PCWorld Forums: What's Next With Gaming Consoles - PCWorld Forums

Post your comments for What's Next with Gaming Consoles here

Ok, so we have a mysterious 16 core chip with no details. No video card details (except the other rumors talking of old mid-tier cards), no ram details, no media details... basically nothing.

But it is going to be "too powerful". I have yet to see anything that back that statement up. Also, is this a real 16 cores, or an 8 core chip with random parts duplicated, IE: AMD FX series or Intel HyperThreading?

Also, is Sony going to screw its customers over again by selling machines with varying levels of backwards compatibility and Linux support only to eventually strip them both?

I really don't care how much graphic power a console has, that's for PCs

What a game console really needs are great games .. maybe that's why Nintendo won this generation in handheld and home consoles sales

NiwaDaisuke, on 15 April 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

No, that is for consoles as well. People have been complaining as it is that the Xbox cannot handle 1080P gaming. And they are right to do so. That was one of the largest benefits of the Xbox 360. If the NEXT generation console also cannot handle more than 720P for most games, then people are certainly going to wonder why they should bother upgrading. Without extra power needed to take the visuals further, there is no sense in an upgrade. Shoot, if the hardware stayed largely the same, I could easily see game makers continuing to make 360 games for years to come - why not? If there is little or no difference in graphic quality, it will cost next to nothing to implement across both the new and the old console, and they would make more money.

NiwaDaisuke, on 15 April 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

I think you're just classified as a different type of gamer. Yes, a lot of the games out now are terrible. The few good games have set the expectations so high that it's ridiculous. I did a little survey among friends (about 10 people) and it seems to be pretty much a requirement for good graphics if the game is trying for it (IE: not a cartoon) and interactivity, as well as excellent multi-player. If you see an object in a shooting game, then you better be able to shoot it and it better realistically react. If you're playing online, there better be algorithms that negate latency, If you're playing a game that uses the Kinect then it better be able to recognize all of you plus at least one to 3 others... not just your hands/feet, etc.. That kind of physics/etc. takes processing power, and maybe these 16 cores (even if they aren't clocked all that high, say at 1.5-2Ghz) will help that.

I don't believe in "too much power" though. Games generally already have to scale back detail because of lacking power. I guarantee "too much power" won't last long once the developers get comfortable with the new hardware and can fully utilize it. Also, If I am waiting at any point in the game then the console is not powerful enough or the game is not optimized properly. Until everything is instant, there is no such thing as too much power.

I do know that the Xbox 720 better be a power house, because that's what will be expected. It's been a while (over 7 years) since the 360 was released. By Moore's Law saying the performance should pretty much double every 2 years, that means the Xbox 720 needs to be at least 200%-300% more powerful than the 360. Anything less (without some kind of gimmic) isn't really acceptable.

I'm somewhat surprised that game consoles haven't tried to replace cable boxes and DVRs though. A DVR/Game console that could stream movies to my phone, whether it be Android, WP7, or iOS, and my PC/Laptop would be amazing. Windows 8 can already control the Xbox 360 to an extent, so it seems to be going in the right direction. They just need to focus less on themselves and more on compatibility with others (no, I don't mean playing PS3 games on the Xbox. I'm talking about the kind of integration that Windows 8, Xbox, and the Windows Phone will likely have). That alone could be a win for them.

This post has been edited by daniel142005: 15 April 2012 - 03:59 PM

Comparing Nintendo's Wii to the 360 or PS3 is somewhat incorrect. The wii is not in direct competition with the other two consoles as it does not target the same demographic. It's a whole different class of gaming device and cannot be accurately weighed against standard hardcore gaming rigs. The fact that they are releasing a console this year that only matches the power of current (old) hardware is strong evidence that Nintendo aims for more of the same. Meanwhile, SOny and Microsoft's customers are going to expect a considerable improvement in power and software offerings on their next console releases. They cannot simply keep up with nintendo by releasing a console with the same specs as the one currently out.

ML, on 15 April 2012 - 06:24 PM, said:

I would expect nothing less from MS and Sony. So far though, the rumor mill has released nothing that sounds like gamers are getting what they demand. Video cards that are old by today's definitions, CPU's that are questionable at best, and unknown media.

Personally, I am kind of hoping that all the rumors are wrong. A 16 core cpu with an older mid-tier video card results in a very unbalanced system that would be great for excel, or small home servers. Moving to a decent 4 or 6 core chip, and dropping in a current generation AMD or Nvidia card (like the 78xx series, or 600 series) would result in some crazy performance and smaller electric footprint. I just want to be able to play BF 4 in 1080P with high resolution textures on my 65" TV and have some more realistic effects - such as real farking bullet drop on all weapons, and proper cone patterns.

If you really want to know what they can produce using next generation console hardware just take a nice look at desktop gaming performance two years ago from PC exclusives - before developers began tailoring games to fit consoles as opposed to dumbing down the graphics to work on them as well. Will the next gen console games match the vivid beauty of the dream world engine Funcom used in Age of Conan on PC? Highly doubtful.

NiwaDaisuke, on 15 April 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

But console and handheld limitations dictate the current industry - not desktops, sadly.

Funny, the one console I am most stoked about wasn't even mentioned, Valves's Steam Box or whatever they are calling it... and with the talk of the Valve/Apple meeting the other day, next gen could get really interesting and unpredictable.

http://www.pcmag.com...,2403056,00.asp

Pure conjecture, but I see no reason why Apple wouldn't go for games, and Steam has been a good supporter for Apple. If Valve is looking to manufacture a console, Apple has the muscle to manufacture and push product onto shelves better than anyone else. Naturally, that also has implications for OS X gaming and the App Store for OS X. Another game console aisle in 'Best Buy' with the Apple logo over it. Selling Steam content directly through the 'App Store' is more likely, though.

It seems that an 'app store' model would be a the most likely and welcome thing with the upcoming consoles. Push your game out to millions just for creating it, have it available 'forever', and get a fair cut of the proceeds? Dream come true compared to Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft and their multi-thousand dollar per seat development consoles, and disc based physical distribution to store shelves and payola business model, and the instant death for all games shortly after they've been released to the renters/traders.

Keep the trade-in and rental parasites from bleeding every console (and their developers) white. Expect EVERY game console to rein that madness in, and continue the trend of being streaming clients for movie/video services.

Just think of the kind of games you could get on the console if most game developers aren't f***ed from start to finish. Another golden age.

What we have no is the age of numbered excrement.

Evildave, on 15 April 2012 - 10:55 PM, said:

Yes yes, we have all heard your rants before - developers going broke and such. Not that Modern Warfare 3, BattleField 3, and Skyrim didn't make every drop of their money back, and earn a tidy profit on launch day or anything...

Used games are killing the industry - so sayeth... uh... oh yeah, those wonderful over-the-top my-way-or-your-wrong people like evildave.

Games generally already have to scale back detail because of lacking power

waldojim, on 16 April 2012 - 12:22 AM, said:

Used games sales may not be killing the industry, but it certanly isn't helping it either. There is a lot of lost profit on the secound hand market and most of the time not a single cent is seen by the developers when a used copy is purchased. Especialy with stores such as gamestop who vigrusly push used-games. Everytime I purchase a new game they always ask if I liked to buy that game used, which most people do because its a bit cheaper and the quality of the product is about the same.

Generally, if the game is available new, I buy it new. Used games are great for one reason: resale of OLD games. Tell me, how many copies of Final Fantasy 7 can you find brand new? Even if there were no used game market, do you honestly think it will be on the shelf today?

waldojim, on 16 April 2012 - 08:07 AM, said:

Thats you though. Most people buy used games whenever its offered, doesn't matter if the game is 10 years old or 10 days old. I'm not saying that we should get rid of the second hand market (that would be absurd). What I'm trying to say is that the second hand market does hurt developers and publishers more than you might think.

Yup. People buy the trade-in, to save less than a dollar on a game that's been out for a week, giving 100% of the 'trade in' profit to the company handling the trade-in. Again and again, as the same game is traded in and resold multiple times.

So, the game company gets something like Log2(n) of the profits, while the game makes OTHER people lots of money, reselling it over and over again.

That's stupid, and NO game developer wants to do business with that to be the model. Only sleazy, cheap little morons who hate games do.

Just cut everyone who needs that profit to make more games out of the loop. A perfect formula for destroying the very games you love, and guaranteeing very little besides 'Warmed Over Crap [BIGNUM]', developed by a different 'team' by a different developer, forever.

Why do different developers release the sequels? Because the people who made the ORIGINAL are out of business and gotten different jobs. Then some publisher like EA buys the 'intellectual property' from some holding company and makes their crappy sequel based on it.

Even GameStop is switching over to the 'app store' model. They see where the writing is on the wall. Do you think they'll let you 'trade in' your game, once you've downloaded them? Not even a tiny chance of that.

Evildave, on 16 April 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

Since internet penetration worldwide is still only ~ 35% (~ 2.5x that in the U.S.A.),and of that an appreciable amount still isn't what most would consider high speed, a hybrid model is still needed. Those will internet speeds that won't take all day to download a 50GB game are good with their internet connection and get the cheapest price for the game. Those with less than enviable speeds can go to a "Gamestop/Walmart Internet Kiosk" and get the game loaded on a proprietary game drive at a bit higher price and then save it on your 1TB backup drive, or just by the highspeed game cartridge at full price.

What a pile of crap, Sony known for being arrogant and have a lot to make up to the gaming community??! I totally disagree with this rubbish. Sony reps and Sony in general have always treated me with respect as a customer and always delivered excellent service. And when the network outage happened, somehow I didn't think it was arrogant for the Sony board to humbly bow in apology to its consumers and offer the free content and added security measures. With Microsoft's history it astounds me that so many dub Sony the big greedy evil corporation?? Its just crazy

ReubenBrannon, on 19 April 2012 - 02:37 PM, said:

ROFL! You mean the same company that managed to lose a $1600 laptop? The same one that sent it off to a San Diego repair center for a fan problem, just to decide a motherboard needed replaced ("it is sending a bad signal to the fan, that is why the fan died") and then CLOSED that repair center without forwarding the machine off to an OPEN center? THAT COMPANY? The same company that sold PS3's with varying levels of PS2 capabilities only to eventually remove them? The same company that also removed Linux support with it was no longer a convenient selling point? The same company that watched their network being attacked for TWO DAYS while thieves stole customer information and ultimately crippled the network?

I think they have more to make up for that you realize.