can't see PS4 or Xbox One lasting more than 5 years.


Recommended Posts

While i already have a wii u, i probably will do like i did with the last gen consoles and wait like 4-5 years to get one when it comes to sony and microsoft. The libraries will hopefully be decent on at least one of those two consoles by then.

Though despite their meager libraries at the moment, they both have better libraries than the Wii U :)

Though despite their meager libraries at the moment, they both have better libraries than the Wii U :)

 

Not really. I'd say the Wii U has more worth playing on it at the moment(and this is even before we have mario kart, smash, X, etc). Aside from a certain few launch titles, the ps4 and one both have very little on them now and in the near future that you can't play elsewhere.

The only games worth playing on it atm is two Mario games that offer limited playtime, Forza alone offers more playtime that two short Mario games. By the time those games come out(especially smash which might not even make this year as it seems, with no launch date yet) the libraries for the next gen consoles have grown even more. And unlike the PS4 and One there no indie or "arcade" scene to talk about either. It's the same crappy small games that's been there since launch.

I'm getting so tired of the which console is more powerful. The spec that both system has I Dont see it lasting more than 5 years. Technology is going so fast and the new consoles are already outdated by a few years now. Can't see myself getting either. Does anyone feel this way?

 

No chance. 

 

Last gen lasted and this gen will too. People are flocking in their millions to purchase this gens consoles and those millions are highly unlikely to just forget about them in the space of 5 years.

 

MS and Sony will continue to push and improve the units as time goes on just like last gen. 

I think we can expect them to last around 4 years. Purely because we will never see another gen gap like the last one again.

Recession probably had something to do with it and also consider that the non arrival of new stuff almost bright a lot of games retail places to their knees.

It is in everyone's interest to bring out a new console in 3-4 years.

The only games worth playing on it atm is two Mario games that offer limited playtime, Forza alone offers more playtime that two short Mario games. By the time those games come out(especially smash which might not even make this year as it seems, with no launch date yet) the libraries for the next gen consoles have grown even more. And unlike the PS4 and One there no indie or "arcade" scene to talk about either. It's the same crappy small games that's been there since launch.

 

Saying the mario titles(nsmbu and 3DW) are the only titles worth playing on the wii u right now is about as accurate as saying something like 'halo is the only worthy exclusive on the 360'(which it's not).

 

Just because Smash doesn't have a date yet doesn't mean it cant be out this year. Especially when there's still so much of the year left. Also remember that nintendo often waits till closer to a games release than many other publishers to give a solid date for things.

 

As for indie stuff, Nintendo actually has quite a bit of indie stuff coming up.

Coming up.... Seriously the console has been out for one and a half years, and their game selection has been pretty much static in that period. The indie section hasn't changed in the last year... It's a little late for coming up.

And no saying the Mario games are the only ones worth playing is fairly accurate when they have a to total of like 10 games in 1,5 years, vs the hundreds of other games on the 360 compared to Halo.

And most of the games on the system aren't even designed tobe played on a big HD screen, but tobe played on the pad.

To the original point, personally believe neither MS nor Sony want to have X1 and PS4 as primary devices for more than five years this time. It's great 360 and PS3 are so enduring, and Hawk is right, they will continue to sell and have software made for them at least until 2016, but technology should move a little faster. Seven-eight years is too long, five is the right number.

The thing is, it's not just MS, consumers don't want it either.

 

Look at the situation right now, there's hardly any games for them, more frequent releases will mean more frequent platform shifts, less time to adapt, more time with less games on the platforms and all that.

 

Granted there are ways to mitigate it. Ways that where suggested before the new generation was announced and the platform change was announced, and the change to X86 made it rather impossible. But now that they have moved to X86 they can do this on future upgrade. That is to release new hardware using nearly the same hardware platform, and have the games run on either platform with different settings. higher res textures better effects higher game res, and all that. with a bigger platform change they can still do it by having two binaries on the disc.  This way you can "upgrade" the platform and not have a problem with few games at launch. And backwards compatibility is dead easy, you could even upgrade old games by upgrading the res(though in many situations on consoles this requires a patch of the software binaries so it would require the dev to still be around).

 

So if they decide to do something like this you could very well see a new generation in 4-5 new years

  • Like 1

I think we can expect them to last around 4 years. Purely because we will never see another gen gap like the last one again.

Recession probably had something to do with it and also consider that the non arrival of new stuff almost bright a lot of games retail places to their knees.

It is in everyone's interest to bring out a new console in 3-4 years.

You think consoles are computer desktops that can be replace every 3 to 4 years? Consoles last more longer because they can be updated with firmware to improve the GUI and fix any issue with lag or any bug to speed things up. Plus the companies behind the games they need time to create very good games, a game can take years to create... imagine a console now that came last year and now will be replace in 2016 and there are several games that will come to that platform but it will be release in 2016... so now they are going to release a game in an already obsolete platform. This is why consoles last usually almost 8 years.

The thing is, it's not just MS, consumers don't want it either.

 

Look at the situation right now, there's hardly any games for them, more frequent releases will mean more frequent platform shifts, less time to adapt, more time with less games on the platforms and all that.

 

Granted there are ways to mitigate it. Ways that where suggested before the new generation was announced and the platform change was announced, and the change to X86 made it rather impossible. But now that they have moved to X86 they can do this on future upgrade. That is to release new hardware using nearly the same hardware platform, and have the games run on either platform with different settings. higher res textures better effects higher game res, and all that. with a bigger platform change they can still do it by having two binaries on the disc.  This way you can "upgrade" the platform and not have a problem with few games at launch. And backwards compatibility is dead easy, you could even upgrade old games by upgrading the res(though in many situations on consoles this requires a patch of the software binaries so it would require the dev to still be around).

 

So if they decide to do something like this you could very well see a new generation in 4-5 new years

 

I know I don't speak for everyone and no doubt someone is going to reply and with "you're in the minority", but I was more than ready for new consoles by 2010. Especially when every game started to ship on UE3 and they all looked the same, XBL and PSN were being pushed to their limits with possibilities and I wouldn't say the visuals they are pulling off with PS4/X1 were impossible 4 years ago. It was enough to push me back to PCs and as a consequence MS/Sony miss out on my ?. It wasn't because they didn't want to make new consoles, it's because the industry is a complete mess with growing dev costs. I'll never understand how they managed to ship 2 unfinished, underpowered products when R&D started almost 8/9 years ago :no: The very fact they've chosen the cheap parts is probably the biggest hint that they don't want another long generation. Shifts in technology and how we game change too much to for so long. Both MS and Sony have said it themselves that they released PS3 and 360 at bad times when everything started to shift because their eyes were pretty much just set on the SD to HD leap. Everything else had to be hacked into the OS which we all know ended up with sluggish experiences. They won't repeat that and I'm sure future proofing is very much planned for but there's only so much you can do, especially if something totally left field comes in and changes everything. The obvious pick right now would be VR but who knows what else is around the corner.

  • Like 1

Nintendo should strike in 3 years. Sadly they are not ready. But it would be the time for them to retake the crown and put both Sony and Microsoft in a bad position.

 

Yeah, while Wii U is very underwhelming, they can make a console in a couple of years that will be vastly superior.

 

 

We are in 2013-2014, I would have hoped for new gen console to be able to push 1080p without any problems.  Not this 720p/900p or whatever game publisher use.

 

And with the push to 4K... I don't know if these console will last that long.

It looks like Infamous will only be 30fps.  Talk about last gen. This gen is really looking pathetic.

 

Don't be so ridiclous. 30fps is perfectly adequate for the vast majority of people. It certainly does not define the generation as "pathetic"...

Don't be so ridiclous. 30fps is perfectly adequate for the vast majority of people. It certainly does not define the generation as "pathetic"...

 

Just because a number of people don't know any better isn't valid justification.

  • Like 1

Don't be so ridiclous. 30fps is perfectly adequate for the vast majority of people. It certainly does not define the generation as "pathetic"...

If thats the case 720p is adequate for the vast majorirty.  In fact the the 360 or PS3 are adequate for the vast majority. Face it both consoles suck.

  • Like 1

Just because a number of people don't know any better isn't valid justification.

 

It's adequate because people don't care to know or simply just don't care. No ones going to cancel a pre-order of the next big game because it's 30 fps... well maybe there's a few.

 

 

If thats the case 720p is adequate for the vast majorirty.  In fact the the 360 or PS3 are adequate for the vast majority. Face it both consoles suck.

 

Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't want to better looking games. I couldn't say whether the new consoles suck. If they "suck"(and I assume you mean in a technical sense) that should be pretty evident in a few years.

 

Though I'll probably have one by then. XD

It's adequate because people don't care to know or simply just don't care. No ones going to cancel a pre-order of the next big game because it's 30 fps... well maybe there's a few.

 

No, it's not. Ignorance or apathy simply aren't valid justification, such thinking is regressive and harmful to the industry as a whole.

  • Like 1
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • 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. 👍
    • Compared to the 7735HS it is around 25-30% slower in multi-threaded tasks (according to Google search) I did a review of the 7735HS Beelink SER6 Max in 2023, but thinking about it, it's not comparable to the 7730U. For the example you gave about how it will be used, the 7730U is actually an excellent choice for its power and battery efficiency.
  • Recent Achievements

    • 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
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      503
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      194
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!