Could it be that the console life cycle time (which should be around 4-5-6 years max up to now) is shirinking? Could it be that Microsoft is aiming to that? Will the console of the future be something like a PC ? Beware, i said "something like a" not "a" PC. What do you think?
Who knows? Back in the 16-bit era, we were thinking video games had reached their limits, when they evolved even more. There are many surprises yet to come in the industry...
Well I was wondering how this new life cycle effects the final products that we get. For example if the nes had a product cycle as short as system today, how would that have effected the programming knowledge and tricks needed to make castlevania 3? Its seems like today we will never see the full potential of the currents systems power. This brings dreamcast and gamecube to mind. On a side note is it possibile to keep old systems going as "budget lines"? Is there anough room in the market to support something like this? Before I begin (I know its a totally different industry) but cameras and PCs seem to have hundereds of models come out a year. Can the console idustry do the same?
Uhm...i think that was a "special case", since it was the gateway to the 3-D era...so i wouldnt count that one, if you agree.
4-5 years for a console is plenty enough for me. Personally, I think the 360 is coming along just at the right time as waiting too long isn't the best move either.
Well, instead of guessing if console life spans are shrinking or not, lets take a look at the release dates for various systems. Then, you can decide for yourself what 'bit' they are and when they 'died': 1983 = Famicom 1986 = SMS, Atari 7800 1989 = Genesis, Turbografx 16 1990 = Super Famicom, Neo Geo 1993 = Jaguar 1994 = 3DO 1995 = Saturn, PSX, Virtual Boy 1996 = N64 1999 = Dreamcast 2000 = Playstation 2 2001 = Gamecube, XBox 2005 = XBox360
i think you'd be better comparing a console machine with it's predecessor, or successor, rather than with everyone else. Famicom= 83 +7 Super Famicom= 90 +6 N64=96 +5 GameCube=01 +5 Revolution= 06? ---------------------------- Playstation= 95 +5 Playstation 2=00 +6 Playstation 3=06? --------------------------- xbox=01 +5 xbox360=05 -------------------------- SMS=86 +3 Genesis=89 +5 Saturn=95 +4 Dreamcast=99 -------------------------- But we also need to consider that more the system is advanced technologically, more it takes time to fully utilise its power.
That's a really good point. If you look at well made games now compared to decent launch titles for xbox and ps2 they improve even though it's on the same hardware. I don't really think console life is shrinking. I just think they are hyping the upcoming systems so early that it seems like they are 'rushed' out.
Which, on the other side, means that they "push" the gamers on the new...which, obviously, makes them change console. Which startes a the end of a console lifetime. Am i wrong?
The Neo Geo (both as a home console and arcade format) lasted a whopping 13 years. 1990 - 2003 Just in case people wonder.
I said they hyped upcoming consoles. We've been hearing a ton of hype about the 360 for at least a year now. But people couldn't go out and change consoles and end the xbox yet since the 360 isn't even out. I am just saying, the "next gen" is on everyones mind so far in advance that it does take somewhat away from the "current gen" but they can't change over to something that's not available. If console lifespan is shorting so dramatically, where has it happened? Looking at cahaz and fabrizo's posts, and you said yourself is should be 4 - 5 - 6 years. I just don't see where is has been noticably shorter than that. I also feel like it's getting shorter, but if you look at the system release dates, it's not the case. Maybe time just seems to pass quicker in our "old" gamer ages??? :shrug:
Yeah, that's the key thing. We perceive time as passing much quicker as we get older. Days, weeks and years fly by. Not just for gamers, but everyone. The Mayans thought this was a real thing and qorked it into their cosmology and maybe to a lesser extent it's a part of every culture's understanding of the world. My own theory is that this phenomenon has to do with attention and learning. When we're young we pay attention to everything and so time is constantly "stopping" as we pause to notice something, undertsand it, learn from it and file it in our heads. As we get older, we stop noticing things, *REALLY* noticing them; most of the events around us go completely unnoticed and most of those that we do pay attention to are not fully perceived because we're so constantly looking to what comes next and besides in most cases we already have a similar event in our head that we think we can match this new event to and not have to worry about really considering it. So, yes, there's no doubt that console cycles will seem to be shorter and shorter as we pass form childhood to adulthood. As for whether the cycles really factually are getting shorter, the factual speed at which technology develops would certainly indicate that they will in the future if they're not already, but who knows. The list cahaz posted (which suffers some from mixing up US and Japanese release years) only really shows that there's not been enough cycles for us to make out any real pattern. ...word is bondage...
its true, the reason why this one is seeems short mostly, is that as welll there werent a ton of memorable games like there were back then that were considered timeless.
Personally, I think the time between the Last and Current generation of games was pretty good. Even though people bash the 360 for coming out too soon, I think it may be a good way for the developers to work on various titles a bit sooner, and get a feel for the system. Hell, compared to the current generation's launch, there is actually a few decent titles to go along with it. Getting back to point, I do think the current consoles still have a little bit of juice to last a little longer. PS2 still has MGS3: Subsitence, Shadow Hearts: ANW, and various other RPGs, while the GCN has Zelda.
I do believe something makes today's games less "revolutionary" in our minds than the games of the past were to us. Maybe because we're jaded, or maybe because some very great examples cannot be replicated, no matter the hardware - since the experience is what matters. About time-shrinking, the fact of the matter (I don't recall where I read this) is that the brain does not count time as integers (absolute) but as fractions (relative). Your brain does not perceive one second, but rather (one second) over (total of time it's been on). For example, if you're 24 years, 4 months and 9 days old (as would be my case), you perceive one second as a quantity of time similar to 1/24.45, which would be a fraction of a lesser value than it would have been had you been ten years old (perceiving 1/10) but of higher value than if you were 55 years old (1/55 units). In short terms: The brain perceives time as a relative quantity.
I think Microsoft is aiming to arrive earlier this time, not to shorten the life of the consoles in general. On the other hand, It should be more profitable to last longer, but competition is a bitch.
