Report: Console life cycles grow as big three share the market

a fool and his gold will soon be parted.

I don't think the "next-gen" technology is going to be available soon. Judging by the top of the line graphics cards out there. Graphics cards are getting bigger and more power hungry. Unless they are going to do vector based lighting there is really no point. Nothing can do that reasonably in realtime now. It's the final step they need to make realtime graphics look like today's prerendered. So yes, I don't mind waiting until it's really ready.

Why, so we can deal with games like Perfect Dark 0 and Motor Storm again as companies scramble and financially worry about programming for new consoles?

I don't think so.

I'm perfectly fine with the graphics found in Modern Warfare 2, Batman: Arkham Asylum and Dragon Age.

Natal will be interesting and I'm DEFINITELY getting it, even if it'll account for 1/8 the games I'll probably play using it.

Keep this gen around for another 3 or 4 years, thank you.

In fact, other than graphics (and digital sound), the Wii is even pretty sufficient *snicker*

Why would anyone need a new Xbox in 2 years? Serious question.

Only graphics whores really would want such a thing.

there are a lot more advancements that come with a new console than just graphics. how well would RF:G physics be on the PS2?

as for having to deal with more "perfect dark 0's" deal with it, its going to be like that no matter how long this gen lasts.

Well, I don't really want one, but a new Xbox could have built-in Wireless N, a less proprietary HDD solution, more RAM, an integrated power supply, a HD media drive, perhaps card slots (please?).

Of course, they could do all that but the RAM or the BD drive in a new Xbox 360 Slim model too.

Barely any xbox 360 game runs 1080p natively. Also, games like GTA slowdown often when there is a lot of stuff going on.I think it needs more power.

next-gen? hell we're still calling this generation Next Gen

i really feel like these consoles are holding there own for now. i remember being deep into the PS2 lifecycle and PC games were just destroying it in terms of technical advances but in this gen, i just don't see the same thing. sure there are advancements, a top of the line gaming PC can show you that, but nothing that would make me want to go buy another $300+ console. i say let these consoles ride a little more. all 3 are sitting in pretty comfortable positions and are actually co-existing pretty nicely compared to the "console wars" of the past.

Actually, I am very very confident in saying that any new console will be 100% backwards compatible for obvious reasons for each company apart from keeping the support of 3rd party developers.
1) Microsoft has invested itself in keeping a variant of DirectX9.0c within the Xbox360. In keeping with tradition it will move to probably a variant of DirectX11 which is 100% backwards compatible. This will be cheaper to produce as both Nvidia & AMD/Ati will have already considerable experience in designing these graphic chipsets so designing something for Microsoft will be less crazy than for the 360 since DirectX9 was in the same timeframe as the 360.
2) Sony has learnt their lesson in treating 3rd party developers as dirt and will therefore make a lot more solid effort to appease them and hence keep backwards compatibility a high priority. Also, it has invested considerable amounts of money in the Cell architecture which need to be recuperated & the processor is certainly powerful enough to deal with games in forseeable future(Graphics core is what will need an upgrade).
3)Current Nintendo hardware is so weak that anything they produce in the future can be software emulated.

All this IMHO will lead to a serious backwards compatibility & will hence not piss off the devs. This in turn will lead to games for at least sometime being made for both platforms with they being marginally better looking on the newer platform. I think that in Microsoft's case they introduce something new in 2012(holiday of 2012) which will make it about 7 years. It's an eternity & devs will probably ask for an upgrade by then(if not external, then internal at least). Since resolution is fixed 1080p for the next 10 years, effects & specialized physics hardware will be given higher priority.

All this I assume is if everybody doesnt jump to OnLive :)

Wow great plan MS! You can sell me 6 more 360s to replace my red ringed units over the next 4 years, then next gen you can finally release hardware thats not utter crap.

@Shag

Except at most you'd have to buy 2 360's over six years, since each one comes with a 3 year warranty for RROD's...

And lets just ignore that the newer units rarely have RROD's if ever.

Longer console lifecycles? Ugh. I hope this won't keep holding the PC back. : (

Business is NEVER about making 'progress', it's about making profits / money.

If MS makes a new console that's $2-4 billion down the drain right away in research and development. Then you gotta advertise that new system. Then developers have to do more work to take advantage of the enhanced powers of the new system so they're poorer. Finally the consumer has to buy new hardware, so they have less money.

No... Noone wants a new wave of consoles right now.

money is no object for Microsoft in the console space. They have demonstrated that before.

I wouldn't be so sure. There's been a lot of grumbling from the stockholders regarding Ballmer's current handling of the company, and the company's low stock price. I believe he's got a few more years yet, but if the situation doesn't improve, he might get the boot. The new president would basically be forced to kill any hemmoraging divisions. They might end up in a Sega style situation-publishing games on their competitors consoles.

Wow, Khan, you are way off here.

Last generation was a joke. Both Nintendo and MS did little to combat Sony. they *both* needed to re-invent themselves quicky to halt some of Sony's forthcoming PS3 momentum. MS was essentially forced to put out the 360 and take the hit on the original Xbox and move on.

Sure Nintendo may have been making money with the Cube, but it's brand identity and overall Brand equity took a huge hit as the Playstation brand continued to steamroll the entertainment world. The Nintendo Brand was on the verge of becoming irrelevant in the home console space. I'm sure that's a major reason why they changed thier philosophy and segmented the market with the Wii - they didn't want to take on Sony head on - I think many recognize that.

Currently, that's not the case. All the companies are in full stride and making money (for the most part) . They have all differentiated themselves and they now have the time to refine thier core concepts.

Before this gen, consoles never had the luxury of largescale software upgrades. One can argue that thanks to their online integration, the 360 and PS3 have been "upgraded" multiples times already - further negating the necessity for a full-on hardware upgrade.

I just don't see much demand for it. The fans seem to be happy playing quality games, developers always enjoy having more time to learn hardware/software tricks, and the big 3 love not having to spend billions of dollars launching an entirely new product every 5 years.

Embassy's got most of the picture.

Of course, Microsoft's 'victory' came at the expense of their public image regarding the 360.

@ Embassy

There needs to be a little more perspective in your well thought out comment.

First we need to remember that the Xbox launched in November 2001! That was just a little over a month after September 11th 2001. Not the best time to launch a console.

The reason why MS ditched the original Xbox so soon was the cost of putting in 8GB HDD's. The off the shelf components worked against them in manufacturing costs.

"I just don't see much demand for it. The fans seem to be happy playing quality games, developers always enjoy having more time to learn hardware/software tricks, and the big 3 love not having to spend billions of dollars launching an entirely new product every 5 years."

But this is always the case. Before the start of this generation, as I've mentioned before, it was NOT difficult to find people who were saying they didn't think it was time to upgrade yet and things were fine as they were. So fans are always happy playing quality games provided they don't know what they're missing. They change their tune right quick once they get hands on time with the new hardware, though.
- Developers would almost surely have appreciated learning / implementing more hardware tricks last gen, too. It might be a moot point since the PS2 was maxed out (by some studios, at least) and the Gamecube and Xbox were basically dead, though.
- And obviously no business wants to spend billions of dollars on a product rollout if they don't have to, but that's what they're doing anyway, perhaps to a smaller extent, with Natal, the motion dildo and...whatever Nintendo has planned next.

We already know they're working on their next consoles. There have been a lot of stories in the last 2 months or so about striking deals or proposals from chip makers and such. Next gen is set to begin pretty much on schedule.
Hell, I will buy you a game of your choice if there isn't at least one console announcement at E3 2011, with the system launching in 2012.

I DON'T EVEN HAVE A WALLET :O

It'd be nice to be able to play Wii games on HD resolutions.

Zelda and Mario Galaxy's HD screenshots from the Dolphin Wii emulator look really nice.

Even though that was a horribly put together paragraph, you make some very valid points which I agree with.

Agreed. It looks more like a high end car than a console.

Damn thing shows dust and fingerprints like no other, though. It's why I went with a matte finish on my TV>

The reflection looks to me like "inside every ps3 is an xbox trying to get out"!

@HighFiveJesus

Or it could be the 360 slim.

PC developers are not graphics card makers. There will always be new video cards as long as ATI and Nvidia are competing. Most graphics cards can be maximized; look up something called overclocking.

you definitely don't need to upgrade every four months to game at max settings.

nothing coming out last year required me to upgrade, and nothing coming out this year is going to need me to upgrade either.

even then, you only need to upgrade regularly if you plan on gaming on super high resolutions or multiple screens at the maximum settings.

Nothing is wrong with gaming at high instead of very high 2-4 years from now at 1680x1050.

I'm not sure what you mean by that... I mean, hasn't the Wii sold enough to prove that graphics really have nothing to do with what it's offering?

I'm almost positive the Wii will be the first to move to another console, but it will be due to the fact that they have buckets of $ to use for the R&D.

Super Robot Wii II wil not only play all your games, it will nuke both your PS3 and 360 on start-up!

"I'm not sure what you mean by that... I mean, hasn't the Wii sold enough to prove that graphics really have nothing to do with what it's offering?"

just because it sold a lot doesn't mean it "proved" anything.

if anything it just proved that people are just as retarded as ever to purchase something because they think they will lose weight playing games.

in other words, it COULD have sold a lot because graphics dont mean everything, but it is more likey that it sold a ton because it was extremely cheap and had tons of shovelware that people who hadn't gamed before would think are good games.

and with how low the Wiis attachment rate is, i'd go with the second.

The point is that the comparatively poor graphics haven't proven to be an inhibiting factor to sales (considering the thing was sold out for quite a long time).

just because something is sold out doesn't prove that it is "good", just popular.

I guess I mean that Nintendo will have to upgrade sooner if they want to keep their hardcore audience happy, which I think that they're getting around to deciding that they do. I'm a Nintendo fanboy for life, but I in no way play my Wii as much as I do my 360 or PS3. It's not that I don't think that there are good games for the Wii, either. As far as I'm concerned Nintendo has done a bang-up job of supporting the Wii by getting out a new Zelda (I played it on Wii, it's a Wii game to me), 3D Mario, Smash Bros., Fire Emblem, Metroid, and launched good (imo) IPs like Wii Sports and Wii Fit. This year looks to be quite eventful (fingers crossed) with Other M, Galaxy 2 and New Zelda. But there's something about the Wii that's lacking. It's not just the graphics, either.
If they want to stay ahead of the new motion control craze then they need to have a new system with a new break-apart controller. To make the best controller possible it would have to have two IR pointers and two analogs. Nintendo would be responsible for making your character's hands separate from their head. Think about it. You could make your dude run forward and shoot backward. You could actually target two enemies at the same time. It would be revo-fucking-lutionary.

@Brian: He's talking about SALES; the graphics have not inhibited SALES.
God, stupid one track minds...

Nintendo realized this gen that their hardcore audience is insignificant. The hardcore fans will buy their games regardless, so putting effort to please such a small fraction of loud Wii owners would be pointless. The great games that they've put out thus far isn't so much as to catering to that hardcore audience, but instead just making really good games that so many are familiar with.

I don't know how much longer they can keep pushing the wii. People complain about big 3rd party devs not pushing the wii to its limits but when they do and take such risks to make it unique, the games end up selling poorly. And while those with high development costs sell poorly, cheap shovelware more than likely make a greater return on compared to what they put into the development. I think nintendo has made the fracture between themselves and big third party devs even greater this generation. It makes sense for Nintendo, since their first party titles sell exceptionally well, but more 3rd party companies seem to not even bother with it due to the large gap with hardware between the Wii and everything else.

I'd hope at least 4 more years until we see new hardware. Online gaming will help stretch it out a little more than usual. Nowadays people care just as much about updates and features to the OS as they do graphics. They expect the systems to be updated as the years pass. That was never the case before.

I still have my fingers crossed for one system that is built by Sony but has MS software.

So, you're wanting to purchase a Vaio?....

if sony and microsoft both start making games for it.

Seeing as the PS3 is confirmed to have full 3D support, in addition to Blu-Ray 3D, even that reason doesn't work.