 and you know that it will be able to play ALL games for the next 8-10 years.

With a PC try playing the latest games with a 5 year old graphics card and CPU and see how far that gets you.

To play the latest games with maxed out graphics you need to buy a new GPU at least every 2-3 years, you are nearly buying a new console every 2-3 years as new graphics cards are ?250+ up to ?400-500 for the best ones.

  • Like 3

You may get the console hardware cheap but you pay for it by the software prices staying higher significantly longer than they do on the pc. In the long run consoles don't actually end up much cheaper.

It's the premium price as well, you buy a games console for ?300-400 and you know that it will be able to play ALL games for the next 8-10 years.

With a PC try playing the latest games with a 5 year old graphics card and CPU and see how far that gets you.

To play the latest games with maxed out graphics you need to buy a new GPU at least every 2-3 years, you are nearly buying a new console every 2-3 years as new graphics cards are ?250+ up to ?400-500 for the best ones.

You may be able to play the latest games 5 years down the line, but the quality of graphics on some of the latest titles are extremely poor compared to their PC counterparts.

All in all I think it balances itself out, PC's cost more to start with and you get insane graphics and framerates, whilst consoles are cheaper but stay on a set standard graphics wise. Playing the latest titles on 5 year old hardware can still get you better graphics than current consoles can do.

You may be able to play the latest games 5 years down the line, but the quality of graphics on some of the latest titles are extremely poor compared to their PC counterparts.

All in all I think it balances itself out, PC's cost more to start with and you get insane graphics and framerates, whilst consoles are cheaper but stay on a set standard graphics wise. Playing the latest titles on 5 year old hardware can still get you better graphics than current consoles can do.

i don't know, I'd say 343i did a pretty good job of pushing the 360 to the limits graphics wise

and I'd also say it compares pretty well to pc game graphics

I'll just play games on both my pc and a console. You can talk about hardware all you want but I can't wait to see the games we get on both sides now that devs can move off of dx9 and on to dx11.1. At the least ports won't suffer like they have.

I'll just play games on both my pc and a console. You can talk about hardware all you want but I can't wait to see the games we get on both sides now that devs can move off of dx9 and on to dx11.1. At the least ports won't suffer like they have.

Games no longer being bound to directx 9 will not suddenly make half-assed ports disappear.

True you do have a point there - Halo 4 does look insane. But don't you think thats because it was built with the Xbox in mind? I'm sure they made a load of optimisations for the xbox to make it look that good - because its their main release platform.

I was thinking more along the lines of the latest COD titles or Battlefield 3. There really is no comparison from PC to consoles graphics wise. What the consoles produce is really average at most.

You may get the console hardware cheap but you pay for it by the software prices staying higher significantly longer than they do on the pc. In the long run consoles don't actually end up much cheaper.

Luckily in the UK console games tend to half in price in a month :laugh: A little bit of patience and you're sorted, but yeah at launch PC is always cheaper.

Luckily in the UK console games tend to half in price in a month :laugh: A little bit of patience and you're sorted, but yeah at launch PC is always cheaper.

PC games are often half price before launch. Take the latest Tomb Raider for instance - it was available for ?17.55 from GMG. Even without any discount the Amazon price is ?24.99, which compares to ?37.94 on both PS3 and X360. And that's how Microsoft and Sony make up the money for offering their consoles at a discounted price. If you were to buy 12 games in a year with that sort of mark-up then you'd have spent an extra ?156; over the life of a console that would work out to ?1248. And a lot of people buy more games than that.

Console gaming is very much like mobile phone contracts, in that the real price is hidden. Even with the cheaper games PC gaming still works out more expensive but it's not that bad considering you get much better quality visuals (resolution, textures, polygon count, view distance, etc) and higher framerates, plus additional capabilities like 3D and VR tech like the Oculus Rift.

Luckily in the UK console games tend to half in price in a month :laugh: A little bit of patience and you're sorted, but yeah at launch PC is always cheaper.

I've adopted the "wait 6 months, then buy" method. I used to get caught up in getting a game at launch, or close, but realised it was costing me too much and the premium was rarely worth it.

You may be able to play the latest games 5 years down the line, but the quality of graphics on some of the latest titles are extremely poor compared to their PC counterparts.

Yeah......no.

kucha-skrinshotov-uncharted-3-grafika-huzhe-gow3killzone-3-i-bez-mlaa_9.jpg

Uncharted_3_Screen_6-000.jpg

image_killzone_3-13238-2035_0009.jpg

Try running the latest games with nVidia 7900GT graphics. BF3 for example runs at 12FPS on 7900GTX with everything turned off.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!