Top 2 reasons why nextgen consoles are extremely important and their possible downfall.

The Playstation 4 and Xbox One could easily fail. Sony and Microsoft have already excluded themselves from gaming evolution. Could the STEAM train bring its a-game with a recent technological advantage? This weapon called the thunderbolt maybe? Read more.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
jackanderson19853015d ago (Edited 3015d ago )

the steam box might be the next best thing but at the rumoured 1000 price tag they're going to have a hard time pushing it on consumers....i built a pretty decent gaming rig for €800 (built mainly through bday gifts and related) and that also included the cost of the OS and everything else dunno if i could justify to myself to go buy a 1000 box that would sit beside my tv when the pc could do the same jazz

Parasyte3015d ago

Read the article before commenting please. It brings up a few good points and ideas.

3015d ago
EXVirtual3015d ago (Edited 3015d ago )

'They make slow, or out right prevent the evolution of gaming experience by having limited hardware.'
Well, I think you're saying that now especially because of how long this gen was. But what you need to understand is that, if these next gen consoles were on the level of the highest end PCs on the market, the prices would be unbelievable. Especially if you expect them to run at like 4k @ 60 fps. I don't even think the ninth gen of consoles will be able to do that. But how long will this gen last. Ehh... I'd like to speculate but we'll have to wait and see.
Also, 1 million PS4 pre-orders beg to differ with the title.

Sarick3015d ago (Edited 3015d ago )

This article looks like it was written someone who's a biased PC fan. He/she thinks that all new tech should be rapidly replaced and that the life cycle of a console should be updated every few months.

New tech has its advantages but remember every time you update/replace hardware you need to throw something else away. This is wasteful and more expensive in the long run. The developers also need to keep up with every change mid development.

One thing I've noticed is computer game technology seems advance faster then software. Why? It's because the games take years to make sometimes. By the time a game is fully completed the tech could've become 2-3 times better. At least with the 5 year console lifetime developers can maintain a standardized development pattern.

Knowing the specs are locked from the start helps the developers realize their development process from start to finish. If they had to worry about re-optimization every 6 months while still in development I would assume it would increase production cost.

Also, the customers would lose faith in console makers. Just like they did with the saga consoles. Remember the path sega took (excluding hand helds) Genesis, Saga CD, saga 32X, Sega Saturn then the Dreamcast? All these new tech updates where released so close together that it confused the customers and developers. It caused a lack of faith.

If you want the costly update path every few months GET A PC. Don't try and drag the console market into a an endless rat race. I think both developers and hardware manufactures know that keeping a standardized environment lets the customers spend more money on games software instead of displacing it on constant hardware replacements.

3015d ago
kryteris3014d ago

3 years isn't exactly rapid, and it is a suggested "option" for a high settings mode. Would allow consoles to keep up with technological advances and not become obsolete.

"He/she thinks that all new tech should be rapidly replaced and that the life cycle of a console should be updated every few months." -You made this up entirely.

"All these new tech updates where released so close together that it confused the customers and developers. It caused a lack of faith." - This argument was address at the end of the article, did you even read it? :P

Sarick3014d ago (Edited 3014d ago )

-You made this up entirely.
did I? From the way I read it his ideal system was based around a PC that can be upgraded.

"I am expecting that this tech will be available with the Steam Box simply because Valve’s target audience is the PC gaming community.

Clearly he's a fan of the PC market. The whole article talks about having expansion ports.

Sega tried this already with 32X and Sega CD . Some customers would upgrade others wouldn't. Nintindo also did this with the N64, some games required the ram expansion port just to play newer games. Sony did tis with the HDD and network adapter. You saw how supported the HDD was. The only game I know that supported it in the USA was Final Fantasy 11.

This didn't work well it split the market. Developers had to develop and custom optimize for each attachment. In some cases the software became totally incompatible without the upgraded hardware.

Yes I did read it. There where subtitle references that gave me the ultimate impression he's deeply into the hottest tech. Just look at His about profile. It even says he's a "gamer enthusiast, graphics whore, tech guru" With references like that I doubt he has anything older then 2 a year old gaming rig.

Say, what you will the article gave me the impression that he whats a faster upgrade pace in the gaming market. You say 3 years, the standard pace is 5 years with support for at least 10 years. The only people I know who upgrade every 18-48 months are the hard core PC enthusiast.

Show all comments (12)