Top
1140°

Don’t Be Shocked If The PS4 Is Less Powerful Than The Next Xbox

Geek Revolt writes "There’s a good chance that a new Xbox will be unveiled next year, and a new PlayStation will follow shortly after. This is leading some people to assume that the PS4 will automatically be more powerful than the next Xbox, since it’ll be released later. This could be true, but there’s a chance it might not be. Here are a few reasons why the PS4 could be less powerful than the next Xbox."

Read Full Story >>
geekrevolt.com
The story is too old to be commented.
2591d ago Replies(2)
Kon2591d ago ShowReplies(3)
The Meerkat2591d ago ShowReplies(4)
TheKindRoost2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

this is going to get hot! the author forgot something though, with games like uncharted, killzone and gt5 set the bar pretty high for graphic dept for Sony, they will have no choice but to push for a more powerful specced console.

Sony3602591d ago

Name dropping games from the next gen doesn't really mean anything when you talk about how powerful the console will be next to its rivals.

The ps3 is falsely assumed to be the more powerfull console this generation, then Crysis 2 and Gears 3 came along and proved that to be a load.

The Xbox was more powerfull than the Ps2.

So indeed, don't be suprised if the next xbox is more powerfull. I don't see why it couldn't be, the same is true the other way round. Either console could be "more powerfull" or they might be about equal like the are now.

Either way, it'll be about a month before a top end gaming PC will be more powerfull than all the next gen consoles.

Bring on the disagrees. I know this will be flooding with fanboys.

M-A-R-S-H-A-L-L2591d ago

Sony360 : I speak for everyone when I say this.

Take a backseat and let actual gamers talk. Thanks.

"The ps3 is falsely assumed to be the more powerfull console this generation, then Crysis 2 and Gears 3 came along and proved that to be a load. "

That's opinion and not fact. Sorry to say. Also, Gears 3 isn't even out so how can you sit down and compare it with PS3 games that are already out?

You don't know what you're talking about.

amilio2591d ago

LOL u got no agree dude LOL. when something like dis comes on this site. prepare for the drones

Big_Dom2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

You weren't wrong about the disagrees. How anyone with knowledge of the respective platforms can disagree is beyond me, so I suppose most that did with your comment are just retarded fanboys who havent a clue. BTW, I was the second person to agree.

Marshow appears to be up his own hole there.

Sony3602591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

@marshow

I like how claim to be an "actual gamer" and go on to give no reasonable counter argument, or say anything to make yourself out to be an "actual gamer" for that matter.

Listen. I play games on all platforms, you're in no position to go throwing out labels on who is a 'real' gamer and who isn't, so I politely ask YOU to take a back seat, and either bring a solid counter argument or quit trying to be a smartass.

All you need to do is LOOK at Gears 3 to see it looks just as good as any console game out there, and if you don't agree you're either retarded or blinded by stupid fanboyism. I notice you didn't refute my Crysis 2 comment at all, or even mention for that matter. Why is that?

If making a retort to that one snippet from my comment is the best you're gonna do, then you really need to take your own advice and take a back seat, sonny jim.

I would go into the technical side of things, like how the Ps3's architecture is tediously designed, but like other people who claim the Ps3 is such a leap over the 360, it'll probably be nothing more than jibberish to you. So many fanboys try and talk about the internal workings of these machines without a clue as to what they're talking about, I commend you for not being dumb enough to do that.

Why is it only PC gamers are able to see that there's not much of a difference between the level of graphics on the 360 and Ps3?

If you want the power, get a gaming PC. There's no argument.

@Big_Dom

Notice that I have 19 disagrees, but only 1 of them was able to (try and) argue my point and actually replied. It's nice to be proven right so quickly.

Hicken2591d ago

First, Crysis didn't prove anything. If you think a sterile environment like that of Crysis requires nearly as much power as the landscapes of Killzone, you need a bit more education on the subject.

And, as marshow said, Gears3 isn't out yet, and what I've seen isn't quite a match (graphically, anyway), for UC3. Forza's also not out yet, so no use comparing it to GT5.

Finally, why do you feel the need to bring up computers in a debate about consoles? Yes, computers are more powerful; everybody knows that. Yes, they've got great graphics, blah, blah, blah. Keeping up with the newest tech is also a helluva lot more expensive than buying a new console once.

There is CURRENTLY NO GAME for the 360 that can boast that it's superior to a counterpart on the 360, and do so in a manner that shows the PS3 to be weaker hardware.

DualConsoleOwner2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

And they found that PS3 is SIGNIFICANTLY more powerful than xbox 360.

They said PS3 has almost three times the processing power of Xbox 360.
it is just really hard to program for.

Edit
Oh yea... and Crysis 2 on console has fps crashes. Sub HD. really bad AA. terrible pop ups. inconsitent textures and etc...
Lens of Truth did an analysis and was decided that Killzone 3 looks better than 360 version of Crysis 2.

It cant beat PS3's 3rd best looking game. PS3 has been king of console graphics ever since KZ2.
it wouldnt have been possible if PS3 wasnt more powerful.

http://www.lensoftruth.com/...

Dramscus2591d ago

You guys are all arguing about the wrong thing here.

They won't announce the ps4 in 2013 they'll anounce it in 2014 then release the year after that.

Their probably going to give the next xbox two years to itself. During which they will sell record amounts of ps3's as the ps3 will be cheap and many games will be multi platform between the ps3 wii u and xbox whatever. Except exclusives of course.

Looking back it should be obvious to thehm that pushing up their planned s-chedule of console release to closer to when the other guys release is just stupid.

Sony is supporting this with all the talk of the ps3 going on for at least ten years and such, Plus their still selling ps2's.

In addition it would really go a step forward with their old line of "The next generation starts when we say."

I mean if they just kick it for a bit in last generation they could really mess things up for their competition.

Also the ps3 is faster than the xbox 360. The Cell runs at 230.4 giga flops.
While the xbox 360 gets 96.0 giga flops. See two didgits instead of three means less speed.

The graphics chips for both consoles are pretty comparable. They both have strengths and weakness' but the one in the xbox is a bit better to be honest.
Though thats not really a surprise since sony has stated that the ps3 wasn't designed with a graphic chip in mind originally. They just put it in to make it easier for developers to develop for.

In anycase as usual I am right with no fanboy bias. Enjoy your day, stay neutral.

thewhoopimen2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

@Sony360

Why I bother to even respond to your sophmoric argument, I don't know but here goes:

If you want to argue the point that the 360 is more power than the ps3, fine, it's your perogative, but don't associate your opinions with mine.

If I were to argue that the 360 was more powerful... (which it isn't)... I wouldn't begin using a multiplatform game or a multiplatform engine as my arguing points.

When Crysis2 runs on both the 360 and Ps3, the most you can argue about the 360 is that it is on 'par'. There isn't a 'better' in this scenario. Using Gears3 as an example for the 360 contention is equally retarded. When both consoles run the Unreal3 Engine (which is btw, like 5-6 years old now?)... you can only argue parity as well.

Thus your logic is left wanting and your shell accounts 'backing you up' are just as empty.

Finally, the FACT that Xbox360 is now in Kinect/Wii lala land and strictly focusing on that suggests to me that Microsoft is looking at everything other than 'power' to argue console viability. Enjoy your hand waving and feet stomping fun.

Sony3602591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

Lovely. A plethora of baseless comments and "lens of truth" links.

You fanboys really do take the piss.

I'll respond generally, as you seem to all sing the same tune.

1. The Ps3 is not more powerful, if you're going to claim that some random article "proved it's X times more powerful", then at least provide a source. By the way, it's bullshit, and processing power isn't the only thing that goes on in a games console.

2. Crysis 2 was the basis for my argument that they are equally capable, not that one is more capable than the other. I never said one is more powerful, I said that they're about equal. They're both running on half a decade old hardware, only one has a fanbase that thinks it's some kind of alien machine with untapped power (that's most of you).

Plenty of sources have stamped Crysis 2 has one of the best looking console games out there, and it's available on both consoles and runs pretty much equally well on both. You can say "Well X exclusive was compared to it in Y article and blah blah blah". Have you looked at the games side by side?

3. Gears 3 running on a "5 year old game engine" is kind of a funny argument, being that the "5 year old game engine" has seen an enormous amount of upgrades and changes to the point that it simply can't be considered the same as it was. If you had any idea what you was talking about when it came to games engines (you don't, mentioning it doesn't mean you do) you'd know that the engine's name isn't the only factor in what goes into building a games visually.

If what you said is true, you have a game running on 5 year old technology that looks just as good as any AAA console game today. Mentioning what game engine it's running on doesn't make a difference if you can look at it and see it holds up to the best there is today (refer to earlier comment: if you can't see this, then you're blind with fanboyism or retarded).

It's kind of fruitless to use any sensible argument in a comments section filled to the brim with fanboys, but thankfully hammering me with "disagrees" doesn't prove anything more other than there's just more of you :)

Have fun with your one gaming platform kids :)

SilentNegotiator2591d ago

"The ps3 is falsely assumed to be the more powerfull console this generation, then Crysis 2 and Gears 3 came along and proved that to be a load"
-
How dare you call people delusional when you claim that some game without anti-aliasing and another that is also sub-HD are benchmarks of the consoles.

This only goes to show that you don't even have a PS3 to compare these games to go on about.

Killzone 3 displays large areas with steady framerates and great sight distance, great animations, complex geometry, spectacular anti-aliasing that has no counterpart on the 360, is HD, and supports smooth 3D all at the same time.

Who's really the delusional one here?

M-A-R-S-H-A-L-L2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

Sony360: All I hear spewing out of your mouth is words that can't be backed up in ANY way whatsoever. So again, take the backseat and shut it. Your obvious hate for the PS3 and Sony is showing. You're the one that's acting like the fanboy here.

Hicken2591d ago

"1. The Ps3 is not more powerful, if you're going to claim that some random article "proved it's X times more powerful", then at least provide a source. By the way, it's bullshit, and processing power isn't the only thing that goes on in a games console."

Oh? So you're admitting the PS3 has superior processing power? Last I checked, when one thing has more power than another, it's MORE POWERFUL.

"2. Crysis 2 was the basis for my argument that they are equally capable, not that one is more capable than the other. I never said one is more powerful, I said that they're about equal. They're both running on half a decade old hardware, only one has a fanbase that thinks it's some kind of alien machine with untapped power (that's most of you)."

That is, essentially, pointless. A game can be developed that looks equally as good on the 360 as on the N64. And, in general, developers tend to make games look and play about the same on each console; because the 360 is easier to develop for, the PS3 version of multiplatform games usually suffers from being a port. There's also laziness like the fiasco with Bayonetta.

"Plenty of sources have stamped Crysis 2 has one of the best looking console games out there, and it's available on both consoles and runs pretty much equally well on both. You can say "Well X exclusive was compared to it in Y article and blah blah blah". Have you looked at the games side by side?"

Case in point. And, as I said, the graphics of Crysis 2 are sterile environments and easy-to-code cityscapes. It's not on the level of the PS3's best looking titles, so how good "plenty of sources" say it looks means nothing in the face of that.

"3. Gears 3 running on a "5 year old game engine" is kind of a funny argument, being that the "5 year old game engine" has seen an enormous amount of upgrades and changes to the point that it simply can't be considered the same as it was. If you had any idea what you was talking about when it came to games engines (you don't, mentioning it doesn't mean you do) you'd know that the engine's name isn't the only factor in what goes into building a games visually."

No matter how many overhauls you give it and superchargers you put on it, a '69 Chevelle is not a new car. Making it perform like a 2011 ZR-1 would require that everything that makes the car what it is. It then becomes a Chevelle in name only.

"If what you said is true, you have a game running on 5 year old technology that looks just as good as any AAA console game today. Mentioning what game engine it's running on doesn't make a difference if you can look at it and see it holds up to the best there is today (refer to earlier comment: if you can't see this, then you're blind with fanboyism or retarded)."

So, while the entire time you've been saying "you have no proof" and "you're using random article A," you're doing that very same thing. And to make matters worse, you're using the fact that you're wrong in a sad attempt to prove you're right. "All you disagreeing with me just means you're fanboys."

Really?

DragonKnight2591d ago

This article is actually incredibly speculative and there is one key problem with it. That being that Kaz Hirai himself stated a LONG time ago that developers are going to be brought in to weigh in on the development of the PS4. He is determined to give them what they want, which will likely cost less than the PS3 did and have a great improvement as well since devs know what they most want to work with that will be a performance pusher, but not difficult to use.

http://www.industrygamers.c...

In an interview with Develop, SCE Worldwide Studios boss Shuhei Yoshida indicated that SCE head Kaz Hirai implemented a change in philosophy in the company when he took over for Ken Kutaragi. “When Ken Kutaragi moved on and Kaz Harai became the president of SCE, the first thing Kaz said was, ‘get World Wide Studios in on hardware development’,” Yoshida said. “So he wanted developers in meetings at the very beginning of concepting new hardware, and he demanded SCE people talk to us [developers].”

swinesucker2591d ago

You are full of ****. Sorry bud. Gears 3 is not even released and again has zero AA. Crysis 2 has so many problems it is not even worth mentioning. SubHD and zero decent AA are too HUGE gorillas in the room. The game looks good but to even compare it to KZ3 is madness at this point and I have a lot of hate towards KZ3 and the matchmaking and freezing issues the game has on my PS3. As for Uncharted 2. Yeah, no game still has surpassed that game for GFX and they are set to release the sequel in a couple of months with much better SSAO and just all around better AA with their own custom MLAA solution from what I have read. The game will simply put ANY game on consoles to sleep. And what say you now about Portal 2 and LA Noire being consistently better looking on the PS3 in every regard? Not much. The tides have turned. Deal with it. Gears runs on Unreal engine for god's sake you frickin' fanboy.

MaxXAttaxX2591d ago

@Sony360
Do you honestly think Gears 3 looks as good as the bullsho-- sorry, screenshots released by epic!?
Gears 1 didn't. Gears 2 didn't.

Gears 3 has a better lighting system FINALLY. Yet it's still no better than other games. The amount of tricks Epic uses to hide flaws, such as blur instead of anti-aliasing, sub HD texture and resolutions. Please.
____

Anyway, we have not clue yet as to what the specs or more importantly, what GAMES each console will deliver.

avengers19782591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

Gears does look like its going to be great, but Infamous 2 is amazing, resistance 3 looks great, and none of those games compare to Uncharted 3 witch is still the game that pushes what next gen should be. PS3 clearly has more power, but the 360 does deliver with what they have... The article fails to mention that the cost of the PS3 was so high at first was because sony developed a new processor for the system, and put in what at the time was very new blu-ray tech, so new that no one was sure which format would previal. Sony can now focus on adding cheaper things like more memory and better online and still come out with a powerful and cheaper machine.

playboi282591d ago

If the PS3 isn't more powerful, why can't Gears of War display more than 8 characters on screen at a time? Apparently, Gears sets the bar but isn't even that great. The PS3's level of detail is unparalleled. Look at Drake in Uncharted (either one). Every time he takes cover, he is in a slightly different position. Look at Resistance. You can kill a Chimera by shooting each independent tube they use for breathing. Look at Heavenly Sword. It has almost every language on one Bluray. Look at Final Fantasy XIII. It all fit on one disc instead of three (Also L.A. Noire, Mass Effect 2). I realize that has nothing to do with power but it does have something to do with them cutting corners and not putting the technology in their system. And finally, you can say what you will about the PS3 but the price still wasn't as much as having to buy 2-3 Xbox 360's due to RRoD's. Does anyone know one single person that bought an Xbox 360 more than two years ago that did not have to send it in or replace it?

Keltik822591d ago

@Sony360

Can you be anymore of a tool, seriously. You're so wrong on so many levels, lol. I just feel so bad for you. I guess you can enjoy your new Sesame Street game or Skittles I guess?

Bull5hifT2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

I Really Dont Think they'll be a next eCKz-BauwxXz cause M!cro-Hard lost around 3 Billion on the system and alot of top level managment jumped ship..... But now that windows phone is doing alright and also the kinect maby they might try again......... .i Highly Doubt that it would be Stronger Than what sony is planning... The good thing about sony is that instead of sticking everyday stuff into there systems that game companys can just spit out a decent game using normal tools, sony challenges the developers to try and unlock these chips like the CELL and that Ultra Fast Ram... if they woulda stuck an off the shelf product developers would just make a game simple with the existing toolset, but since ps3 is uncharted territory developers have to challenge themselves to unlock the possibilities PS2 was able to squeeze out God Of War, Metal Gear Solid, Gran Turismo, Grand Theft Auto, Ico, And many other great games..with the weakest hardware last gen.... And it helps the industry make huge strides to developing great games using current hardware instead of waiting till next gen and For Crytek, Unreal, iD, to get there engines up to this level ready to make what there building now on current gen ' its brutal for the developers to force a new way of games but ... If it werent for people like sony wed still be paying top dollar for nintendo type games thinking this is the best they can do

JOHN_DOH2590d ago

next gen console won't be as fast as a high end pc. High end pcs can use 2 or 3 graphics cards and the next gen consoles gpu will be scaled down probably due to heat and power.(TDP)

WhittO2590d ago

These are like the longest comments from everyone on any piece of news I've seen haha!

BenEViolent2590d ago (Edited 2590d ago )

oops: quote something from 6 years ago lol

paintsville2590d ago

Why would I be shocked? This gen xbox is more powerful than ps3 so why would the next gen be any different? PS3 with it's horrible fillrate, horrible frame rates, horrible shadows, horrible implemetaions of SSAO, and horrid alpha blending limitations. Then come the "Exclusives". Exclusives are written to "HIDE" all these deficientcies that become apparrent when a game releases on both 360 and PS3. In that case 95% not 100% but 95% of the time the power of the 360 shows through with superior performance, sharper textures, no installs required, etc. That the next xbox is going to follow suit and whip PS4 is not a surprise at all.

Statix2590d ago (Edited 2590d ago )

@Sony360: I'm sorry, but I will have to respectfully disagree. I personally feel I have a decent grasp of technical knowledge regarding gaming graphics and technology. Sure, I would agree that the 360 and PS3 are "about equal" in terms of multiplatform development, but the only reason that is the case is because a) most developers use the 360 as the lead platform first and foremost, with the PS3 version usually being a port; and b) the 360 has a more PC-like architecture which is more familiar and easy-to-develop-for to most developers. You cannot compare multiplatform games to exclusive titles, as they are not representative of the full potential of each console's capabilties. I realize you mentioned Gears 3, but that game really doesn't hold up on a technical basis to the top-tier PS3 titles. This is not to say that Gears 3 isn't a great-looking game, but I could give you a laundry list of reasons and graphical features that differentiate it from the best-looking PS3 games, and how it is generally lacking in comparison.

In terms of raw power and progressiveness of technology, the PS3 is significantly ahead in overall horsepower in many areas (with a few exceptions, i.e., the 8 MB of embedded RAM and the slightly faster GPU of the 360). The Cell processor is simply much more capable in terms of theoretical floating-point performance, although its complexity causes many multiplatform developers to steer away from heavily optimizing their games to exploit it in a manner befitting. The Blu-Ray medium also has a huge storage capacity advantage over the 360's regular DVD, and this is proving to much more and more of a factor--and problematic for the 360--as we go deeper into this generation of consoles, as shown with games such as Dead Space 2, RAGE, FFXIII, and LA Noire. I bought the PS3 because I felt it would be overall the most advanced console on the market this generation, and thus far I have been proven correct for the most part.

@paintsville: There are many ignorant and glaringly erroneous statements in your fanboy rant, but I just have to laugh at one point you made in particular. The PS3 has "horrible implementations of SSAO?" This is a pretty ridiculous and ironic statement, as Uncharted 2 probably has the most convincing and well-done SSAO of any console game I've seen this generation; Uncharted 3 will probably raise the bar once again on this feature as well.

Regarding your assertion that exclusives are meant to "hide deficiencies..." isn't that also true of 360 exclusives, and ANY multiplatform game, in general? I don't disagree that the PS3 has deficiencies (it IS a 5-year old piece of hardware after all), but the same can be said of the 360. Every console has their unique set of strengths and weaknesses; EVERY good developer (1st-party and 3rd-party) tries to hide said deficiencies and emphasize the strengths as best they can, and within budget. I just feel that, on a raw power basis, the PS3 is a significantly more capable platform than the 360, providing that enough effort is put into coding and optimizing for the PS3's eccentric architecture. Your statement that the PS3 has weaknesses is really a non-statement; it's like saying the sky is blue.

+ Show (23) more repliesLast reply 2590d ago
Adam21012591d ago

i will criticize all

1.graphics are being upgraded and released within 3 months or so, and the ps3 was released a year after the Xbox 360 , thus means that the ps3 will have some extra flavor in power. that's not opinion that's a fact.

2.the Xbox 360 focused on 3rd partie and on kinect mostly and didn't release alot of exclusives (yes there are great exclusives the fans love for ex: gears 3,halo reach and the upcoming halo 4 etc) but sony was all over their exclusives ( infamous 2, uc2 n now uc3 , godofwar 3, killzone 3, resistance 3 etc )

3.i think its not a question who has more power its about who is using the power, sony is using by focusing on graphics and gameplay(example: UC3, GOW3..)
microsoft isn't, so its microsoft's fault. and they can focus on power, i belive crysis 2 was a power house and it was great and it ran on 360 and ps3. im not saying they are equal but they both have good power, and now we have Skyrim coming for both consoles, among other games coming in 2011

4.i believe one of the major problems is the disk space, its pathetic to say we dont need blueray. alot of ps3 games are 20gb+ , which means more space = more content or better graphics (logic)

5.affordable and great games(the wii?) we are talking HD gaming, the wii is "FUN" but gets boring so quick, and yes it has a couple great games.

6.and finally i love both consoles,i just have fun. if i like a game i get it,ps3 or 360

lategamer2590d ago

Your so wrong on so many points:

1.) Graphics are constantly being upgraded, yes. However, the GPU the PS3 uses was actually about a year old when it launched. The GPU in 360 is better, proven fact.

2.) Yes, 360 focused a lot on third party. But, the third party also had games that were previously on PS consoles, not 360. Devil May Cry, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil (never came to Xbox, on Nintendo and Sony), etc. 360 also had a lot of exclusives early in the gen, Perfect Dark, Kameo, Crackdown, Gears, Halo, Project Gotham, Forza etc. Now, Microsoft is focusing mostly on Kinect Titles.

3.) Kind of Agreed. It's not really Microsofts fault, but developers. Just like how early this gen, games ran badly on PS3. Developers need to push the architecture. Its crazy how 360's best looking games, Crysis and soon to be Gears 3 run on MULTIPLATFORM engines, not ones built ground up to take advantage of it.

4.)Disc space isn't a big problem. Contrary to popular believe, textures and such don't take up much space. Audio and CG do. PS3 games are so big because developers don't compress audio. They don't have to.

5.) /
6.) /

Adam21012590d ago

@lategamer,

yeah your right on some points, i still think xbox 360 can do more cause i think it has power.

not saying its equal to ps3 (and i really dont know if it is) but i read a while back that UC2 developers said UC2 cant be done on xbox 360, i was curious what he really meant.

cause i think it can be done (doesnt have to be the same game but they can adjust a little for it to fit)

FamilyGuy2591d ago (Edited 2591d ago )

Question: There's this pointless argument about power here and to this I ask, Who's doing HD, Stereoscopic, 3D gaming and having exclusives that look noticeably better and who's loosing visuals because their sacrificing processing power to a camera peripheral?

PS3 games are getting better while *the majority* of what's coming from 360 has been downgraded in comparison to the games of its past. Gears and Halo are the only games getting proper treatment from Microsoft.

In terms of 3D gaming: The PS3 is rendering two beautiful images simultaneously while the 360 only 1, that alone should tell you which system has more power.

Mkai282590d ago

Hmmm, I don't know about that "loosing visuals with kinect". Did you see Forza 4 using Kinect?

Yes, the majority of PS3 exclusives seem to be better in visuals. But it's pointless to preach what most ppl already know. You ppl get so offended when some one has their own opinion.

I look at these comments and see the same broken record over and over again. You all sound like vain preachers trying to convert gamers into joining your side. "Renounce the 360 and embrace the PS3 and ye shall be saved!"

3D I care not much for, too expensive(PS3, 3DHDtv, and 3D glasses) for an headache or worst.

This site has become a joke, a ppl that put a console over all things, worship your god and see if it will hear your praise.

Sigh, same arguments, same comments, same site, different day..

FamilyGuy2590d ago

I'm honestly surprised people are still bringing up this old argument. It feels like 2009 around here again -_-

joab7772591d ago

Unfortunately this generation, Sony was only able to get back into the game because of their high specs. It just took time for developers to catch up. My guess is that it remains more powerful but w similar set up. What they cannot afford is to b a year behind w foreign specs that take 3 years t o understand. As far as price, drop the blue ray. Everyone will have one soon and go to digital utilizing a relationship w steam or a similar way to play games for cheaper. Its a risk but u r able to put out the more powerful system cheaper games. It may b time and enough to get ppl to switch to digital. If Xbox cost $100 more and charges $70 to $50 game price, Sony would have huge advantage. And vice versa. I love them both and just want the best system,not a dumbing down.but i believe the age of two identical systems vying for power is over. They will begin to separate themselves by offering different experiences, ie. Kinnect, the wiki and vita. Sony was smart going mobile. Ibelieve the ultimate winner will capitalize on the ability to offerboth the best home and mobile experience. I just figured apple might sneak in. But, imagine games that can b played at home and then brought w u. For skyrim, u can earn XP and gold on the go. Madden on the go, cod on the go. There has to b a way to create a game that plays on both, maybe losing a little while mobile or distinct aspects that can only b played mobile. Which skyrim would u buy? Which cod? We hav all seen the recent dominance of iPhone games. But what we really want is AAA titles, right? Best of luck,cuz ultimately we r the winners.

showtimefolks2591d ago

when devs are saying wii-u is %50 more powerful than current consoles in 2-3 years why can't the xbox360 and ps4 be %50 more powerful than wii-u

and next gen i fully expect both xbox and ps to have easy development tools and about the same specs.

people who will buy xbox720 will do so to play MS's 1st party games and improved kinect.

people who will buy ps4 will do so to play 1st party titles and move.

I think the time where 3rd party exclusives existed are long gone now its about what you get in 1st party wise.

also epic studio had a 3 game deal with MS since gears 3 is it if they do make more gears games expect them to be on all 3 consoles and pc.

Mkai282590d ago

Bubbles for you for sounding intelligent, and not like a fanbum. Every one sounds the same, saying the same nonsense over and over.

2591d ago
CarlosX3602590d ago

If the console is slightly powerful than [next] Xbox it's understandable. And honestly, I don't care.

If PS3 matched the specs of Xbox 360, then I am happy about the outcome.

cannon88002590d ago

The majority of these articles that say "why this is going to work, or not, or is going to sell more," are usually catastrophic and just looking for hits(which it usually gets) because it usually never works out. The title should say, "why i think" and not "why this won't work" etc. Plus, these also create lots of unnecessary flame wars, and so instead of uniting gamers together, it ruins possible bonds between different console gamers.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2590d ago
sayonara892591d ago ShowReplies(1)