Motion Control To Lengthen Console Hardware Cycles 160
With the recent E3 demonstrations of new motion-based control for consoles — Microsoft's Natal, Sony's Motion Controller, and Ubisoft's camera-based system for the Wii — analysts now expect the current console generation to last longer than normal. Microsoft exec Shane Kim said he expects the Xbox 360 to last until around 2015, in part due to Natal and new services available through Xbox Live. Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all:
"Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch. For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than those in the past, and don't see new hardware coming until 2011 at the earliest, and 2012 to 2013 more likely (if at all — if new services like OnLive take off, or if Xbox Live and PlayStation Network become more and more robust, there may not be a need for another console cycle).'"
2015? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, console graphics already look dated. Waiting until 2015 for the next version would be a big boost to PC gaming. NVIDIA and AMD sure aren't going to stop releasing graphics hardware, so people who want a modern gaming experience will have no choice but to go to the PC.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dated? Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix doesn't look that dated to me. Then again, I can see how the attempted realistic graphics would be dated though - those are always the first ones to start looking bad. Team Fortress 2 will keep looking good long after Counter-Strike: Source becomes painful to the eyes.
Good enough is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"
Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?
With the Wii selling bucketloads more initially than anything else, despite having inferior graphics hardware, have the other two finally realised that Faster chips, bigger numbers and impressive specs are really just nothing more than macho posturing?
Re:Good enough is? (Score:4, Interesting)
Both Microsoft and Sony can create faster variants of their existing hardware, but mandate that new games are backward compatible.
I.e., they can release a PS3.5 as the PS4 that can handle 1080p60* gaming (possibly in 3D with a 3D monitor) based around the same hardware, just running faster or with more resourced. Games detect the console, run in 720p on the PS3 without some fancy graphical effects (assuming physics runs on the SPU in Cell and the new one has ~30SPUs compared with 7 in the current PS3), lower resolution textures (due to less RAM), etc.
Sony always make a console last 10 years anyway, but they also release the new high end 5 or 6 years into that lifespan whilst the previous model mops up the low end of the market and new poor markets around the world. I think it would be suicide to not build upon the hardware base in the PS3 - going with a new architecture would be a folly given their financial situation.
* I know that the PS3 can do this, but most games are in 720p, if that.
Nintendo DS games with DSi extras (Score:3, Interesting)
Both Microsoft and Sony can create faster variants of their existing hardware, but mandate that new games are backward compatible.
As can Nintendo. Most Game Boy Color games early in the GBC's lifetime could display in grayscale on a Game Boy Pocket, and Nintendo has stated that some new DS games will have extra capabilities when inserted into a Nintendo DSi system of the correct region.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Is the XBox 360/PS3 really the pinnacle of console gaming for the next 5 years?
The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64. The problem is, games are more and more boring.
Re:Good enough is? (Score:4, Insightful)
The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64. The problem is, games are more and more boring.
Actually, I disagree in part.
Some really good games have only become possible with better hardware. Except that graphics hardware comes last in that list. But more memory and CPU speed have allowed for more complex games. A game like Oblivion or Fallout 3 would not have been technically possible on the C64, even if you would've been happy with Bards Tale style graphics.
Re: (Score:2)
Some really good games have only become possible with better hardware.
I have to agree. [youtube.com] But even the original 2D version was a classic.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a pretty extreme scenario though. Aside from graphics, how many have Oblivion/Fallout3 done that wouldn't have been possible with Daggerfall technology? Or Ultima Underworld?
Re: (Score:2)
Very obviously, Daggerfall was possible with Daggerfall technology, but not Oblivion. Don't you think that Bethesda would've made Oblivion if it had been possible?
The difference is in scale and complexity. The Oblivion world is a whole lot larger and more complex than Daggerfall. Just putting the data (without graphics) down into Daggerfall would probably have exceededd hard drive capacities of the time. AI calculations would certainly have slowed down the game. The physics engine and its related points (e.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oblivion's world larger? I don't think there's ever been a gaming world larger than Daggerfall's. It would take something like two weeks real time to walk from one end to the other without using fast travel.
Some genres just weren't possible on the 8-bits (Score:2)
The hardware is good enough for good games. It has been since the Commodore 64.
Could the Commodore 64 have run a first-person shooter like the Doom or Quake or Unreal series in real time? (Probably not; no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.) Could the Nintendo Entertainment System have run a social simulator like The Sims or Animal Crossing? (Probably not; enough battery-backed RAM on a cartridge to save the state of a town was cost prohibitive during the NES's commercial era.)
Re: (Score:2)
The original Doom didn't use hardware 3D -- I remember playing it on a 286 system with ease. Of course, the graphics were 320x200, and the most basic of 3D effects. But that was all software driven.
Also, I'd count Flight Simulator in as a 3D game. The original one by Bruce Artwick ran on Commodore, Atari, 8088 PCs, etc. And the 3D in that was only one step down from what was in Doom (polygon graphics without a texture overlay, but with light source direction).
Re: (Score:2)
The 80286 was a 16-bit chip
Re: (Score:2)
Hard to render in software at that clock speed (Score:2)
Commodore 64 [had] no 3D rasterizing hardware nor sufficiently fast CPU.
The original Doom didn't use hardware 3D
I know Doom used software rendering on an i486 or high-end i386DX CPU. But that's not so easy on a MOS Technology 6510 CPU clocked at 1 MHz.
Also, I'd count Flight Simulator in as a 3D game. The original one by Bruce Artwick ran on Commodore, Atari, 8088 PCs, etc. And the 3D in that was only one step down from what was in Doom
But could the C64's CPU handle complex enough enemy meshes at high enough frame rate to make a twitch shooter like Quake 3 Arena?
Re: (Score:2)
Really the commodore 64 met all your requirements? Really? Do yourself a favor, take of the rose tinted glasses, and play a modern game for a while. You can pause the game and wait for half an hour before you can play it if it makes you more comfortable.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
> Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"
No. I'd say we reached it one generation ago. More precisely: one generation ago is when we've reached the point where style matters more than polycount. Not saying that next-gen games aren't awfully pretty: some are. What I'm saying, though, is that there are many ways to go for pretty, and polycount and high-resolution aren't fundamental to a good number of those. See Okami, for instance.
I suspect this is the lesson Nintendo learned. Last generat
Re:Good enough is? (Score:5, Insightful)
Sorry, it's a hell of a lot more than macho posturing.
The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel. The Wii is sorely underpowered for today's display tech.
Now, it's still good fun, but I really don't buy into this horrible fanboyish meme that seems to hae taken hold, that the two are somehow exclusive. You CAN have both. There is no reason that bad graphics make good games. A Wii or other machine with Wii-like controllers and Wii-like games but with and updated GFX hardware would be great.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Oh sure. But I'm not advocating photo-realistic Wii Tennis here! Just a few more pixels would be nice, some more anti-aliasing, that sort of stuff. At the moment quite a few of the games look blocky on a 1080p capable screen, even when using the component/576 mode.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not looking for Gears of War Tennis
You bloody well should be. Think about it, chainsaw guns, alien bugs, and tennis?
I don't want to play any other game now, I'm boycotting all videogames until someone makes gears of tennis!
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be quite happy with the existing wii style, i.e. broadbrush stylized cartoony style (wii tennis, mario galaxy, boom blox, little king's story), but running at a higher res. You don't need to turn a game into Gears of War 2 or Alan Wake in order to get a nice looking high res game that doesn't go all blocky and hard to see on a 1080p panel - so some sort of wii 2, with backwards compatibility but a gruntier gpu and anti-aliasing built in would still be nice to see sometime before 2015.
On the other hand,
Re: (Score:2)
it will hopefully be a shot in the arm for the platform if AAA titles look a lot better on the PC (or even has some good exclusives that just aren't possible on the consoles)
PC versions of games pretty much always look better than their console counterparts if you have good hardware, even if the only reason is a better resolution and/or framerate. Now that all consoles are networked and have decent storage space (though not all as standard yet, Xbox a HDD is optional, Wii I'm not sure how much space it has but it probably isn't more than 8GB or so.. PS3s are guaranteed to have a minimum of 20GB, though I upgraded mine from 40 to 320).
So I don't see what you could do on a PC tha
Have we really accepted that? (Score:2)
Maybe I'm alone, but I own a Wii and a 360. The Wii is fun for 5 minutes and then gets very very boring. The Xbox has games that are fun for hours at a time.
So why does everyone just assume the Wii is more fun? Because it moved more consoles? That's no better a metric than # of games sold, which the Wii loses at pretty badly.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because Wii games are more fun. I don't like FPSes, I find them the most boring genre ever invented. And even the non-FPS games- it's the same damn thing I've been playing for the past 20 years. I'm tired of that. Wii games tend to have more new material. Even the games that are old genres have motion controls which give it a nice change. And of course the Nintendo first party games are polished to hell and back.
As a gamer of over 20 years, someone who uses to spend 8 hours a day gaming- I can't thi
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
> The GFX on the Wii look pretty poor on a decent sized 1080p capable panel.
They look like a smeared mess, IMHO.
What bothers me isn't that it can't do HD, but that it doesn't even do an on-board upscale. If it did the upscale as graphics were written into the image buffer, it could get a MUCH better upscaling than any TV could do to the content, by understanding it better.
Re: (Score:2)
But the SCART or component cables that the Wii outputs through can't actually support that high a resolution (AFAIK, may be wrong), so it is the responsibility of the display itself to do any smoothing/upscaling. The Wii could do some anti-aliasing, but not actual 'upscaling' unless it has an HDMI connection.
Re: (Score:2)
Component cables sure can, the other consoles can do it through them. And the Wii component leads can do 576p, which is a little better, but still not great.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Have we really reached the point where "Good enough is"
No, we haven't. As we know, both the PS3 and the Xbox360 are struggling with true 1080p content, most games advertized as 1080p actually run at a horizontal resolution lower than 1920. We need faster consoles still to take full advantage of the current FullHD displays.
Obviously none of this has anything to do with how good the actual games are, and as Nintendo has shown quite vividly, the actual playability of the games matter more than eye candy. However, I don't see these two issues to contradict each oth
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good enough is? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well "Good enough" for now. The last update to consoles brought HD compatibility with the now standard HD TV, and good use of internet connection. Without both of those consoles would look like backward technology.
But we certainly haven't reached good enough for gaming in general. Games do look good enough, but the worlds they simulate need more power.
For example, go to the top of a building in GTA IV and look into a street in the distance, it is empty. That game does a good job of having an illusion of a busy city, but it really is just that. Four blocks away from you there is nothing.
Wouldn't it be great if every brick in every building was simulated, and having ten million entities walking around the city with you, rather than the 50 odd that follow you around at the moment.
Of course you don't need all this to have a fun game, some of the better games on the 360 are geometry wars and braid, both of which are 2D. And the success of the Wii speaks for itself.
But I think it would be sad if the development of more immersive environments stalled here.
That early? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't feel bad. I'm still waiting for a price drop on the PS2. ;)
You can probably pick one up on eBay for cheap. Or do you live in a country with prohibitive import duties on consumer electronics, like a few countries in South America?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Blu-Ray... (Score:2, Flamebait)
I don't think I'll care about my PS3 having a motion sensor. I only play fighting games, Metal Gear Solid, and Ratchet & Clank. No real need or want for motion control from me. I have a Wii and I barely touch the thing anymore (wow I just typed that then paused then laughed) and won't until Mario Galaxy 2 comes out.
The reason my PS3 has longevity is because it plays Blu-Rays, it won the format war, and unless some new disc type comes along or digital downloads with all of the extra content of a BD come
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, right - this discrimin
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
And in The Future...
#1 "You mean you have to use your hands?"
#2 "That's like a baby's toy!"
How many watts? (Score:2)
Why can't your computer be powered partly by a bicycle wheel, while the computer monitors your exercise and requests power from time to time? Don't pedal when the computer tells you to, and your computer shuts down.
Good luck keeping up the pedaling long enough to finish downloading the 8 GB game you bought. Or are you talking about a mass migration away from desktop PCs and 150-watt consoles in favor of machines that sip power like laptops and Wii consoles?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
fine physiques?
No, sorry, wrong.
Games will be controlled by the mind, and gamers will be known by their gelatinous forms.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... but it's all about money, and Microsoft and Sony want a piece of that pie.
There's no doubt that the "hardcore crowd" can make a company money. When Blizzard releases something, it's practically guaranteed to generate vast quantities of cash. But there are a lot more gamers out there than just the hardcore crowd.
I'm fairly confident that games for... let's call them "seasoned gamers"... won't be going away. Making these games makes people money, presumably enough of it otherwise they would have st
Re:Blu-Ray... (Score:5, Interesting)
Until cheap, reliable haptic control systems emerge (not a for about half a decade if things like the Falcon, and the cost of more flexiable systems, is anything to go by), motion control will be limited in usefulness to a few casual games that don't require fast and accurate responses.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That claim comes up every now and then, but at this point in time its really kind of baseless. The major failure of the Wiimote is simply that it just doesn't work the people expected it. It doesn't give you 1:1 mapping and thus your movement on the screen ends up having little or even nothing to do with your actual motion. Its not even a matter of precision, its simply not enough sensory data to do any kind of real 3d tracking. That's the sole reason why the experience ends up a little flat, as you end up
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize the Wii MotionPlus is scheduled to be released in 3 days (in NA), don't you? The others have just been announced.
Re: (Score:2)
Fixed that for you.
Granted, the camera approach of the 360 and PS3 have advantages and disadvantages over the WM+. But let's not kid ourselves. This is a three way race to full motion control capabilities. Thanks to the existing Wii Remote platform, Nintendo is leveraging their sizable lead to get their own 1:1 solution in consumers hands before the competition.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Fixed that for you.
MotionPlus doesn't give you 1:1 mapping. The controller has still no idea where it is in 3D space. The controller now has sensors to measure rotation independent from acceleration, which will allow to make the mapping of action a good bit better then before, as it will get much harder to cheat the thing, but it will still be a lot of guessing of what the player did, instead of just taking the coordinates and bringing them into them game. So MotionPlus is more an intermediate step, then the solution to the 1
Re: (Score:2)
Incorrect. The Wii Remote has a camera in the controller itself. This camera is used to orient the controller prior to 1:1 use, thus allowing the controller to know its position via dead reckoning.
This was demonstrated at last year's E3. I'm surprised you missed it.
Re: (Score:2)
The Wii Remote has a camera in the controller itself.
That won't help much, as the sensorbar has only two points for reference, not enough to calculate a proper position in 3d space. And in games where you are not pointing at the screen it wouldn't work either way.
This was demonstrated at last year's E3.
Links are welcome. I havn't seen anything that gets near what Sony demostrated. Thats not to say that the MotionPlus isn't a big improvement, it allows to properly detected swinging motion and such, which would likely be good enough for some decent sword fighting or grenade throwing, but that is stil
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need a proper position. The WM+ contains gyroscopes that can measure that. What you need is an orientation. i.e. The Wii Remote has no idea which direction the television is. So without a starting point, how is it supposed to know which way is forward? With the camera, it can obtain a very precise orientation on the 2D overhead plane. Dead reckoning is use to find the posi
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing rotation. The Wii Remote can only sense rotation based on the axises of the accelerometers. That limits its ability to measure 6DOF. The Wii Motion+ adds gyroscopic sensors that are able to better measure rotation at all times. Once calibrated against the physical position of the television (which as you know provides distance information*) dead reckoning combined with a few assumptions about the human arm allows the remote to track its position through a full 6 degrees of freedom.
* Watch thi [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yes they did.
However, was there not research showing that the attach rate (i.e. frequency of game buying) was very much lower for casual/Wii gamers? Making the Wii continue to pay might be difficult.
Wii Points attach rate? (Score:2)
was there not research showing that the attach rate (i.e. frequency of game buying) was very much lower for casual/Wii gamers?
Does this include only retail titles or also VC and WiiWare games purchased with Wii Points?
Re:Blu-Ray... (Score:5, Informative)
Yes they did.
However, was there not research showing that the attach rate (i.e. frequency of game buying) was very much lower for casual/Wii gamers? Making the Wii continue to pay might be difficult.
That's a myth.
From Wikipedia:
Best selling PS3 games:
Xbox 360 games selling more than 3.31 million:
Wii games selling more than 3.31 million:
So the Wii has 5 games that have sold more than any game on either the PS3 or the Xbox 360.
Looking at it another way, the top 10 PS3 games have sold a total of 21.4 million copies, the top 10 Xbox 360 games have sold a total of 29 million copies and the 10 Wii games have sold a total of 133 million copies. The consoles themselves have sold 21.3, 28, and 50 million copies each respectively. So for the Wii, excluding Wii Sports, that's 87 million top 10 games for 50 million consoles: 1.7 games per console. The other two consoles manage only 1 top 10 game per console.
In terms of total games, PS3 has sold 94 million and the Wii has sold 353 million. Not sure about the Xbox 360. So that's 4.4 games per PS3 and 7 games per Wii (6 excluding Wii Sports).
Clearly, the idea that the Wii has a lower "attach" rate is pure BS. It might have been true initially but now the attach rate is significantly higher for the Wii.
Re: (Score:2)
In addition, a console with vastly more hardware sales than its competitors is naturally going to have a lower attach rate. For example, the Wii sells about twice as many hardware units as either the 360 or PS3 per month in the US. But since these new owners start from 0 games (not counting the bundled Wii Sports), the attach rate falls behind the higher ratio of longtime owners on the 360 or PS3 who've had more time to get more games.
But in absolute sales terms, Wii sells a lot more software, both 1st an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wii Sports comes with the Wii - it shouldn't count. Likewise Wii Play always comes with a new controller so shouldn't count either, don't think either of them are sold separately (what would be the point?).
As for the rest, that's all valid. And note that Gran Turismo 5: Prologue is about half the price of a normal game, so it won't make so much profit. Would be interesting to see how many the real GT 5 sells.
Re: (Score:2)
in the GP's defense in his analysis he does give numbers for both with and with out Wii Sports; I wanna agree with the Wii Play as well, it was given as a freebie
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
maybe you missed some key words in the analysis like
So for the Wii, excluding Wii Sports, that's 87 million top 10 games for 50 million consoles: 1.7 games per console
or
So that's 4.4 games per PS3 and 7 games per Wii (6 excluding Wii Sports).
It pays to read the whole comment, its not like we're asking you to read TFA or TFS.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I have not played a single DS game where the touch screen is a gimmick, it is almost always unused (e.g. Mario Cart DS), and alternate control method that may or may not be better (e.g. advanced wars), or a fantastic edition (e.g. tap for backup item in NSMB). The Wiimote is a different story though often it is used as a very fun gimmick.
As for attach rates:
http://vgchartz.com/aweekly.php [vgchartz.com]
This is the American charts, it has the attach-rate at about the same as the PS3 and lower than the 360, of course argum
Longer console lifecycle will kill them (Score:2, Interesting)
If you consider the fact that most games are constantly looking for the latest and greatest, whether it be hardware or software or (god help us) controllers, there will be only negative results from the lengthening of the console lifecycle. By extending the life of these boxes, console manufacturers are going to face the waning interest of consumers.
In some respects, the decision to keep current consoles longer makes some sense. There has not been any serious change in gameplay since the earliest consoles f
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Longer console lifecycle will kill them (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
This is certainly true. The PS2 still gets at least half the sales of the PS3 every month, and got 50% more in April due to a US price cut of the PS2 that month.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
While improvements in graphics are nice, improvements in processing capability and storage space for physics simulation, collision detection, freeroaming and/or destructible environments are the things that have been responsible for most of the improvements in gameplay over the last few years. More realistic control systems do make games more fun. Think of using a steering wheel compared to a joypad - the joypad is often a lot easier because of the tiny motions necessary to go from lock to lock for counter-
XBox 360 looks promising (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does the PS Eye need a general purpose core? (Score:2)
On PS3 you have only 1 general purpose core
The hypervisor in PS3 Other OS runs on a SPE core, not the general purpose core. I'd imagine that the new motion control system could likewise have an SPE dedicated to it.
Re: (Score:2)
How could SPE run an OS??
I suppose you meant that SPE can be assigned under hypervisor control to do some computational heavy task. The hypervisor actually resides on the general purpose core, but has an SPE available to it exclusively to perform SPE suited task like encryption. Thats all.
SPEs could do very narrow tasks only.
Re: (Score:2)
The hypervisor actually resides on the general purpose core, but has an SPE available to it exclusively to perform SPE suited task like encryption.
Likewise, the new motion control peripheral would have exclusive use of an SPE to do its heavy lifting.
Could've happened last generation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This cycle will be long, but not for that reason (Score:2)
The reason there's no new hardware from the console maker is that there is no new hardware from the chip makers. We hit the GHz ceiling a couple years ago, and as a result today's chips aren't better by enough to make it worthwhile.
I suspect MS and Sony want to see where the multi-core thing is going (CPUs support a dozen complex threads, while GPUs support a few hundred simple threads.) Will one line of chips take over the other? Will we find masses of simple cores are better than a few complex cores?
Re:This cycle will be long, but not for that reaso (Score:2)
The reason there's no new hardware from the console maker is that there is no new hardware from the chip makers. We hit the GHz ceiling a couple years ago, and as a result today's chips aren't better by enough to make it worthwhile.
This is a myth. The clock speed of a processor isn't directly indicative of its performance, which has never stopped increasing.
Each core in a Core i7, at 2.66Ghz, is faster than a whole 3.8Ghz Pentium 4 and uses a quarter of the power. There's no tradeoff between core count and speed, modern CPUs have both.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but it took us 3 years just to reach "faster". Back in the 90s, you could expect to get double the usable performance in less than two years. We should have had chips running running 2-4 times faster than they are now, but instead Intel has spent half the decade releasing 3 GHz chips, each one merely "faster" than the previous (except for the ones that are slower.) And it's all due to the GHz ceiling.
Well, *I* call it the GHz ceiling. I suppose a more technical name might be "leakage-induced therma
Re: (Score:2)
But we can't get one to run at 6 GHz no matter how small we make it, so the only way to boost performance is it with multiple cores.
It's not though. You can do a lot without increasing the clock frequency; more cores are one thing, but modern CPUs also perform much more instructions per clock, have larger caches and in some cases onboard memory controllers. These all help performance a lot.
As for the slower high end advancement, I think it's more due to lack of competition than lack of technology. It's only very recently that AMD have become competitive even with Intel's C2D series. They've been competing on price. In the high e
Re: (Score:2)
Meh - my grandmother is faster than a Pentium 4, and only uses cups of tea for power.
I Like This (Score:2)
Cause and effect, people... (Score:2)
Motion controls are NOT lengthening the current console life cycle. That wasn't implied in the article and the notion itself is absurd. Analyst believe that because the console makers are devoting significant time and effort to producing new hardware for consoles that will be 3-4 years old by the time that hardware is released, it is a sign the console makers are planning on stretching out the usual console life cycle. Motion detection is not the cause. Motion detection hardware is being shown as eviden
640K (Score:2)
With the recent demonstrations of new 640K RAM computers, analysts now expect the current computer generation to last longer than normal. Signal Hill's Todd Greenwald thinks this cycle may not need to end at all: "Microsoft and Sony have invested so much in their current hardware line, as have third party publishers, that we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch. For all of these reasons, we think this cycle will last longer than thos
Sensible next consoles. (Score:2)
If Sony's PS4 was a PS3 with 2 cell chips and latest Nvidia Graphics (say 260 derived) and the Xbox (3?) upgraded to a 6-8 core power PC chip from the current 3 core device with latest generation ATI graphics (derived form their latest DirectX11 chip) then maintaining backwards comaptibility should be relative
The next gen (Score:3, Funny)
>... we don't think any party is seriously interested in throwing away these investments and starting over from scratch.
Man, wouldn't it be funny if Nintendo did a hardware refresh in a year or so and called it a next generation machine? They could make it backwards compatible to the Wii, have simultaneous releases for both systems, but distract Sony and MS to no end. But would it be the Wii2, or the WiiII (or Wiii)?
Re: (Score:2)
Wii Too (play on words, "we play too/Wii 2").
Re: (Score:2)
PS3 held back by Xbox360, Wii under-used (Score:2)
From what we keep reading, we haven't even seen what the PS3 is really capable of. We keep hearing about games being made for Xbox360 then ported to PS3, with the Xbox360 being the baseline, etc.
Also, with the new Metroid game, we finally see what the Wii is capable of and it's far from cartoony graphics.
In any case, what matters is games and how far can developers push the hardware. I have a Wii for Zelda and Metroid games, and I'll probably be getting a PS3 to play FF XIV Online. I sure hope I can transfe
Re: (Score:2)
That's what we hear from the game devs, not from Sony.
In fact, what we heard from Sony is that they made the PS3 hard to code for, on purpose. How dumb is that?
Definitely true in my case (Score:3, Funny)
Rose Colored Sunglasses (Score:2)
If you pull my other leg it plays Jingle Bells.
Xbox 360 redesign? (Score:2)
I don't any 360 will last that long - they'll RROD themselves way before then!
I imagine that the Xbox 360 won't last that long, but a hypothetical Xbox 360 Slimline with the same capability as Xbox 360 might last the rest of the time.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
One Red Ring to find them,
One E74 to bring them all,
And in the Blue Screen bind them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Sony's system literally can't be any worse than the Wii for pointing - they could do exactly the same trick that the Wii does if they want, and in reality they can do better if you can somehow define exactly where your TV is in relation to the camera, how big it is etc. The only reason Wii games seem better for pointing than the Sony tech demo is because they show a crosshair on screen, whereas the guy in the tech demo often had to physically control an object on screen and then guess where it was pointing.
Re: (Score:2)
Um.. you realise that argument works more in favour for consoles than PCs, at least if you want to keep your machine capable of playing games at their best? I used to spend lots on more RAM, faster processor, faster graphics cards every year or two when I was into PC gaming because things advance so rapidly.
With my PS3 all I've spent money on is more games, and the graphics are definitely "good enough" for the most part. I'm happy being forced to let my wallet grow fat for now, and I get plenty of regular e