Sony Computer Entertainment America CEO Jack Tretton says there's no chance the company will release a PS3 successor any time in the near future.
In fact, the executive believes we are only "in the first 25% to 30% of this generation", and he's pretty happy about where Sony's positioned right now.
"I would say we're sitting in the catbird seat," Tretton told Fast Company. "We've just passed the third year of the PlayStation 3 and we're just hitting our stride. And I don't think anyone is saying, 'This is a five-year cycle; what's new on the horizon?' I can't even imagine what can be done technically beyond the PlayStation 3 in the near future.
"A question I often get is when we are going to see PlayStation 4. When somebody can craft the technology that exceeds what we're able to do on the PS3, but we are still just starting to harness it."
Tretton also mentioned that pre-orders for Heavy Rain had been "off the charts", and said that he expects God of War III to "blot out the sun".
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
home consoles are higher-end than ever, no need to upgrade so fast. the benefits wouldn't show a big enough leap and wouldn't be worth investing in as a company, or buying as a consumer.
plus with HD, the graphics this gen impress far more than last gen. and with BR plus the ps3's complicated nature, we will see a nice and suitable graphic boost to see us for a good few years yet.
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
Actually even the GPU in the 360 is more powerful in itself than the RSX in the PS3. Both 360 and PS3 GPUs are equivalent to PC DirectX 9 parts. PCs now have DirectX 11 parts so are a good way more advanced. Only a few quite graphically simple games on consoles actually run at 1920 x 1080 and yet PCs can run complex titles at 2560 x 1600. Just saying.
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
Actually even the GPU in the 360 is more powerful in itself than the RSX in the PS3. Both 360 and PS3 GPUs are equivalent to PC DirectX 9 parts. PCs now have DirectX 11 parts so are a good way more advanced. Only a few quite graphically simple games on consoles actually run at 1920 x 1080 and yet PCs can run complex titles at 2560 x 1600. Just saying.
developers dont take advantage of high end systems. considering the money they cost, its a waste of time for anyone other than a buff.
games are made for consoles these days. the increased rez etc is something we dont care about to be honest. the games still look fantastic on consoles.
the gap between ps2 and the top pc's of the day isnt half as big as the one that exists between ps3 and todays pc's.
we can live without the nuances. once it becomes more than that, then people will start to get interested in a ps4.
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
Yes, the PS3 will last at least 10 years, but that does not mean that it would be 10 years before the PS4 is released - after all, the PS1 lasted 10 years, but after 5 the PS2 was out, likewise, the PS3 came out after the PS2 was 5 years old but the PS2 continued to sell (and still does) so will no doubt see at least a 10yr lifespan as well.
However to think that the PS3 will be out for 10 years without it's successor showing up first seems little unlikely. 2012 seems to a date that has been mentioned a few times (by Epic amoung others) as the estimated time that the next gen of consoles will start surfacing.
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
Actually even the GPU in the 360 is more powerful in itself than the RSX in the PS3. Both 360 and PS3 GPUs are equivalent to PC DirectX 9 parts. PCs now have DirectX 11 parts so are a good way more advanced. Only a few quite graphically simple games on consoles actually run at 1920 x 1080 and yet PCs can run complex titles at 2560 x 1600. Just saying.
developers dont take advantage of high end systems. considering the money they cost, its a waste of time for anyone other than a buff.
games are made for consoles these days. the increased rez etc is something we dont care about to be honest. the games still look fantastic on consoles.
the gap between ps2 and the top pc's of the day isnt half as big as the one that exists between ps3 and todays pc's.
we can live without the nuances. once it becomes more than that, then people will start to get interested in a ps4.
Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony will not start talking next gen until closer to their release as any talk starts people considering whether to purchse a console now or to wait for the next one.
Personally I see Microsoft as being the one that will break ranks and announce new hardware first. Nintendo can live off the Wii sales for years before considering a new machine. Sony's PS3 has enough under the bonnet to not start showing it's age yet, but Sony stating the PS3 has a 10 year life span to me doesn't mean they think it will be the best console for 10 years, but that years 7 to 10 will probably include the PS3 living alongside the PS4 (as the PS2 has done with the PS3).
Microsoft on the other hand are going to start feeling the pinch. There hope that downloadable games would take of this generation isn't going to happen, and in terms of what a DVD can hold and therefore the expansiveness of the games released on their console DVD is starting to show it's age. Although I'm sure a lot of the extra space used on Blu-Ray is through duplication of code to reduce access times and some developers needing to tell stories with 26 hrs of FMV (I'm looking at you Final Fantasy 13) it does give developers that option.
Microsoft have also been saying they will treat the launch of Natal as a new console launch in terms of advertising spend but to me this just sounds like a way of trying to reinvigorate the brand and capture more of the casual (i.e. buy the console, get a game and bring it out at parties) market, it won't. That demographic will get the Wii, simple as that.
And if Natal fails to capture a significant portion of new users that leaves the only other option of a new console (you can't add Blu-Ray to the 360 as you immediately give the developer a problem of what to develop for).
And then theres the simple fact Microsoft are still positioning themselves in the games market and will once again want to get in first with the next generation of console.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
I'm glad both microsoft and Sony have been mentioning there's not much chance of new machines anytime soon. Both the consoles are still supplying good games, there's no need for anything new yet.
However, there is no way the 360 can last another 7 years which is what sony are saying they want to get out of the ps3. But the ps3 has similar issues, virtually all games run at the low res of 1280x720p, they almost all run at 30fps as well(hardly cutting edge). Compared to my pc now, both my consoles are looking a tad dated technically. I would never play a pc game as low as 720p.
In a few years time, 360 and ps3 games are going to look very dated imo. They're not powerful enough to run the majority of games at 1080p.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
To illustrate your point, apparently 32 of the 39gb of the PS3 version of FFXIII is cutscenes.
I'd agree that we don't need a PS4 in the immediate future, but I seriously doubt that Sony aren't already working on it. At the very least they will be in the early R&D phase.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
More space to store game data or storytelling FMV is not something a developer would frown on though is it?
Personally I have no problems with multiple DVD's (Forza 3 was fine after loading to the hard disk, and Mass Effect is one of the only games I have where my son and I can both play on seperate machines at the same time. Installed it on one 360, got far in enough into the story to get to disc 2 and then he used disc 1 no problems )
y r they even saying it. noone was talking about PS4...
but yeah, i think PS3 have longer legs than PS2 even. i demand it, i payed so much 4 it. and i wont buy a new console 4 a while. come to think of it, this might b my last console.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
To illustrate your point, apparently 32 of the 39gb of the PS3 version of FFXIII is cutscenes.
Without that 32gb I can see the story side of FFXIII being a tad on the light side? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying developers put the extra space to good use but, when they have a vision of what they want to do they will begin leaning more towards the system with less restrictions.
I'm not bothered myself as I just buy the games that interest me, no matter what console they appear on.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
To illustrate your point, apparently 32 of the 39gb of the PS3 version of FFXIII is cutscenes.
Without that 32gb I can see the story side of FFXIII being a tad on the light side? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying developers put the extra space to good use but, when they have a vision of what they want to do they will begin leaning more towards the system with less restrictions.
I'm not bothered myself as I just buy the games that interest me, no matter what console they appear on.
My comment wasn't an attempt to say the extra space is pointless, merely that it seems to be mostly spent on uncompressed video and such at the moment. It's certainly useful to have the option of more space, but I don't think it's a huge advantage as of yet. I do own a PS3 and a 360, and really don't think there's much between them.
Also, I was just rather amazed to see how much of the disc was cutscenes!
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
bollocks.
a few games have been scaled back (both graphically and length-wise) on 360 and sometimes as a consequence, all platforms have suffered.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
To illustrate your point, apparently 32 of the 39gb of the PS3 version of FFXIII is cutscenes.
Without that 32gb I can see the story side of FFXIII being a tad on the light side? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying developers put the extra space to good use but, when they have a vision of what they want to do they will begin leaning more towards the system with less restrictions.
I'm not bothered myself as I just buy the games that interest me, no matter what console they appear on.
My comment wasn't an attempt to say the extra space is pointless, merely that it seems to be mostly spent on uncompressed video and such at the moment. It's certainly useful to have the option of more space, but I don't think it's a huge advantage as of yet. I do own a PS3 and a 360, and really don't think there's much between them.
Also, I was just rather amazed to see how much of the disc was cutscenes!
I know what your saying. I still stand by my attempted analysis of who would come up with the next console though. Microsoft are still keen as mustard to grab as much of the games market as possible.
From my own point of view as a more dedicated gamer I'm more concerned that the Wii's success this generation is going to affect Microsoft and Sony's next consoles architecture so that it leans more towards a more Wii like experience, which is great if you like that sort of thing but I don't want 3 versions of the Wii next time round. I've quite enjoyed the difference in the 3 consoles this generation.
I should think so too. There'll probably be another 2 re-designs of the PS3, before the PS4 comes out. Not really sure where else they could go with the redesigns though.
I still stand by my attempted analysis of who would come up with the next console though.
I agree with your assessment. In fact I've seen a couple of your posts and thought "This guy makes a lot of sense!"
When you've been gaming as long as I have you see the same arguments spewed out each generation in each consoles defence and declarations of who wins as though a new world orders about to begin. It's all garbage, if you enjoy games you'll want to see the best games each console can achieve. Which console you play them on matters not a jot.
Personally I can't wait for the next generation of consoles, it's an exciting time when you start looking forward to new kit. But financially times are hard in the world at the moment and this console generation will be extended not by the companies personal choice but the global mess were in (I reckon Microsoft would have included Natal with their next console out of the box but decided a new console was too expensive to launch at this time and wouldn't get a quick enough return. They probably stripped it out to extend this generation for another year or two).
We don't need a pS4 quite happy with the PS3 its a mile ahead of the Xbox 360 and will be ahead of the next xbox 720 1150 960 whatever they do!
And here's one of the new world order kids
20 years down the line your going to be so bored with this perennial argument, seriously. And where the hell do you get an 1150 from? It's not even a multiple of 360.
Some of the best Xbox and PS2 games came out just before the PS3/360 were launched and probably cut the developers cycle short for those machines.
I Imagine that most developers dont want new hardware just yet either, as they would need to build new engines for games.
Pc gaming will always be ahead of consoles, but the gap seems much less than before. Consoles have cutting edge tech when they come out, but that was 3 or 4 years ago now and of course the PC market changes constantly.
I think that the next PS will be in 4 years time and Xbox just before. Plus Consoles have been more expensive this time and I dont think that people are in a hurry to buy another one just yet.
"I should think so too. There'll probably be another 2 re-designs of the PS3, before the PS4 comes out. Not really sure where else they could go with the redesigns though." PS3 built into a 40 inch OLED tele like a PSP Go with no discs and extra memory stored on Sonys cloud, games delivered via PSN store or a USB storage key that is uploaded to in a store or vending machine in a supermarket.
While I do think a better media format would work well for the 360 there is no reason at all why devs can not use more than one DVD rather than "cut back" on games.
It is all a ploy to get you to buy there DLC. Anyone can see that and I for one don't buy it at all.
As for the PS4 or Xbox 720 I don't see the point in these just yet. They can not do that much I would think that the 360 and PS3 can't do so it would be a waste of time and money.
I think that the next PS will be in 4 years time and Xbox just before.
Potentially. However, as soon as the 360 starts stagnating in terms of sales, which unless Microsoft bring out a slim version or some redesign, they will, and it will happen before the PS3 (which has a longer sales curve than the 360) then Microsoft will announce the next gen. That in turn will start Sony rumblings and so the cycle will begin again.
"I should think so too. There'll probably be another 2 re-designs of the PS3, before the PS4 comes out. Not really sure where else they could go with the redesigns though." PS3 built into a 40 inch OLED tele like a PSP Go with no discs and extra memory stored on Sonys cloud, games delivered via PSN store or a USB storage key that is uploaded to in a store or vending machine in a supermarket.
I doubt OLED has got enough of a future in TV's for it ever to get up to a 40", Sony have all but pulled out of selling the small ones in Japan due to poor sales and once one major pulls out more will follow.
No idea, I guess we'll know when the embargo is lifted and the analysis blogs/sites get on it.
I think it's save to say it's going to be quite a bit saying it's coming on multiple DVD's.
Oh of course, if the majority of the data for the PS3 version is cutscenes, it's reasonable to assume it will be much the same on the 360 version.
Just to make myself clear, my comment was not an attack on any particular system. I was merely pointing out that the space advantage of BD seems to have mostly resulted in the addition of uncompressed video/audio so far. I wasn't even passing judgment on that - I didn't say that was a positive or a negative. In fact, in a later post, I said that it is a good option for the developer to have. I just don't think it's been any kind of revolution thus far.
I've got no desire for a new PS3 (or Xbox!) any time soon. Both consoles are still impressing on a regular basis - if it ain't broke, don't fix it...and all that.
@ gogo re 'looking forward to it. Waiting for the sony bashers to show up '
Seriously...just don't bother posting if that's all you can muster. It's not funny. It's not interesting. It's just irritating.
Absolutely. I've been gaming since '89/'90, and I've had machines made by Atari, Sega, Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft...
It's about the games, not the hardware.
Its like Speccy 48K vs the C64, both had great games, sound was far superior on the C64 though, but I still loved the games on the Spectrum.
Ive been playing games since 81 and agree completely with you. Id own all 3 consoles if I had more time. All have good games. Im a bit worried about the mainstream push at Wii sports type games though. Im not a big fan of motion and jumping around my lounge.
I played tiger woods on the Wii at my neighbours, I could only play it for an hour before my arms were killing me.
I am a graphics whore, ill admit to it, but games like Mario Galaxy are cool too.
BTW Paul, you have to leave, your talking far too much sense for this kind of thread!
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
Now I may be talking out of my ass here but if everything is uncompressed then that means less strain on the hardware to decode it and thus more power to work with right? The PS3 does have the better looking games between it and 360 but how much blu is a part of that I have no idea. Its not as groundbreaking as it should be though due to other limitations of the console.
BTW Paul, you have to leave, your talking far too much sense for this kind of thread!
Unlike HITMANBAZZA who just can't let it go. The wars over son, nobodies gonna win, it's a tie. With the numbers of owners of each console it's just varying degrees of success.
As for '81, well I'd been playing Pong for a few years by then. Man the graphics were amazing, it was like playing tennis in real life
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
ATI's HD 5800 GPU family and Nvidia's upcoming Fermi family send their greetings.
why would anybody be talking about the next playstation? the ps3 has only been out 5 minutes and sony said at the time they expected it to last 10 years and lets face it, graphic chips at the moment are not up to much more than the ps3 can currently do.
Actually even the GPU in the 360 is more powerful in itself than the RSX in the PS3. Both 360 and PS3 GPUs are equivalent to PC DirectX 9 parts. PCs now have DirectX 11 parts so are a good way more advanced. Only a few quite graphically simple games on consoles actually run at 1920 x 1080 and yet PCs can run complex titles at 2560 x 1600. Just saying.
This. And at even higher resolutions with the latest DX11 GPUs.
BTW Paul, you have to leave, your talking far too much sense for this kind of thread!
Unlike HITMANBAZZA who just can't let it go. The wars over son, nobodies gonna win, it's a tie. With the numbers of owners of each console it's just varying degrees of success.
As for '81, well I'd been playing Pong for a few years by then. Man the graphics were amazing, it was like playing tennis in real life
Hahaha, I was playing Space invaders and Combat on my lovely wood veneer finished Atari 2600!
Im not 100% certain if it was 80 or 81, but the best part of 30 years. We upgraded to a spectrum 16K from the Atari, with some strange maze game that I cant remember the name and Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Its funny how your accepting its a tie when a year or two ago you and all your xflop friends thought cheapy xbox had p**sed it! How wrong you the PS3 is gathering momentum and will pass you and that is a fact!
Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Yeah, spending hours or so typing lines of code in, try to run it only for nothing to happen, then finding out in the next issue they'd missed out lines of code or printed the wrong character, aaarrrghhh. Happy days
actually hitman bazza before you speak get your facts right the ps3 is losing momentum as the 360 is catching up weekly by how much the ps3 outsells it by i think it was 30000 units this week, and its outselling it in america
Its funny how your accepting its a tie when a year or two ago you and all your xflop friends thought cheapy xbox had p**sed it! How wrong you the PS3 is gathering momentum and will pass you and that is a fact!
I particularly enjoy your tendency to portray as-of-yet-unproven claims as "fact". Perhaps you could ask Pachter if he has a job opening?
Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Yeah, spending hours or so typing lines of code in, try to run it only for nothing to happen, then finding out in the next issue they'd missed out lines of code or printed the wrong character, aaarrrghhh. Happy days
or Syntax error in line 560, because you put; instead of :. Not annoying at all.
Do you remember this, it was classic
In March 1984, Singleton’s spy-themed board game, Treachery, which had its complicated game logic controlled by a computer program, was featured in C&VG, with a type-in listing for the Spectrum, together with a keyboard overlay (a common feature of Mike’s games), centre-spread board and a set of counters. The game was so popular among the readers that the editor asked for conversions for the Commodore 64 and BBC Micro to be produced, and each of them featured in C&VG’s 1985 yearbook.
Its funny how your accepting its a tie when a year or two ago you and all your xflop friends thought cheapy xbox had p**sed it!
I know I shouldn't get involved but please point me to the offending post I made stating that the PS3 was dead long live the 360.
Go on, I dare you.
The 360 won't fail, too many owners. The PS3 won't win, they don't hand out a trophy at the end of a console cycle.
The companies all go "great, made some cash lets sell them another console and make some more money".
As I said, grew out of this pointless argument about four console generations ago when I decided to just start playing and enjoying the games irrespective of what console they were on.
Obviously I wasn't too enamoured with the Wii when it came out (too much of a traditionalist in controller terms) which you'll find in one of my earlier posts, but that's cos it's not to my taste on the whole but I still enjoy the classics, Zelda, Mario et al. And as long as it doesn't change the nature of the games industry too much then it doesn't affect me.
And if it doesn't affect me why would I care if it 'wins', loses or comes in joint first, last or somewhere inbetween.
We don't need it. To be honest, most of us dont want it yet.
The future of this generation still has the new motion controls, which may actually provide some feasible benefits to hardcore gamers, unlikely, but possible. Also, 3D gaming may be a step we hadn't really thought about, but could be really good overall.
I think that by bringing out a console that basically has a bit more processing power, wont make the games any better. So they run at higher resolutions and have slightly shinier graphics...but devs would still push the systems to their limits so we'd be stuck at 30FPS forever if they had their way.
I think the next generation will be announced in 2012 and by 2014 we will be seeing new consoles, from everyone. I also believe that it will be quite unexpected what we see. I don't quite know how yet, but we'll see.
Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Yeah, spending hours or so typing lines of code in, try to run it only for nothing to happen, then finding out in the next issue they'd missed out lines of code or printed the wrong character, aaarrrghhh. Happy days
Im debating in my mind, if this helps me to enjoy games more now than in the past. Imagine that some have been gaming less than ten years and no nothing other than consoles.
They probably have never played a side scrolling beat them up or an adventure game like the Hobbit or a platformer like Manic Miner.
Granted, you go back and play them now, they are not much to look at, but are gamers today lucky because of all the amazing looking games, or do they not get the same enjoyment as they havent seen the gradual progression over time?
I remember spending hours playing games like winter games on the C64 with my mates and then compare it to a game like Vancouver 2010 and there is no comparison. strange right?
I think the next generation will be announced in 2012 and by 2014 we will be seeing new consoles, from everyone. I also believe that it will be quite unexpected what we see. I don't quite know how yet, but we'll see.
You know what may get Microsoft and Sony panicking early is if Nintendo (which am I correct in saying has seen a reduction of it's Wii sales, still massives sales but starting to fall) may decide to release their next console first. You can guarantee Sony and Microsoft won't want Ninty getting a head start with an update to such a successful console.
Anyway, happy with what the consoles I've got and equally looking forward to whatever comes next.
Obviously. The moment either MS or Sony release a new console is the moment they bankrupt themselves. One of the two would see the other's mistake and rush forward with a swarm of exclusive games. Then the console war would, finally, be won. Don't fix what isn't broken. (See PSPGo)
Unless they make this generation of consoles life cycle an unusually long one, it's going to come at a funny time for huge sequels such as GTA, will we see 2, or 3 this gen? Or perhaps more?
Still, I can't help but feel that once one company announces they're moving on, the other 2 will quickly follow suit. If they don't, they're never going to make a whole lot of money in the next few years, regardless of if this gen was successful or not for them, especially for the PS3 and the 360.
IT'd be nice if they got the PS3 a decent catalogue of games first!
Really!? I'm not even gonna start.... you just need to leave.
Come on (grabs by the arms and pulls away from nutter) he's not worth it. They just don't get it, either that or their like everyone else who spouts this sort of garbage, they just like winding you up and laughing at your reaction.
The PS4 isn't needed until Games start to need the hardware. Let's not forget that the best graphics you can have now are on Crysis, and that was released in 2007. Crysis 2 is being developed for consoles, even without the high high graphics and AA it will still handle. The PS3 has undying potential that is only beginning to be accessed. Most people are now realising that the 360 is the cheaper option, instead of the "Get this, because the PS3 "Has no games" The thing is though, the PS3 HAS games. People only think that it hasn't because it doesn't have any of the overrated trash that people were obsessed with at the start, like Halo. Halo has lasted ages but won't last much longer - It's not a PC game and Bungie no longer have a contract with Microsoft. HOPEFULLY they'll start making some brilliant games that aren't just made to make more money off of existing brands by repackaging games *Pokes COD* PS3 has had 3 MASSIVE releases in a row: MAG, Heavy Rain, and GOW3, all of which have been in production for ages and have utilised the PS3 to it's peak - Instead of sequels to launch games that didn't use their hardware as best as it could have been done and were only sold because of hype for the console.
If I'm not mistaken the PS3 has 8 3.2 Ghz processors. I'm pretty sure no game has fully taken advantage of that. Or even come close.
If Nintendo and Microsoft need to release new systems in the next couple of years(and Nintendo probably really needs to), and Sony still has their $299 (or cheaper) PS3, Sony could be sitting pretty.
The whole DVD vs Blu ray thing is a complete red herring. Think about it logically for a second. GOW3 is 44gb right. But how musch of that is actual game and how much is audio and text swaps. its in 9 languages. thats gonna take up a hefty chunk of disc space and at the end of the day the game will still only be 10-15 hours long.
While as something like dragon age is on one DVD and would probably take you 20-30 to do it properly. thats before added dlc.
How big a disc is has bugger all to do with the length or quality of a game. The only major impact that DVD's lack of space could have is on very graphic intensive games and games with a lot of fmv.
bollocks.
a few games have been scaled back (both graphically and length-wise) on 360 and sometimes as a consequence, all platforms have suffered.
The Xbox 360 is now in such a strong position I doubt PS3 will exceed it unless something major happens on the format.
If Sony is to succeed in positioning themselves on top of the market again then they need to do a few things.
A further price drop and relaunch PSN and call PSN something different. This would also include gamer tags and stats, putting a headset out of the box. Place this along side Arc as a complete package, (they must not sell Arc as an add-on but make adapt it into the platform as the main control). They also need to continue with strong exclusive games (these are mightily important for the success of the console) and I feel they offer best at the moment.
They need to do most of these things in one period and not over time to attract more consumers with a new brand design but I think MS have Xbox 360 users solidified into Live and that's were their main strength is in the market.
If Sony can't challenge Live in such a way then it may never be able to reclaim the market.
PS3 is still running up to its prime position. Its just started outselling the 360 (yes, it really has, don't argue) and it's getting great games every year. I'd say Ps4 isn't needed for about 10 more years, if that.
Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Yeah, spending hours or so typing lines of code in, try to run it only for nothing to happen, then finding out in the next issue they'd missed out lines of code or printed the wrong character, aaarrrghhh. Happy days
I remember them doing that in "Sinclair User" as well and they'd still have errors even when they'd actually just cut out the LIST print and stuck it onto the page for the magazine print... man that magazine was pants.
Also Spectrum related one of my kids college tutors is Pete Cooke who wrote Tau Ceti for CRL Limited.
PS3 is still running up to its prime position. Its just started outselling the 360 (yes, it really has, don't argue) and it's getting great games every year. I'd say Ps4 isn't needed for about 10 more years, if that.
Worldwide the margin is so small though it'll take another 4 or 5 years to catch up at the current rate, and lets not forget that over the Xmas period in the US the 360 outsold the PS3, so it's going to struggle to maintain it's current position.
Buying CVG to input code for games, those were the days.
Yeah, spending hours or so typing lines of code in, try to run it only for nothing to happen, then finding out in the next issue they'd missed out lines of code or printed the wrong character, aaarrrghhh. Happy days
I remember them doing that in "Sinclair User" as well and they'd still have errors even when they'd actually just cut out the LIST print and stuck it onto the page for the magazine print... man that magazine was pants.
Also Spectrum related one of my kids college tutors is Pete Cooke who wrote Tau Ceti for CRL Limited.
tau ceti I think I'm beginning to forget more games than I remember from 'the old days'.
Except for Elite which will always have a special place in my heart. Still got my t-shirt from when I finished it. Seems a bit more snug these days, only joking it's too precious to wear. Best Game Ever. Right on Commander!
Except for Elite which will always have a special place in my heart. Still got my t-shirt from when I finished it. Seems a bit more snug these days, only joking it's too precious to wear. Best Game Ever. Right on Commander!
Except for Elite which will always have a special place in my heart. Still got my t-shirt from when I finished it. Seems a bit more snug these days, only joking it's too precious to wear. Best Game Ever. Right on Commander!
You got the T-Shirt? Sonuva....
oh yes, one of the happiest gaming moments when I finally got to Elite. The game was just so different from anything before, even down to the packaging (BBC version) with the story book and ship guide. Rose tinted glasses I'm sure but it was so far ahead of anything at the time
Worldwide the margin is so small though it'll take another 4 or 5 years to catch up at the current rate, and lets not forget that over the Xmas period in the US the 360 outsold the PS3, so it's going to struggle to maintain it's current position.
Really?! Lets see.... In Europe the 360 has sold only 209,000 consoles more than ps3 total. and thats since its release (not Xmas break). Now lets talk worldwide, the 360 is currently ahead of PS3 by 5,750,000 consoles. Worldwide from August 2009 until today the PS3 has covered a 2.8-2.9 million unit gap. Now since it probably wont remain constant since it was over Xmas break. But if the trend stays the same then you can count on the PS3 taking the lead in 2 years max.
Here are the charts where i got my info.. http://news.vgchartz.com/news.php?id=7190
surely if you got your sources from vg chartz you would notice that the 360 sales improve every week and the ps3 only outsells it by 20000-30000 units a week now thats 1.4 million more a year if they keep that up so thats 4 years to overtake roughly. on a brighter note aliens vs predator went worldwide number 1 on 360 out selling the ps3 version by 100000 copies, the consoles sure are selling well but a major problem is software but i do hope heavy rain gets number one lol might get this next week
lol ya i notciced the 360 sales increase each week, but thats only in america. I was talking worldwide sales. And when I said 'If the trend continues' I meant if PS3 can cover the same 3 million unit gap in the fall/winter months every year (very unlikely, but not impossible) then they'll catch 360 in 2 years. But these were just hypothetical assumptions, seeing as how no one can really predict the future. And its definitely against the odds to think that PS3 will have the same massive sales boost as last year. One can still hope though lol.
now i see where your coming from, ye thats possible, but this year it will be diffrent with another halo and natal which could be a hit or miss, i cant see sony doing that again, least you are not deluded like hitman bazza lol who thinks the 360 is dieing console
lol dying ya its quite the opposite. at least in the US. Well yes Halo Reach will sell a ton of consoles, but there are quite a few PS3 exclusives that are working their magic, especially in europe. Natal so far is a sound 'idea' but alot of people have been complaing of lag, so unless they fix the bugs, it probably wont be a huge system seller.
And who knows what E3 will bring. There have been alot of rumors about extremely popular franchises making a return for PS3, but haven't heard much on 360. I dont think I've ever been this excited to see E3 lol. Maybe because of all the hype, and hopefully they both bring amazing titles. I don't want 360 to go down without a fight, it wont be as satisfying lol.
i wudnt say the 360 is dieing in europe, in britain, germany and france 360 reigns supreme, with games always outselling the ps3 versions. yes e3 shud be good, if rumours go by that ssx will not be a ps3 exclusive cause ea have brains and know to maximise sales is to go multiplatform, gears of war 3, and ubisofts i am alive is now a 360 exclusive after switching to splinter cells engine and a employee of ubi only mentioning the 360 version, there will annoucne that final fantasy versus is multiplatform too, plus the major changes happening on xbox live which was hinted on todays episode of sentuamessage
SSX and FFXIII Versus I knew would end up as multi-platform. But I Am Alive as an exclusive, thats pretty disappointing. I was quite interested in that. Can't wait to see what Agent is all about tho.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
and agree completely with you. Id own all 3 consoles if I had more time. All have good games. Im a bit worried about the mainstream push at Wii sports type games though. Im not a big fan of motion and jumping around my lounge. 
