Orbis Unmasked: What to expect from next-gen

[HawkMan]

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.

[theyarecomingforyou]

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.

[Veiva]

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).

[George P Global Moderator]

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.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

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.

[soniqstylz]

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.

[TheLegendOfMart]

It won't be at Destination Playstation at the end of Feb, if its pre-E3 it'll probably be at GDC at the end of March, the next event after that is E3 leaving their conference for revealing games.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

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.

[BajiRav]

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.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

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

[Shaun N.]

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

[theyarecomingforyou]

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.

[TheLegendOfMart]

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.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

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.

[TheLegendOfMart]

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.

[Blackhearted]

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.

[Mulrian]

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.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

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

[George P Global Moderator]

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.

[Blackhearted]

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.

[Mulrian]

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.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

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.

[theyarecomingforyou]

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.

[compl3x]

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.

[TheLegendOfMart]

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.

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