So recently there have been quite a bit of rumors going around, since the announcement of WiiU at this years E3 that Microsoft and Sony are beginning they're research and development cycle for new console models, personally I'm not the one to jump into conclusions but I'm quite intrigued by this 'rumor', I think that many people including myself are still very happy with the ones that are out right now and truthfully you can still do a lot more with them (graphically). But truth be told at the speed technology is growing and with the bigger demand for 'photo realistic' games, game developers are forced to come out and upgrade their game engines so the audience wouldn't get weary of their games, it is only matter of time wouldn't you say? It's not like Microsoft or Sony gave us the option to upgrade our consoles' graphics cards to support new technology for new games like you can with a PC. So the points of this thread being, what do you think? What is your opinion on this? Is it time to upgrade or is it still too early?
it was too early for current gen, when it came out (128bit gen consoles hadn't reached their limits yet) so its way too early now as well; its all just a big cash in & I'm not playing that game anymore
i really see no reason to upgrada yet. no machine has been completely used, and too few "special" games released.
well, about graphics: I updated from my 15" TV to a self built beamer (100") last year, but I still am only playing on 1024*768, I still use my old Xbox quite often and seriously, for me games arent about graphics, sure thats a nice thing, but games are meant to be about story IMHO, so I dont care about photorealism too much. about console gens: well, I usually update like 3-4 years after the new gen came out, 1st the prices are cheaper, 2nd I just dont need everything only cause its new and got better graphics, as already said above, they should use what they got for a longer time, learn to use them till you cant get more out of them
Same here. My 360 still has the wow factor and with the machine still having more to offer I say it's not time to upgrade. Sure, some PC ports of PS3 and 360 games may look better but unless you have both standing right next to each other and you really look, you won't notice any difference. Anyway, we are now starting to see action games on current gen consoles running at 60fps. The latest Driver game does and looks very nice. just a shame it's got a stupid gimmick. Yakumo
There's plenty of life left in both the PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360. If developers and designers deviated from their undying obsession with FPS games, uber realistic 'driving' games or 3rd person adventure games then maybe certain consumer quarters ''wouldn't get weary of their games''. If I see one more ad for a game that tells me it has 'unprecedented attention to detail and realism' I swear to God I'll fucking scream Give me something that I can't experience in the real world, that's my whole reason for playing the fuckers in the first place, to drag me away from the mundanity that surrounds and consumes me each and every bastard day, not to be pissing reminded of it.
I completely agree with you on this matter. Realism took away all the fun from games such as GTA IV, this game wasn't anything that special like the other titles in Rockstar's library of games. I do hope the next GTA title will go back to it's game-play mechanic roots and escape the 'realism' stigma that surrounds GTA IV. I don't want a game to be a true gang-banger simulator, I want to drive tanks around Vice City, blasting everyone the things I wouldn't do in the real world. Oh well one can only hope, but with new audiences being generated everyday by games such as Call of Duty (although this game has nothing to do with being realistic I think it's more of an arcade type game, for a quick doze of rage from eight year olds) it's hard for developers to go back to their old fundamentals most of them are forced to develop games for 'here and now' audiences in very short periods of time that want more gore more realism more simulation type game-play. Although I'm very much looking forward to Battlefield 3.
Well it was definitely too early for the original XBox, but their sales were so bad and the system was bleeding money for them with every unit sold. PS2 on the other hand had a full life and didn't really 'die' until the very end of 2008 with its final big hit Persona4. Dreamcast was killed because Sega was way beyond bankrupt, and Gamecube tech got an extended life as a part of the Wii. As for this gen, I think your overestimating it. When the handhelds (Vita) have basically caught up to the consoles you know its time to move on.
I don't think it's time for new console just yet, partly because I can't afford to buy one... but yeah I'm happy with my with my 360 and Wii (and my Dreamcast ) From what I've been told, developers have already received some manner of PS4 prototype. Dual quad core CPUs apparently.
Why? Where is it written that a handheld must technologically be at least a generation behind a home console? Can't the two markets co-exist on an equal footing or do we now feel the need to sneer and deride anything that isn't this weeks super cutting edge flavour of the month? The only people to benefit from new hardware would be lazy programmers and multi-national retail conglomerates. It would hurt the majority of developers and designers, games publishers and the company actually releasing the new hardware but most importantly it would hurt customer confidence. Why should a PS3 owner have to upgrade after just 4 or 5 years when the original PSX was in commission for 8 years and the PS2 for 10? Start trying to create a market that isn't needed and prepare to be taken down a peg or two.
They killed the original Xbox too soon. It'd be a shame if they did it again. I mostly don't want to see the next gen of consoles simply because I don't really care for the direction gaming is going.
After watching the very impressive Battlefield 3 PC 64-player Caspian Border trailer, a console only friend asked why couldn't the 360 version be 64 players(console is 24). I had to reply that the Xbox is now 6 years old, while the PC can be as cutting edge as your wallet allows. I wouldn't mind a 2013 release for the new 360.
release dates: PS1 (December 1994) PS2 (March 2000) PS3 (Nov 2006) PS4 (??? 2012/2013) I think the numbers speak for themselves.
PS1 didn't die until 2006, and the PS2 is still going... just because a new console was released before then doesn't mean that they immediately pulled the plug on it.
Xbox was paying a fortune on the NVidia graphics chip cause of a bad contract. They had to kill it and replace it in a hurry. I don't think the 360 is badly in need of any replacement. While it would be nice for a HW upgrade, I can't say that now is the time. Certainly you could do more with more memory, better graphics chip and better cpu. As well as using Blu-ray storage. But for it to be worth it you are going to be asking people to fork out probably $400. And you'll be asking developers to increase the cost of games to meet the higher graphical standard. Also, about these 'rumors'. MS and Sony have been researching their next gen consoles for a long time. They always do.
No we don't need new consoles We need to stop this generation of PC titles being rammed down our throats on a console and paying an extra $20+ for the privilege. That being said DX11 is sounding pretty amazing.
I hear when the Dreamcast 2 comes out this Christmas it will have a proprietary system that won't allow it to play anything that was first developed for the PC. And it'll launch with Shinmue 3.
I'd say yes, it's time. In fact, I think it's overdue. The technology for better graphics is already out there, and it's been over 6 years from when the current generation really began. I think they can, should, and probably will.
