Why it's Too Soon for the Next Xbox Console

Rumors are already starting to go around the Internet that Microsoft is planning for the successor to the Xbox 360. However, releasing a new Xbox system a year or even two years from now is not a good idea for Microsoft or the industry. This editorial explains why.

[MaximusPrime]

sooner it is, more hardware failure to expect.

Just be patient Microsoft. Your xbox 360 is only less than 3 years old. Spend at least 4 years on working on the successor and you probably will find success.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

No, I think MS absolutely should be working on the next Xbox in terms of design, etc... Now if you are saying when they should release it? Well that is a different question.

I think MS wants the 360 to have as good a run as the PS2 did. Not likely to happen this generation...I dont think anyone will see the runaway success that the PS2 had. But I do think MS would be happy to see the 360 kick around for a good 6 years as the main platform for them. And in that 5th to 6th year they will bring forward the next xbox and have it launch somewhere in that 6th year. This time around though I think you will see MS take the Sony approach and keep support of the 360 ongoing.

[Exhaust]

While its possible MS would come out with another system in say late 09 or 2010 I think they'll continue to support the 360. The PS2 model is exactly right. From a business stand point it makes a lot of sense. Keep the 360 around for the low price point while bringing out the new 720 or whatever for the high end hardcore gamers.

This time making sure backward compatibility works like a champ. With BC the two console approach really works... It did for the PS1 to PS2 transition.

Bubbles for you.

[INehalemEXI]

I agree, R&D of the next xbox probably began before the first 360 was out the door to retail.

I do think PS3 will eventually out do even ps2 though its a sexy beast of a console and everything sony promised the ps2 to be is actually present in the ps3 and more. Once Home and In game XMB etc. arrives it will be pretty complete firmware wise.

The bundles and sku's will continue to get better as does the price. 360 will be the most successful MS console yet as well. Both will break there predecesor's records IMO.

[Marceles]

I agree about them wanting a long run with the 360. The 360 has been successful but I think MS wants to truly prove to themselves that they can stay in the big leagues in terms of longevity and consistency. I also think they want to work on worldwide sales more and not lose alot of ground with that...if they give up on the 360 now it'll just mean they're happy with the number of users they have now and they're throwing in the towel this gen

[Tarmgar]

Yea, develop while you have a console out, as to not get behind the competition. I heard rumors that the, now dubbed PS4, was already in development when the PS3 launched, but the PS3 was a quickie launch by Sony because they need a next gen competitor to Microsoft, which launched a year ahead. So, I'm guessing the PS3 was a rushed console coverup, as to not reveal they're next Superconsole(PS4). I don't know, but I agree with you lol.

[wageslave]

This is really two questions;

A) Are they working on PS4 and Xbox 720. Of course they are.
B) When will they ship them? In line with the budgets, accounting that were set at the time they released PS3 & Xbox 360.

These are massive undertakings. They dont turn then on and off in a few days.

[The Closing]

Ps3 a quickie launch? Sony has a track record now of 6 years inbetween systems, and the ps3 was released what would seem to be right on the projected target to me, which is an ample time for industry standards regardless also the hardware failure rates were right at industry standards when it was released, and seems to be quite the leap from its predecessor in terms of capabilities. Ps1 was on board for the cd change, then they were first onboard for the dvd format change, and now the first for the bluray format change. Hmmm quite a good record I would say.

[godofthunder10]

i disagree,i think that 5 to 6 years is the perfect time to release a new system for all three companies.today technology involves a lot quicker then 10 years ago,hell after they release the top of the line computer today it's out dated in about 6 to 12 months and 10 years ago it would be the top of the line for at least 3 to 5 years.
when the ps3 was released it was said to have the most powerful chip ever made and now they have a newer,powerful,and quicker one out in less 2 years.
if the systems(even the ps3)we have out now are still the only ones out then they will look like nintendo compared to computers because every year computers upgrade to the newer tecnology.if consoles don't upgrade a lot quicker then 10 years then consoles sales will start to decline because of the graphics and gameplay on the computers will run circles around the systems if they don't upgrade to a newer one in 5 to 6 years and people(me for one)will start playing their games on computers instead of consoles because they are outdated about 6 to 10 years and that's like 100 years in tecnology years because they upgrade so damn fast that consumers can't keep up with the new tecnology,hell you could buy a computer today and 6 month or sooner it's outdated.
i like anyone to name me one electronic product that wasn't out dated in 3 to 4 years,hell most of them are out dated in 1 year,like computers,tv,and phones and i think that it's just a money racket.i bet that they have about 3 generations of chips and programes already made but they release the weaker one to sale to consumers and when the sales decline they release the other ones to keep sales up because they know that people that buy the high tec electronics will buy the new version to keep up and to say that they have the newer version.

[travelguy2k]

Sony and Microsoft should release a new console every 3 years (not 2 consoles every 3 years). What i mean is Microsoft in 2010, Sony is 2013, Microsoft 2016 and so on. That way everyone would buy pretty much every console and buy games for them and we would always have next gen machines to play on. These companies would always be trying to one up the other with tech and or features becuase they know they have a 3 year window to build a base before the "next gen" comes and then for the next 3 years they support their generation and do r&d for the next. Every 1 wins the comapnies, the consumer and the developers.

[myxomatosis]

I dont know about that, it has great reliability for a gaming console, and as far as all the features, i think they got the right balance. its problem WAS lack of titles, not the console its self, which i think is an solid, extremely capable peice of hardware.

[LeonSKennedy4Life]

I can't get Twisted Metal: Head On past the loading screen.

Anyone have the same problem?

[Covenant]

More appropriate for the forums, my good man.

[Andronix]

From the minute a hardware manufacturer launches a new console, they normally start planning the next model.

However its been mooted that Microsoft are at a more advanced stage. Personally I dont think we will see the Xbox 3 before 2010.

[wageslave]

The home-console industry isnt going to switch from its 25 years of standard practice for no reason.

The financial model is probably more stable than we all realize. These industry analysts and executives arent running hundreds of million of dollar businesses without industry knowledge, research and marketing studies and and and and.

This forum is amusing. Whoever devised the goddamn headline is a mental midget.

[BigBaehr]

Releasing a new console so soon would be Microsoft admitting defeat.

[Exhaust]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. No matter how much the hardcore fanboys try to pump up the "Console War" everyone including MS knows their chances of "Winning" the war this generation are pretty slim. MS is in this for the long haul. Just like the original the 360 is a stepping stone.

I think they'd gladly admit "defeat" this generation if they thought it would give them a big upper hand next generation.

Personally I like the competition between the high end platforms. If MS wouldn't have joined in with Nintendo basically dropping out to go after the casual market it would leave the core gamers like me with only one option.

[kornbeaner]

Why would MS want to admit defeat only to get a jump start on the next generation, again. That is the exact same thing they did when moving from the Xbox to the 360. Not to mention since HD-DVD is all but a dead horse, they will either need to develop a way to store their games onto the HDD or rely on Blu-Ray to get their HD format needs. Neither of which would be cheap, MS should focus on cutting down the Sony fanbase that is still there with the PS2 and then think about releasing their next machine.

[cow moolester]

Why dear god why....please god...do not let DarkSniper make his predictions in this article...I honestly don't think I can take anymore 3rd person talk and registered trademark symbols

[Mr Tretton]

Wrong. You Fail.

[redninja]

If Microsoft released a new console now, it would probably be nothing more than a slightly more powerful PS3.

[Ju]

I agree. It won't be that runaway powerhouse to put a huge distance to the PS3. Not now. In a couple of years, maybe.

But if they'll release it that early, that gives the PS3 a good base for competition - and the PS4 enough time to use later tech which could even surpass that new platform by a magnitude. To early, that's what I think. They should even wait another 2 years until new stuff is available to base their consoles on (like 1000GB/sec bandwidth and future CPUs).

[Salvadore]

Great article by the way, really enjoyed reading it.

[power of Green]

Is somewhat old news(in N4G time).

[dragonJP]

...a great article, with lots of interesting points without being particularly anti-Sony, anti-MS or anti-Wii. Nice touch. True journalism....

[power of Green]

Some good posts in here very logical(not counting Number 1.2, 4 & 5.

[Chug]

6.1 & 7.

[power of Green]

And 7.1 and 7.2

Other than 7.1 alleast those comments are not based from malice or being spiteful.

No opinion was formed on the topic I was taking my time to agree with most of the posters thanking them for being civil and thoughtful, why would I add my complements to the list?. lol

The audacity of maturity

:)

[Chug]

;) What? It's alright for you to call other peoples opinions illogical, but I cant call you out on it? Whatever man.

[akaFullMetal]

i dont get it either chug???

[BardockS30Z]

ppl would not buy a new xbox and they'd want BG's head on a plate

[JohnRico]

All three companies are no doubt already working on their next systems & there is no harm in planning ahead

[hotshot127]

i cant agree and the reason being is because i truly dont believe microsofts consoles have the lifespan of 6 years (espicially to support it after that)

remember, microsoft is not a hardware company. and we've already seen the problems that the 360 has so im just not to sure to belive they will be able to keep this too long.

weather microsoft admits it or not...........I THINK thier main goal is just to get a NAME FOR THEMSELVES, that name being XBOX because i dont think they really believe thier going to beat sony because they cant obtain europe and forget japan.

america alone wont do it for them and microsoft knows that developers are going to need to start to use harddrives and standards(burnout) and bigger disks and when i my honest opinion, in a couple of years time when the devs really start to get use the the ps3's architecture, games just wont look that appealing to hardcore fans.
i guess people can say im a fanboy if they want but i can already see little signs of the future as far as where gaming is headed and microsoft will need to bring out thier next xbox withen the next 3 years definetely. because they wont want to run year and year with sony on the playstation since the brand name can only get stronger.
so while i do think it would be a good approach to SUPPORT the 360 after the new xbox releases, i dont think they can even if they wanted because microsofts goal was to get out on the market before sony so that way they could get some brand recognition(which they achieved) now they just have to hope they can sell at least 50 million so that way when they release thier next xbox, they will have more supporters.

but again, WITHOUT JAPAN AND EUROPE, microsoft cant beat sony. they account for about 60 percent of ps2 sales so how is microsoft ever going to reach a world acceptance if people across the world are just to use to the sony brand.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Well....I think we do agree in some areas and disagree in others. Certainly MS needs to be able to win in Europe and Japan to truly dominate the console market. However I think the days of One console dominating all three markets for an extended run (see PS2) are over. I think the competition of all three this generation is proving that none of these consoles will dominate all 3 markets. Here me out before you bash me. I know the Wii is killing in hardware sales worldwide, but I think its pretty clear that their tech is going to begin to look really dated in the next two years. So will they really stay on top for the next 2-4 years? Given the likes of the 360 and PS3? I just dont see it...ESPECIALLY when you consider both the 360 & PS3 are going to see numerous price drops to get them on a pretty level pricing field. I see the PS3 as being the console of the 3 that will make the most gains over the next 2-4 years as its hardware certainly has some future scalability. Will it blow past the other 2? Again I dont think so. And the 360 will continue on its way as the middle ground warrior with price drops and bundles helping it keep pace. Point being... yes to win and be number 1 you need to dominate in all 3 regions but I just dont see 1 console "truly" dominating in all 3 regions. They might finish ahead..but its not going to be dominant like it was for the PS2.

As for the brand recognition portion of your comment. MS did that with the xbox. Hence why they launched the 360 so soon after the original xbox. They made a splash with the xbox...and knew given how long the PS2 had been out that Sony was going to be launching the PS3 relatively soon after the xbox had made such a big dent in the market in its short run. MS figured we have name recognition now, so now we can launch a platform that will have some true staying power and beat Sony to the punch. MS certainly (assuming hardware issues are fixed now...) can and should support the 360 for another 4 years. They need to emulate Sony in every facet here. Sony had a sound idea...launch our new "it has it all" console while having their brand busting cheap console selling at a profit on the back end with plenty of software support for it because of the base of consumers. MS will have that this go round with the 360. I mean if MS gets to 50 million base for the 360 there is no way in heck they will not want software support to continue for that platform... its easy revenue for them at that point and will help curb the expense they will take for the development & launch of the new xbox.

[robbo918]

Nice post and I agree for the most part. Curious though, do you really think X360 can hit 50 million? I expect a ton of disagrees but I just can't see it. If the Wii hadn't been the rather unexpected success (IMO) I would not argue they could but who knows. I would say 35-40 million max and MS will call it a success (rightfully so) and move on to the next, but I also expect a bit of change in philosophy now that Bill stepped down, <shrug> its going to be interesting for the next few years.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I think over the course of its total life time 50 million for the 360 is possible ...but it will be a tough road given the competition. The Wii certainly has hurt the 2nd year sales for the 360..as it has hurt the PS3. Really I think it boils down to how quickly MS can cut costs to lower the price in its 3rd and 4th years. Sony is masterful at that and MS needs to learn how to do that too. For the 360 truly to come out near 50 million they are going to need to be a price leader for the Next-Gen consoles. In their 5th and 6th years they need that price point to be in at $150 or less on the 20GB unit. If they can get there, I think they have a chance at getting to 50 million.

[dragonJP]

...great comments. I agree with robbo918 & Dlacy13g that it will be difficult for MS to make the goal of 50 million from 17+ million now, unless it sticks around a long time. A much more realistic goal would be 30-35 million by 2010, and by then we should all know about the "720."

I also agree with hotshot127 that MS cannot win the console war without Europe and Japan, and would add that I think MS is aware of that. The writer made a great point that MS will only keep appealing to the hardcore/early adopter flush with cash if they repeat the 3-year life cycle of the first Xbox, and that market is limited. To convince the more casual gamers (like Sony did with the PS2) that they are in it for the long haul, the 360 is going to have to stick around for awhile. Make the hardware bulletproof, bring the price down to the "magic number" FIRST, continue to finetune the 360... that's what MS is going to have to do to keep the 360 relevant for the next two to three years while the PS3 really takes flight.

For MS, it shouldn't be about beating Sony this generation, it should be about making a continued profit and solving all hardware issues, so that the '720' launch will be without questions of reliability. With a struggling economy and risks/costs of gaming getting seriously out of hand, a rushed '720' would have two strikes against it before it was even released....

[Silellak]

This just in:

All three companies are already working on their next consoles. Of course they are. To NOT be working on their next console would be foolish. Also, don't think that the success of the Wii doesn't have both Sony and Microsoft scrapping some ideas and trying to counter, because it does.

A few rumors of "Some random titled slipped into the next-next-gen" isn't evidence that Microsoft will release the XBox 3-Billion anytime soon. Certain titles - Mass Effect, Gears of War - are essentially guaranteed-360-trilogies at this point, and it's unlikely that the Unreal 3 engine used to create both games will be terribly impressive in the next gen of hardware.

I expect to see an even-wider variety of hardware next round, as each company tries to offer something the other one doesn't. Nintendo proved you can succeed much easier if you start an entirely different fight than if you try to take on Sony in the "Big, bad, powerful" hardware market. Why attack the market head on when you can flank it?

The Big Three are going to have to wait at least a year or two to see how the current war plays out before determining what exactly their next move is. They may be PLANNING the next console, but plans often change, drastically. Especially since the Wii has thrown the industry a curve ball and it'll be awhile before we see how this plays out.

[tonsoffun]

I am in two minds about this sort of thing:

On one hand I would be happy if a new xbox was announced and they were going to stick to a 4 year lifecyle, as they did with the original xbox - as a tech geek, I would love to see the next stage that MS would come up with immersion/graphic wise.

HOWEVER, considering how popular the 360 is in the US and Europe (it isn't doing too badly over here, much to the dismay of some fanboys) they really would be shooting themselves in the foot if the next console revision did what the 360 did: practically ignore backwards compatibility. I have a huge collection of 360, PS2/PS3 and Wii/gamecube games and as I have run out of space underneath my TV, I would preferr the next xbox to be fully backwards compatible...... but then again, I can always dream.

[funkysolo]

The games that would be coming to it would be mostly ports from the current gen...just like the 1st wave of games that hit the 360 it's 1st year, trust me I had a launch 360 and didnt' see any benefit. I think Sony has learned more from this current gen more than M$ and will benefit the most because of the PS3 features. I'm enjoying games right now and the jump in graphics from 1st gen to 2nd gen games are amazing and I could only imagine what we will be playing in the next 5-6 years on the current consoles. This is living and stop arguing about consoles and let's talk about games

[Cyb3r]

Is this article just speculation that MS are releasing another Xbox? or is it true that they are really working on their 3rd console?

[Silellak]

Also, if they're going to work on a third console, I wish it'd be a handheld.

XBox Live on a handheld system would be slick, if they did it right. The big problem with Live right now is that it's a really tight, well-integrated system that exists on essentially one platform. Yes, there are a few Live-enabled PC games, and I'm sure the 4 users of Live on PC will disagree with me, but for the most part, it's an online infrastructure that could greatly benefit from a multi-platform environment.

Give me a handheld with achievements, XBox Live matchmaking and in-game messaging/music and I'll say "Name your price."

[altimako02]

its called a bank account

[Sev]

One of the best articles I have ever read on N4G, or any gaming site for that matter.

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Besides sales aren't that bad and it's a game selling beast with it's leash cut. When your the number 1 game selling console, you kinda wan't to milk that for a while. #1 and you don't have to wait for "anything" at all :)

[robbo918]

X360 is the #1 selling console??? Guess you left out Wii in your thoughts. Guess you left out the total WW sales for the past 11 weeks running. The actual title of #1 selling console belongs to PS2. At least try to make your posts have an ounce of thought in the Gamer Zone.

[karlostomy]

You just completely and utterly PWNED yourself, son!

Jason said "number 1 GAME selling console"

I am tempted to quote your own drivel back to you now....
"At least try to make your posts have an ounce of thought in the Gamer Zone."

[robbo918]

Granted I mis-read what he typed, that I won't deny. Now lets see if you can try to show me that I was wrong in stating how the X360 is not the highest game selling machine (thus attach rates)?

Xbox (Unofficial, End of 2004)
Asia - 4.706
America - 9.773
Europe - 8.200
Total - 8.945

PlayStation (End of June 2005)
Japan - 13.201
America - 9.122
Europe - 7.552
Total - 9.367

PlayStation 2 (End of 2005)
Japan - 8.454
America - 11.222
Europe - 9.294
Total - 9.885

http://forum.pcvsconsole.co...

The X360 is at 8.8 according to NPD and around that same figure according to Microsoft from what I can tell (some sources are saying MS says 7 but I think its closer to the 8.8 number personally). SO Karl my friend he was still wrong and the winner is still....OH YEAH PS2. Guess I wasn't wrong after all jerk. Oh and a person who tries to imply something by calling another person "son" (which I am probably as old or older than you) and then uses "pwned" in the same posting throws their credibility out the window, even with your clever SN and avatar.

[junkac1]

o_O

[karlostomy]

16.4 - Jeeeeez Robbo.
My friend, once again you are mistaken.
What has the PS2 generation got to do with the 360/ps3 Generation?

To further clarify, once again I point out Jason's original comment:
"when you ARE the number 1 games selling console"
see that?
"ARE" implies present tense. Not past tense.
If he was talking about the ps2 he would have said:
"when you WERE the number 1 games selling console"

Using your line of reasoning I should go and calculate some other attach rates, huh? How about the atari2600? what about the commodore 64? If i go back far enough i can find ANY data to prove ANY point.

Additionally, we should wait to see the 360 attach rates after 7 years on the market before doing a comparison against other consoles which have been on the market for 7 years, don't you think? It is my personal opinion (!) that we'll see attach rates of 11+ for the current generation.

hmmm... It all just makes sense

[ApocalypseShadow]

what they put into it.microsoft knew it.and fans of playstation knew it.only when sony talked about their consoles lasting ten years did microsoft say,

"we want ten years for our consoles too."

but only one of these two companies has a proven track record of making their consoles last for years.while one of these companies has a track record of dropping something and moving on.

we know console makers start making the next one as the current one releases.but microsoft has to really think on what is next.they are not a hardware company.and it showed TWICE by their durability.

sony is in a position to lead by example.they added bluray,added hdmi,added a hard drive(even the first ps2s supported a hard drive.just wasn't standard.),added wifi to support remote play,added usb into the first ps2s,that went into ps3s.microsoft doesn't have that position to do so.only in programming.

we can also see it when it comes to reducing prices on hardware to get it to the masses.we can see almost weekly how fast sony is able to reduce the cost of making ps3s.but you don't hear a peep out of the microsoft side in how to reduce the cost of 360.only one chip that we know of is being reduced in 360s.but 360 fans expect microsoft to just drop the price to $299 without reducing production cost.good thing you guys aren't business men.

same with game production.big games now cost upwards of ten million.gears was ten million.not counting advertising.halo3 was more than that.well....for advertising anyway.but still,how many here expect companies to jump to the next level to make 50 million dollar games?it won't be cheap.and one or two games that bombs may destroy that company.

unless there is some type of chip breakthrough,don't count on seeing a new console anytime soon.because if you do,it will ruin the games industry.and close dev houses.but knowing microsoft,they would be willing to do that.

megaton...............

[JasonPC360PS3Wii]

Not another that signs off with his name. dude be original, there is already like 20 people on here that do that.

BTW your little theary goes to s**t with a little thing called "reality". Before Sony even had wet dreams of gaming and while they were trying to push Betamax, Nintendo was making game consoles and Microsoft was pushing games on the PC platform. Over 25 years, Nintendo has been here and Microsoft was pushing PC games with DOS (in the 80s). Now I know you PS3 fans like to think console gaming started with Sony but in reality it started with pong, exploded with Atari and mastered by Nintendo. Sega brought online gaming to the console arena but it's mastered and taken to new untouched hights by Microsoft. Hell, Sony went backwards by taking away one of gamings biggest staples "rumble". So maybe, you should do just a bit of research and check out a little gaming history, because Sony didnt write it (they just copied it)

"sony is in a position to lead by example.they added bluray,added hdmi,added a hard drive(even the first ps2s supported a hard drive.just wasn't standard.),added wifi to support remote play,added usb into the first ps2s,that went into ps3s.microsoft doesn't have that position to do so.only in programming." <---- uh what?

Jason 360.......

[dragonJP]

...trust me. MS has just begun to turn a profit on the 360. Would it be wise now to be in a hurry to replace it? MS made their bed, and shouldn't risk alienating millions of fans by rushing another console into the gaming market. A gaming market that while making record profits, developers and publishers alike are struggling with the mounting costs of making games, with companies folding or being acquired to survive left and right. Does it matter if they beat Sony to market again if their rep with hardcore gamers and casual gamers alike is in the trash? I think that Microsoft will be dedicating the next two years to getting things on track with its CURRENT console, not rushing to put out the next one....

[gambare]

one of the strong points of the PS2 was the longevity, if the 360 is a strong console, then the longevity of the 360 should endure until the next-gen consoles are ready to come out, an early release of a new console will only weaken the faith on the microsoft brand about why the consumers choose a console over being forced to buy expensive upgrades in a PC in order to play new games.

[power of Green]

MSFT is going to be haunted by the tactic they felt would give them upper hand this generation untill proven otherwise from haters, concerned gamers and media.

This is what we know for sure: all companies work on new consoles after a console launches, teams get to work on it right away.

What we do know: MSFT isn't going to drop support for the 360 completly in a few years regardless of when new consoles are released in the market. Hardware will crush anything out now in a couple of years.

Thats why I do not agree with somebody saying a console released in a couple of years will only be slightly more powerful than current consoles.

[robbo918]

Ok who are you and where did you lock PoG up? Seriously though I put my first ever (I think lol) agree on something PoG said, the one I am replying to. The only part of if I can't fully agree with yet is that you said its a fact that MS will not drop support for the X360. I would like to think MS learned their lesson on that one with the Xbox issue when they dropped it so fast, but until it happens its not a fact. I do tend to agree with you and yes I know MS has stated they will support it after a new console comes out, but I want to see it first, then will give them credit since they lost it after the Xbox.

[IzKyD1331]

man, that was a good read, and that article deffinatly made some good points

[hotshot127]

yea i do agree with you on some points and im not going to bash you just because you like the 360(thats only when 360 FANBOYS make some stupid ass arguments about the ps3 is when i retailiate and sometimes make stupid comments just to annoy them) but again, you're right, i dont believe anyone will "DOMINTATE" per say but i do think sony at the end of its LIFE CYCLE(not including the the actual race between the 360)

it will outsell the 360 by at least 60 million and i say that because japan alone accounts for 40million ps2 owners and clearly nobody over thier is converting. and obviously the ps3 will have more units sold in europe.

and as for the wii comment................I HAVE NO COMMENT.
i can predict the ps3 and 360 battle but the wii is just something i cant explain. the only ground i can obtain with the wii is that i think it appies to a whole different type of market then the ps3 and 360. i think the wii will actually help out sony and microsoft in the long run by bringing in a new gaming demographic to the industry)

nintendo can make a price cut at any time they want but they just dont have a reason to right now because microsoft and sony(espicially sony) arent in that price range right now.

so again, i really dont know what to say about the wii.
as for sony and the microsoft in the price cutting game. sony wont lose as much money as microsoft in the GAMING DIVISION because sony is a hardware company and they know how to cut manufacturing cost much quicker then microsoft (from 800 to 400 in only a year)
now that bluray has arguably won, thats even more of a profit for sony in the movie division AND the gaming division. cost can come down much more effectively for bluray players(ps3)and as time goes on and technology becomes cheaper, the cell will be manufactured for much cheaper.

dont forget sony is making money off of the PS2 AND THE PSP AND NOW BLURAY all in thier gaming division. microsoft if JUST making money off of game sales as far as the gaming division and thier still billions behind in debt from thier previous xbox. now heres where i dont agree with you.................when you say microsoft can support the 360 for years after 5 years from now because microsoft IN MY OPINION didnt build the xbox to last that long. sony always builds thier systems for 10 years (they did it with the ps1 and now the ps2)

and if sony REALLY GOT DESPERATE, all they would have to do is completely drop support for their ps2 and once people cant play thier ps2 games from thier ps2's lifecycle ending, THIER IS ONLY 1 CONSOLE THAT CAN DO THAT. and thats the ps3. so with that being said, sony has alot more options in this then microsoft does. (i know i went off topic alittle bit) but microsoft to me is in a interesting position.
i dont think microsoft will ever beat sony but i think........like you........that microsoft is in a position where they know thier is room for more then 1 console and as much as FANBOYS hate it, it certainly doesnt hurt JUST because they dont sell more units then sony but as long as they make profit. EVERYONE IS HAPPY.

competition is good for the CONSUMERS.

side note: only reason i sometimes get angry that the 360 is in the lead right now is because i truly believe that the ps3 is being held back alittle bit and even moreso in the future when devs get use to the architecture because i like to get the best out of what i buy and if i think im not getting the best because some other company is in the lead, IS WHEN I HAVE A PROBLEM.

i use to have the original xbox(it was more powerful then the ps2 which is why i brought multiplats on it but of course i knew it was too late for it but the ps3 on the other hand is imo the more complete package as far as power goes (features for now go to the 360)
and i want devs to take advantage of that.

[The Closing]

If MS doesn't overcome the last system then it will fail ultimately cuz as it hasn't bettered its predecessor in the ways that count, and it would only show that they fail at the same weaknesses time and time again. Basically it would make their rep even worse than it already is, and people will remember that this next time around. If they rushed out another system it would be looked at as the dreamcast of the day cuz people are just now settling into the idea of these new systems the ps3 which still has a ton of untapped potential. The 360 is having some light shined upon it for what it truly is, and that's a rush job as the failure rate can already account for. Also If you're not giving developers time to fully familiarize themselves with the hardware their instrument then you're not fully utilizing the hardware capabilities at all, and specs become meaningless. The best ps2 games came out 5 to 6 years after it's initial release when developers were fully aware of it's capabilities. So MS should be PLANNING on their next system, but not rush it this time around. If they do they've lost in my eyes.

[vilmer]

That is one of the best articles I've read in a long time. He pretty much nailed everything.

[dragonJP]

...I completely agree. BUBBLE FOR YOU. I'm gonna keep that article and pass it around everytime someone makes bone-headed comments about the current state of gaming....

[NiteWarrior]

I think that if Microsoft decides to try to get a head start on sony agian it will be a mistake because people will know that their money is being put to waste because Microsoft has a reputation of abandoning their consumers and force them to buy their new products.People just dont have that kind of money to throw around. If you look at Sony and what they have done with playstation it seems that they are the company where you can be sure your invested money will be good for a long time.

[ROCCOZILLA]

i cant belive there gonna make xbots buy another console after 4 years.they are just in it for the money.funny thing is ps3 will kick the next xbox ass too.ps3 will be around for 10 to 12 years.PLAY B3YOND!!

[The Closing]

While I agree the playstation brand is a much wiser choice there will be ps4 from 6 years of ps3's release date most likely. If we're lucky they will still make games as long as they did for the ps2, but no longer since than the ps2's lifespan since it cornered the market a lot more than the ps3 has so far. I'd expect them to stay consistent.

[Bleucrunch]

Rocco Bubbles for you....you should write a book! SONY FTW

[gnothe1]

people people, MS didnt abandon the xbox 1 JUST because that wanted to. MS was new to the console industry an they got RAPED building that system!! the xbox 1 was a solid built machine, but MS didnt own anything in it. that systems put'em in the hole so bad because of licences fees. an money made went right back out. so the best thing for them to do was drop it an bring out a system where everything in it belonged to them. thats why theres no standard Wifi. thats the reason they used there own wireless technology an not blue tooth. they even made their own HDD, there expensive as hell but they belong to MS. look at all the add-ons. they're basically all MS proprietary. MS didnt want to owe anybody nothing, I think they learned their lesson from the first xbox!!

[Silver360]

It didn't really look at the financial aspect of selling a new console. This console cycle is still very young. It would would mess up developers and MS to have another console released so soon. Developers need time to make a profit this generation. Yes they may make money on a game here and there, but they need more time to make consistently good games. Just look at the learning curve for the 360. It has been two years and they still haven't reached its potential. Programming with all six threads to the maximum capability. This was somebody's almost well thought out tirade against MS. MS does not have any financial incentive to release another xbox in the next 2 years. With 17 million consoles sold and the price dropping in the near future why would they do something that would kill potential sales of another 23 - 33 million consoles? They invested billions in breaking into the market they will not casually throw away more money now that they have a loyal fan base for their next system. I say wait until you see the 360 hit a price around $129 before you start thinking about them launching a new system. Their stockholders won't let them do otherwise.

[funkysolo]

The PS2 has manage to outsell the nextgen console well into their 2nd year. I do see why Sony rushed the PS3 because of the HD era, but I don't see a need for Sony to rush PS4 because they already have a hd media and can output 1080p pixel per pixel on HDTV's which really has never been the case with a console before. If you all remember HDTV's were out when the PS2 came about, so I think the PS3 can last 7-8 years without having to compete with the next xbox720...I think xbox does need to release a new console because the lack of features and from the games coming to the PS3 there is no way 360 will be able to compete once Killzone2 and Re2 start to show what the PS3 can really do. Noone want's to buy the weaker console at the same price, with less features and a monthly subscription. I do beleave 360 sales will drop to almost a death stop once Sony's killer apps start to arrive and it will be just like last gen all over again

[Luck_y_Penny]

because they didnt even finish with the problems on the actual one/ lol

[OC Shock Value]

im starting to realize theres no winner or loser in this war.. (in my opinion) i guess everyone just plays what they want.. F*** it.. enough talkin from me, back to my PSWii

[Zhuk_]

The next iteration of the Xbox will continue to innovate and revolutionize gaming like its predecessor. The award winning Xbox Live will be remain the leading online service for decades to come. This is great for consumers looking for a market leader to lead them in the next frontier of gaming.

[OC Shock Value]

u sound like a damn comercial ^^^^^

[level 360]

Next time around don't forget to ( include HDMI connectivity ) for other countries as well.
Because it has been deleted here in Australia.
You have to buy an aftermarket add-on to appreciate the graphics - games are already great.

Think it's still too early for another XBox overhaul.

[andron]

But I guess the 360 has got a couple of years before it finally RROD for good...

My point is that never is a good time for a new xbox, if Ms are going to do as bad a design job as they did this time.

[Jdoki]

I could just about forgive MS for killing Xbox1 so early in it's life. But I wouldn't be willing to do it again if they kill the 360.

This is all speculation on my part, so feel free to disagree or discuss!!

Lets say that MS introduce the Next XBox on a 5 year cycle, which seems likely.

The problem here is that it seems like we're heading towards diminishing returns as hardware moves on. The jump from XBox to Xbox360 is massive (as is PS2 to PS3)... But the chances are the jump from 360 to 720, or PS3 to PS4 is not going to be quite as big or noticeable. I'm talking in terms of graphical quality here rather than features, services or 'extras' the next-gen consoles might add. Graphics, physics, AI potential will be better, obviously, but not the huge leap from last gen to this.

If you look at PC hardware, other than DX10 adding new techniques and features, the increasing power of GPU's (and CPU's) is mainly to drive higher resolutions. This won't happen with consoles as they are primarily connected to TV's. In this case, we know for the foreseeable long term future 1080p is the highest resolution a console developer will ever need to aim for. Upping the processing and graphical power isn't beneficial beyond a certain point.

We can talk about AI, physics and rendering power, but realistically how much is game play experience going to be improved if there's 100,000 individually AI'd enemies on screen or 1,000,000?

In a 10 year period it looks likely we'll have one Sony console and two Microsoft consoles. Developers like stability and familiarity (one of the reasons devs have complained about PS3 - the new unfamiliar architecture). (Most) Consumers don't like being forced to spend money on something when what they have is good enough. The slow conversion rate of PS2 to PS3 owners proves this.

If the 720 isn't a massive leap over the PS3, the 720 may have little to offer the consumer, and even less reason for developers to move on to the new console.

So, do MS keep the 360 going (as Sony have done with PS2) or do they kill it forcing devs move to the new platform and consumers to move to 720 earlier than they might like?

Or do they keep the 360 and 720 running in parallel? - Considering what I said above, if the 720 isn't massively better than the 360 why would consumers upgrade and devs switch over unless forced to?

Sony have proven that keeping a successful old console alive really helps offset the R&D costs and launch of new hardware - it's the only thing that explains how they have returned to profitability so quickly. But will MS have a big enough install base to make this viable by the time the 720 comes out?

Look at the slow adoption of BluRay/HD-DVD vs DVD - it's slow because Joe Average consumer can't see a massive difference and we have competing formats which are both expensive. It could well be the same for the next consoles.

Finally, I'd add that Sony are probably in a much better position in terms of R&D for the PS4. They have the Cell. No one can deny it's a hugely powerful CPU (if not strictly gamecentric). By the time PS4 is on the horizon devs will have a handle on programming for PS3... So what will Sony probably do? Simply release a multi-Cell PS4. Not only will developers have a smaller step to utilise multi-Cell architecture, but Sony's cost of producing Cell's will be extremely low. Instead of bringing in all new dev tools they'll be expanding well established tools and so on.

It's a tricky situation for MS. What specs will the next XBox have that truly make it next-next-gen!!? Will Microsoft change their architecture again (Intel to Power PC and Nvidia to ATI)? What can they add that will justify a new price tag? I don't like the idea of the Next Xbox just being a beefed up 360 which is DX10 enabled and has motion control.

[gnothe1]

do you really believe that sony has something special with the cell an videogames!! lol why did sony sell off its share in the cell. why isnt the cell the next big thing in the PC market. the cell is a great chip for streaming video an movie playback!! read up on it, you'
ll find out that sony wanted to use the cell to power the graphics of the PS3 but wasnt getting the results they needed so they ended up getting a card from Nvidia. an does it seem as if the Ps3 is graphically superior to the 360. if your a honest person you would tell the truth an say no but if your blinded by the sony HYPE then you'll think the PS3 is blowing away the 360 when in fact it's the PS3 games thats having a hard time looking an running as good an being as detailed as 360 games!! both systems are very capable an I'll even say there possibly EVEN but you should give the edge to the 360 BECAUSE 90% of multiplat games perform better on the 360. many of you guys CLAIM the 360 to be the weaker system but the PS3 hasnt shown why it should be considered the more powerful system!!

[Jdoki]

@ gnothe1

My post wasn't intended to be pro Sony, just to use the company as an appropriate example where necessary - they are rather successful in this market, no?

As I said in my post the Cell is not gamecentric - it doesn't lend itself to easy game development. But in a couple of years (let alone 10) the tools and middleware will be well developed and coders will have got to grips with it. But for a non-gaming processor it's producing some really good stuff!!!

There's a few articles floating around the net looking at changes in rendering techniques. The Cell is amazing at these calculations and who knows what methodologies and techniques they'll be using next.

I totally agree that the Cell is not the be all and end all of CPU's and you'll find plenty of posts from me claiming that PS3 was a trojan horse for Cell and Blu-Ray and that us gamers have essentially been used to pay for Sony's R&D! But that was not what my post was about.

The battleground for this gen of consoles will be fought with exclusives, not multi-plats. There's slow signs that devs are getting grips with PS3 (Burnout is a great example, but one of the very few), and most multi-plat problems seem to stem (mainly) from one publisher (EA).

But the fact is, the Cell is powerful, in 10 years it will still be going strong in the PS3 and Sony will be in a position to use it cheaply and effectively in PS4 if they wish.

I know Sony had to lump in a graphics card in the PS3 at the last minute. Moving devs to Cell has been tough enough, moving devs to Cell and not having at least a familiar GPU would have been near suicide. Using a Nvidia solution doesn't show that Cell isn't powerful, and I wouldn't be surprised if the PS4 ends up using multiple Cells and no 'traditional' GPU.

Also, I wasn't for a moment saying PS3 is better than 360 (I own both and the performance is comparable with a possible edge to PS3). I was stating (and this is the important bit you seem to have ignored in my post) the reasons why Microsoft is in a tricky position no matter what it does next - but I'm sorry if I have offended your fanboy sensibilities!! :)

[jordan8445]

DVD9 leaves them with no other choice. You see, choosing DVD9 in 2005 secured failure for not just the Xbox 360, but its successor.

[Citizen Cook]

Why wouldn't they?

The harware is sh!t, its time to make a new one, one thats reliable.
I'm pleased about this. I want an Xbox with Blu-ray, less heat, and quieter fans. Screw this generation, i'm ready to move on.

Got my £300 right here for ya M$!

[Jdoki]

"I want an Xbox with Blu-ray, less heat, and quieter fans."

Isn't that called a PS3??? j/k :)

[Boldy]

The PS3 actually produces more heat; it just gets rid of it more efficiently.

[JeepGamer]

Never too early to start planning, just don't release it too soon.

[sleepbox]

They better wait until 2012. If they have to release early to compete with PS3...Xbox is finished.

[ban fans]

I do know that they had better not abandon the 360 like they did the original xbox. The PS3 is starting to pick up steam using only 30% of its total power. The 360 is running about at the max due to its relatively simple programming code. I would not be surprised to see a new xbox in 2 or 3 years. I don't think most consumers will really need the new hardware, but if PS3 continues its rise and improves beyond 360's capabilities, MS may feel their hand is being forced.

On the other hand, MS is sitting pretty good right now, and if they are smart about it, they could ride on top of the wave for a while (even if PS3 eventually begins out selling 360). They have enough consoles out there worldwide to sit back and enjoy some profits and stability without rushing the next gen.

If they do release another system, (as I said above) they better not abandon the 360 and they really need to avoid another RROD situation. Those two factors could kill them in the video game market. It's hard to have any level of customer loyalty when you leave consumers with a very expensive dust collector.

[midgard229]

they shudnt even be thinking about it, the 360 has been out for only 2 years, how many angry people would there be if they released a new console???

although they do need a new system, , that DVD format disc is just way to small for most games like it was for gears, eternal sonata, lost oddesy, dead or alive 4 and so on. they shud have thought about the disc format before they put High def

[SynGamer]

Well, my question is: where do we go from here? I mean, the graphics are already great, the budgets are already soaring past $30 million for triple A games...with this generation, i think releasing a newer, more power hungry, graphically intense console would fail. If we continue the trend, we'll finally see Pixar like graphics with the Xbox 3 or whatever it will be called. That's a bad thing, those movies cost a good chunk of money and that would mean fewer chances on new IPs...

So yeah, if i were Sony and Microsoft, i would wait until AT LEAST 2012 to even mention a new console. Save 2013 perhaps for the release, by doing so, they will be giving the consumers, developers, and themselves a good run of at least 6-7 years to make great games, lower costs, and introduce new IPs to test the market before making the jump to the next-next-gen consoles.

[jinn]

they want to show off a new color for the ring of death

[witchking]

So this is where the game truly begins, folks.

As others have said, MSFT isn't the only working on their next console. Undoubtedly both Nintendo and Sony are doing the same.

The difference is likely in the urgency with which they're working on those designs.

Let's start with where this artcile started: Microsoft. The 360 has been a guarded success. Yes, it's turned a profit. Yes, it was first to market and therefore captured (to this point) a sizable lead on their intended competitor, Sony.

However, not all is roses. The failure rate has caused some would-be 360 owners to choose a different platform. The Wii's wild success has dampened the one year lead they had. And most notably, the PS3 OUTSOLD the 360 in 2007 worldwide (as we've seen on other threads).

So when does MSFT unleash the next Xbox? We've all analyzed things ad nauseum that Sony will simply pummel MSFT in 2008. Currently, MSFT has about a 7 million unit lead worldwide, but I can certainly see Sony halving that in 2008.

So 2009 becomes a real battleground. Will MSFT have exclusives that can help stem the momentum Sony gains in 2008? That will be a crucial question. If MSFT comes out of 2009 still in the lead, even marginally, then I suspect they'll hold off til 2011 to launch the new Xbox. But if Sony's momentum in this generation is simply too much to stop, if Sony catches and surpasses MSFT in 2009, then I suspect that MSFT will launch the new Xbox in 2010. That's a 5-6 year lifespan, and it's likely the marketplace that will determine how quickly they jump.

Now let's take Sony. 10-year lifespan for the PS3, they say. That's likely true in terms of supporting the console. Future-proof... what a lousy, market-y gobbledygook word. I can't believe the number of people who keep throwing this around. When I think of the future, I'm thinking 10, 20, 50 years away. Future-proof is the house I just built that's still going to be standing 100 years from now. Future-proof is not a console in an industry that produces new hardware every 5-7 years. Silly.

But I digress. Sony knows that the head start MSFT got in this gen hurt them, but they also see themselves catching up. If MSFT plans a 2010 release, Sony may have to follow suit in 2011... If MSFT delays to 2011, Sony may try to meet them in 2011. That's 5 years for them, which is shorter than what they'd like to see, but the realities are that MSFT gained a foothold by releasing early and can likely do so again, and potentially with more momentum next time around.

I think the more interesting thing would be for Sony to say "We have the more powerful box, the new Xbox will only now be coming up to our power, so we're going to stick with our original plan." It would be risky, but depending on how the PS3 is doing it might be a bold move that says "We don't care what the competition is doing, we have our strategy, and we're riding it out." Which might mean a PS4 in 2012 or 2013, though I'm not sure they could afford to be quite that bold.

As for Nintendo, the Wii is a raging success. But it's graphics are butt ugly, and it's games are mostly crap. I can't imagine that the Big N isn't taking into account the technology (like HD) that is becoming cheaper to produce. It's difficult to predict Nintendo, because they've always been a little unpredictable. But I suspect that they'll ride the wave of Wii success until they see it has peaked. If Wii is a fad that fades quickly, then the Wii 2 could be released as early as 2010. If the fad isn't really a fad, then the Wii 2 will likely come a little later... and Nintendo will wait to see how MSFT and Sony respond to the casual market they've tapped.

[dragonJP]

...so many of us out there overuse "Future-proof," and I'm as guilty as anyone else. Videogaming is a business where the future seems to change every six months, so how could anything be fut--- you know. You had me spitting out my soda laughing on that one...

MS must know that the successor to the 360 is going to have to be a monster to gain #1 market share, and that kind of innovation is going to take time, time the 360 needs to right the ship for MS and carve out its own niche. Damn... enough cliches... gonna take a nap now....

[bizi6498]

who got screwed and coned in the most creepy way, trying to justify why they did their part (getting screwed) and how microsoft's strategy (of screwing them) is even acceptable.

Wake up people, it's a matter of dignity here!
Have you guys heard of the Stockholm's syndrome?

[TheD_R_E]

Of course all companies are doing the R&D on their next consoles but the thing with MS is that, going back to their betrayal of the original Xbox owners, MS doesn't have a damn clue what they're doing in the videogame world. Apparently they didn't learn from the mistakes that Sega made in the 90's by releasing so many systems in such a close proximity to each others releases. This is where Sony and even Nintendo has succeded. They SUPPORT their formats for many years so that the gamer can actually enjoy their system and it's games before being rushed into buying another system.

[Silver360]

to keep throwing money at a system that was never going to be profitable. You do understand that because of licensing agreements they were losing money on every xbox sold. Even with all their money that is not a good way to stay in business. It was either switch to the 360 or get out of the video game business. Funding the sink hole that was the xbox for more years was not an option. Either way the xbox was going to be abandoned.

[TheD_R_E]

Ok you keep thinking that...but if MS does it again to the current 360 owners then what'll the excuse be then?

[LeonSKennedy4Life]

If they come out with a 720 before the end of 2010, I'm going to assassinate them all!!!

That's just ridiculous!

[TheD_R_E]

No. That's just Microsoft.

[OC Shock Value]

And i will absolutely help you..

The WAR in console war started just over a year ago.. a new console now or even in the next 4 years is a Royal slap in the face to the gaming population..

Im not talkin a normal slap.. Im talkin a Royal SLAP.. Baby powder on hand and all

[ban fans]

MS, Sony, or Nintendo; I'm not buying another machine for a few years unless mine craps out for whatever reason. This is a far too expensive hobby to start throwing out more cash for new hardware every four years and then $60+ for each game. I have a library of ten games and if I add up what I've spent on everything, it is about $1200.00 just to have a comfortable starting point in this generation of hardware. If any of them think I'm going to that again in two years, they are out of their minds!

[Citizen Cook]

''Isn't that called a PS3??? j/k :)''
No, thats called a Blu-Ray player. I want a games console too.

[DanAmrich]

Planning? Yes. Announcing, releasing, readying for sale? No.

Ford is planning the 2010 Mustang, too, you know?

[Bill Gates]

Don't you BABOONS know that the PS3 beats the 360, and the next two consoles that will follow the 360?......Silly BABOONS just aren't in the know....AHAHHAHAHHHHA

[DarkSniper]

Sony's R&D department are more than likely coming up with conceptual designs and ideas for Playstation 4. So Dark Sniper would not be surprised if Microsoft is working on the next iteration of the XBOX.

But as of right now, XBOX 360 is on the brink of a state of emergency. As their console is beginning to be known as a worldwide failure amongst several countries across the globe. The only reaction that Microsoft's marketing and technical department is to develop a console that is similar, yet superior than PLAYSTATION® 3. Which in tune will lose even more Microsoft slaves as they convert to the gaming haven known as PLAYSTATION® 3.

But Dark Sniper believes the sooner Microsoft releases their console the better. The quicker they initiate this becomes the quicker they go the way of Sega....

Bankrupt.

$niper

[etownone]

Microsoft on the brink of emergency??

Reason Sony is finally seeing some numbers is because of the price drop. Anyone can see that for the price, ps3 is a bargain now because of the recent blu-ray victory.
Pretty soon the 360 will have another price drop, most likely putting the Arcade at $199 just in time for GTA4. And as history points out the biggest jump in sales in every console comes when they hit the magic sweet mass market price of $199.

And to M$ they already did a great job with the 360 because they took alot of loyal ps2 owners and converted them. I mean, how does SONY with an installed base of over 125 mil ps2 owners out there screw up so bad that they are still trailing in last place this gen? Excuses about a 1 year headstart doesn't mean shat, just ask Sega (dreamcast)

Everything I pointed out is fact...but i'm sure every Sonyfan will hit disagree just in spite.

[Spike47]

hate to see my freind along with other xbox gamers get left in the dust again if ms announces another xbox soon.

They should just support the xbox360 along with it's install base.

[Xbox is the BEST]

Rumor?

[Xbox is the BEST]

This article failed

[Citizen Cook]

... make a new Xbox 720. The hardware keeps breaking on the 360. The only real way of sorting this problem is just to redesign the console. I.e, new Xbox 720

[etownone]

i got my xbox in 2005 and i think it would be great to come out with a new xbox late 2009.

new xbox every four years is fine by me.

and on a side note.. drop the price already!!! sonys 40gig ps3 with 6 free blu-ray movies just seems like a much much better deal compared to the 360 in terms of price. pro needs to be under 300, and the core at $199.