There was an interesting article on 1Up and I wanted to see what you guys thought. Initially I thought it was stupid but the more I thought about it, the guy could be onto something.
Michael Pachter(I think that's his name), the analyst, has predicted that this may very well be the last console generation. At first I thought that was the dumbest of dumb predictions but they make some valid points. These three consoles, for very different reasons, are so much more flexible than consoles released before. Between DLC and retail games, we're being spoiled with a never ending slew of great games and expansions on top of those. Graphics may have gotten to the point(mind you, MAY HAVE) where they may not appear dated in ten year's time. Granted, ps2 looked great as well 8 years ago but there was NOTHING about the ps2's graphics back then that ever struck me as photorealistic. This generation isn't quite there either but it's damn close! I just don't see us looking back at this generation as one that was easily dated(I could be wrong). Between that, and the mounting costs on the third-parties to come up with bleeding edge technology and the exuberant losses that Sony and Microsoft are experiencing....where does it end?
Which leads me to another question. If the consoles ended at the nes, snes, genesis, etc., would we still be playing games today? Meaning, if they were still making new nes games, and we had absolutely no idea of cutting edge technology and all that we have today as gamers, would we still be buying the latest 8-bit games or do you think the majority of us would have grown bored with our hobby and looked elsewhere? Does the constant introduction to what's new keep our interest in this hobby of ours piqued? Just a thought.
This is the end
-
m0zart1
- Posts: 3117
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
This is the end
The new OnLive service, effectively a cloud computing service for on-demand video games, won't help matters either.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6206620.html
Reading about it today struck me with some irony, especially since the software we develop at my company is also offered in a cloud model for customers who don't want to do the maintenance, integration, upgrading, or any of the other time-intensive tasks in managing software for their enterprise. I hadn't really considered it to be a possibility with gaming though, just because of the logistical problems that such a service faces.
I still believe though that consoles will continue. Ideas like OnLive are interesting because they are new, but technology is often just as much about gadgetry and general geekery as it is about the convenience of the service, not to mention long-term availability that owning the delivery agent of a specific piece of technology provides. I still firmly believe that once the hype dies down, consoles will still be attractive.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6206620.html
Reading about it today struck me with some irony, especially since the software we develop at my company is also offered in a cloud model for customers who don't want to do the maintenance, integration, upgrading, or any of the other time-intensive tasks in managing software for their enterprise. I hadn't really considered it to be a possibility with gaming though, just because of the logistical problems that such a service faces.
I still believe though that consoles will continue. Ideas like OnLive are interesting because they are new, but technology is often just as much about gadgetry and general geekery as it is about the convenience of the service, not to mention long-term availability that owning the delivery agent of a specific piece of technology provides. I still firmly believe that once the hype dies down, consoles will still be attractive.
-
VideoGameCritic
- Site Admin
- Posts: 18181
- Joined: April 1st, 2015, 7:23 pm
This is the end
There's only one sure thing about technology predictions: they are always wrong.
For all the talk of the current console model going away, we may need to remind ourselves that console gaming is bigger, more popular, and more profitable than ever before. The number one console is the one with the worst graphics and worst on-line capabilities. Go figure.
Yes, there is the law of diminishing returns in terms of graphics, but there are other ways to improve the experience. Heck, ten years ago no one would have guessed we'd be waving controllers or rocking out with plastic guitars.
And for all the hype about DRM and clouds, we need to remember that only 4% of gamers use on-line their primary source of video game entertainment.
Whenever any new technology emerges, the hype is usually bigger than its bite.
Remember, the 3DO is the only box you'll need to satisfy all of your multimedia needs!
For all the talk of the current console model going away, we may need to remind ourselves that console gaming is bigger, more popular, and more profitable than ever before. The number one console is the one with the worst graphics and worst on-line capabilities. Go figure.
Yes, there is the law of diminishing returns in terms of graphics, but there are other ways to improve the experience. Heck, ten years ago no one would have guessed we'd be waving controllers or rocking out with plastic guitars.
And for all the hype about DRM and clouds, we need to remember that only 4% of gamers use on-line their primary source of video game entertainment.
Whenever any new technology emerges, the hype is usually bigger than its bite.
Remember, the 3DO is the only box you'll need to satisfy all of your multimedia needs!
-
Kim
This is the end
Michael Pachter(I think that's his name), the analyst, has predicted that this may very well be the last console generation.
I have to agree to this point, despite the overwhelming opposition from both the Critic and others. I have been thinking about this in the past, and I thought one day that the Wii may well be Nintendo's last console.
It sounds absurd, but there are pretty high expectations for Nintendo to fulfil if they planned to market a Wii 2. Who knew Sony would fail so significantly after their most successful console: the Playstation 2?
If companies have to market innovation to keep their profits growing, then they may be more desperate than in the past. Innovation is always risky, and if companies do not have to use innovation then they tend not to use it. Just look at the flow of consoles from NES onwards: the only innovation was the growth of consoles from 8-bit to 16-bit, then to 32-bit... and so on. (well, apart from CDs and DVDs and so on).
Moreover, Nintendo is a company especially conservative minded. They tend not to use innovation. Just look at the Nintendo 64, which used cartridges. Look at the Gameboy Color, which utilized 8-bit graphics in 1999. The Dreamcast was released in the same year, and it was 16 times more powerful! Look at how many SNES ports there are in the Gameboy Advance library. Observe the lack of innovation in the Gamecube.
In fact Nintendo is a company most unlikely to utilize innovation in its console hardware. Sony might do innovation, but Nintendo? Therefore this console generation has produced some very strange results. The giant Sony edifice collapsed, and Microsoft is desperately marketing the Xbox 360 by sacrificing console durability in favour of an early launch date and cheaper price. Nintendo, a company which had dominated the console wars during the 1980s, is making a comeback. Neither Atari nor Sega were able to do the same thing.
Where does this lead us? Strange events occuring within the videogame industry. What does this mean? That the videogame industry is unstable at this present time. What might this mean? The collapse of the videogame market? People are no longer so dependent on videogames as they had been in the past. There are now cellphones, MP3 players, GPS navigation systems, and so on. And worst of all, each of the gadgets mentioned has some kind of interactivity. Videogames no longer have the monopoly on interactivity.
p.s. why was my other thread on 'Top 5 SNES flops' not approved?
I have to agree to this point, despite the overwhelming opposition from both the Critic and others. I have been thinking about this in the past, and I thought one day that the Wii may well be Nintendo's last console.
It sounds absurd, but there are pretty high expectations for Nintendo to fulfil if they planned to market a Wii 2. Who knew Sony would fail so significantly after their most successful console: the Playstation 2?
If companies have to market innovation to keep their profits growing, then they may be more desperate than in the past. Innovation is always risky, and if companies do not have to use innovation then they tend not to use it. Just look at the flow of consoles from NES onwards: the only innovation was the growth of consoles from 8-bit to 16-bit, then to 32-bit... and so on. (well, apart from CDs and DVDs and so on).
Moreover, Nintendo is a company especially conservative minded. They tend not to use innovation. Just look at the Nintendo 64, which used cartridges. Look at the Gameboy Color, which utilized 8-bit graphics in 1999. The Dreamcast was released in the same year, and it was 16 times more powerful! Look at how many SNES ports there are in the Gameboy Advance library. Observe the lack of innovation in the Gamecube.
In fact Nintendo is a company most unlikely to utilize innovation in its console hardware. Sony might do innovation, but Nintendo? Therefore this console generation has produced some very strange results. The giant Sony edifice collapsed, and Microsoft is desperately marketing the Xbox 360 by sacrificing console durability in favour of an early launch date and cheaper price. Nintendo, a company which had dominated the console wars during the 1980s, is making a comeback. Neither Atari nor Sega were able to do the same thing.
Where does this lead us? Strange events occuring within the videogame industry. What does this mean? That the videogame industry is unstable at this present time. What might this mean? The collapse of the videogame market? People are no longer so dependent on videogames as they had been in the past. There are now cellphones, MP3 players, GPS navigation systems, and so on. And worst of all, each of the gadgets mentioned has some kind of interactivity. Videogames no longer have the monopoly on interactivity.
p.s. why was my other thread on 'Top 5 SNES flops' not approved?
-
Luke
This is the end
The only real forseeable problem that I can think of right now is the cost of hardware down the road. I think the manufacturing and consumer costs of the PS3 are only the tip of the iceberg. I would expect them to increase dramatically next generation with the PS4 (assuming there will be one) and other consoles.
-
steer
This is the end
Just as online new services will never 'kill' newspapers and magazines - even if it does change them....
PC gaming in any form will not wipe out consoles.
Even if Nintendo loses lots of customers to iphone - they can still keep a portable going....
Same with home consoles. If they can make money on it - why stop? The technology may change but as long as there are customers who demand a commited gaming console - they will be made.
PC gaming in any form will not wipe out consoles.
Even if Nintendo loses lots of customers to iphone - they can still keep a portable going....
Same with home consoles. If they can make money on it - why stop? The technology may change but as long as there are customers who demand a commited gaming console - they will be made.
-
jbltecnicspro1
- Posts: 86
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
This is the end
I seriously doubt that videogame consoles are going to go away. First, let's not forget that technology evolves so fast, that while game consoles might not be on the bleeding edge, cheaper solutions trickle down from technology developments. For example, I can purchase a video card for $150 that's much more powerful than the GPU in the Xbox 360 and PS3. Why am I mentioning this? Because ATI and Nvidia (graphics card makers) have provided ALL of the graphics chipsets for this generation's batch of consoles. A midrange computer setup today could easily trump a game console's performance any day of the week. But even with that truth, console games look very close to PC games even though their technology is at least a couple of generations behind today's PC technology. Why? Because console games are far more optimized for performance (at least they're supposed to be 
) than their PC counterparts.
In fact, I was wowed today playing Far Cry 2 on the 360. With a graphics card that has the fillrate of a video card from four years ago, it plays smooth and looks really good. There's no way that I could hope to play this game with a video card similar to the 360 graphics card - that's how optimized the 360 version is. And while I'm on technology - what's acceptable in terms of visual detail has definitely changed over the years. When I was a PC gamer, 1600x1200 was considered to be a very high-res. Now, it's 2560x1600 - which is huge! Today's videocards can do that resolution without issue, and midrange cards costing around $200 can easily do the highest HDTV resolution at detail levels higher than current generation standards, so there's no reason to believe that A) graphics won't get much better and B) that the gaming industry is going to end.
In my opinion, Sony deserves its comeupins with the PS3. There's no reason for Cell Processor to exist. It's very expensive and extremely unpractical. Sure, it offers the best performance, but its architecture is so different that developers will probably never be able to exploit all of its abilities. And of course, Nintendo deserves all of its profits with the Wii. They captured the casual crowd with this one, and have appealed outside of the teenage boy demographic. Sure, they might have "ignored" the gamer crowd some, but the games for the hardcore fans that do exist are great.
Gaming ain't going away.
) than their PC counterparts.In fact, I was wowed today playing Far Cry 2 on the 360. With a graphics card that has the fillrate of a video card from four years ago, it plays smooth and looks really good. There's no way that I could hope to play this game with a video card similar to the 360 graphics card - that's how optimized the 360 version is. And while I'm on technology - what's acceptable in terms of visual detail has definitely changed over the years. When I was a PC gamer, 1600x1200 was considered to be a very high-res. Now, it's 2560x1600 - which is huge! Today's videocards can do that resolution without issue, and midrange cards costing around $200 can easily do the highest HDTV resolution at detail levels higher than current generation standards, so there's no reason to believe that A) graphics won't get much better and B) that the gaming industry is going to end.
In my opinion, Sony deserves its comeupins with the PS3. There's no reason for Cell Processor to exist. It's very expensive and extremely unpractical. Sure, it offers the best performance, but its architecture is so different that developers will probably never be able to exploit all of its abilities. And of course, Nintendo deserves all of its profits with the Wii. They captured the casual crowd with this one, and have appealed outside of the teenage boy demographic. Sure, they might have "ignored" the gamer crowd some, but the games for the hardcore fans that do exist are great.
Gaming ain't going away.
-
bluemonkey1
- Posts: 2444
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
This is the end
I'll believe OnLive when I see it running. It's easy to knock up tech demos and make bold claims when your servers sit nearby with nice, fast ethernet connections but no matter how clever a set of algorithms you make, physics is still involved in data transfer.
-
N64Dude1
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: December 31st, 1969, 7:00 pm
This is the end
Nintendo not innovative?!????
Kim where do you think the thumbstick[not the huge joystick type] came from,d-Pad,shoulder,buttons,rumble,controller bay,extrenal memory card not in console,motion sensing for everyday gameplay [not just Samba de Amigo]?????
You fool all that was invented or reinvented by Nintendo.The Nintendo 64 was completely innovative though they used cartridges they managed to invent the conttoller bay and rumble.Look past the hardware dolt! Virtual Boy was very innovative, Dreamcast knocked off the N64 in every last way sure it invented online out-of-the-box but that was it. You know where the whole bay idea came from oh that's right the N64!
In one console,Nintendo practically invented what people take for granted or credited SONY for.
When these companies fold,new ones will arise to the occassion,so long as one will stay in.
There are 3 ways for the industry to end
1.No casual consoles that are lambasted like Wii on the market
2.Another Crash
3.The Apocalypse comes and kills us all
Kim where do you think the thumbstick[not the huge joystick type] came from,d-Pad,shoulder,buttons,rumble,controller bay,extrenal memory card not in console,motion sensing for everyday gameplay [not just Samba de Amigo]?????
You fool all that was invented or reinvented by Nintendo.The Nintendo 64 was completely innovative though they used cartridges they managed to invent the conttoller bay and rumble.Look past the hardware dolt! Virtual Boy was very innovative, Dreamcast knocked off the N64 in every last way sure it invented online out-of-the-box but that was it. You know where the whole bay idea came from oh that's right the N64!
In one console,Nintendo practically invented what people take for granted or credited SONY for.
When these companies fold,new ones will arise to the occassion,so long as one will stay in.
There are 3 ways for the industry to end
1.No casual consoles that are lambasted like Wii on the market
2.Another Crash
3.The Apocalypse comes and kills us all
-
Julio III
This is the end
[QUOTE=BanjoPickles]Graphics may have gotten to the point(mind you, MAY HAVE) where they may not appear dated in ten year's time.
[/QUOTE]
No way. Graphics are far from good enough yet. I have about 10 retail Xbox 360 games and only one of those (Project Gotham Racing 4) has blown me away graphically. And that game was pushing the graphics so hard that the game can't support 4-player split-screen. Now playing the game I can see how the graphics are quite simplistic looking and way off photo-realism.
Some big releases (Call of Duty 4, Grand Theft Auto IV) have dissapointed me in their graphics initially, and I only came to appreciate the graphics after quite a lot of playtime. If you can still see individual polygons then graphics aren't yet advanced enough.
[/QUOTE]
No way. Graphics are far from good enough yet. I have about 10 retail Xbox 360 games and only one of those (Project Gotham Racing 4) has blown me away graphically. And that game was pushing the graphics so hard that the game can't support 4-player split-screen. Now playing the game I can see how the graphics are quite simplistic looking and way off photo-realism.
Some big releases (Call of Duty 4, Grand Theft Auto IV) have dissapointed me in their graphics initially, and I only came to appreciate the graphics after quite a lot of playtime. If you can still see individual polygons then graphics aren't yet advanced enough.