i've been thinking about this for a while now and i wondered what others thought about it:
the Xbox was released as we know to compete with the PS2, but didn't do very well. in a determined effort to beat PS3 in this round MS has released the 360 a year ahead of PS3. but a president has been set with MS which is a 4 year lifecycle for their consoles without it appears a determination to support their prior console.
if the 360 outlives the Xbox by two years that means that the PS3, which is intended to be a ten year lifecycle, would conceivably have to compete with an Xbox720 for five years (five years into the PS3s lifecycle)
with mistakes made by MS concerning starage medium and an add on that would play movies and would be unlikely to support games, its likely that a new machine from MS is probable with a HD-DVD or perhaps a Blu-ray (unlikely)
so my question is: will Sony's PS3 be able to compete with a third generation Xbox? because this to me is a given. Sony have carefully positioned the PS3 as futureproof, but how can they futureproof it against technology that has the advantage of a five year developement cycle? if they can then theres more to the PS3 than we are aware of and considering Sony's excellent track record i wouldn't doubt this.
this is the whole reason for the futureproofing statements as far as i'm concerned. it has to be because they know that 360 will not be around as long as the PS3. it will take a couple of years before we start to really see the difference between blu-ray and DVD9 games. but if Sony are really clever they could give MS no room for maneuvre by necessitating a full utilization of blu-ray and making their Online service free (which we already know is about to happen)
this could be the end game for MS unless they can win this next gen war or at least draw. Vista has hit the headlines of late and perhaps this is a sign that MS are gravitating back to its roots.
Are you sure that the PS3's 10 year life cycle isn't going to be similar to the PS2's hopeful 10 year life cycle? Sony wants to keep the PS2 around for a full 10 years, so with that they could be supporting it all the way to 2010, even though the PS3 will be out since 2006. For PS3's 10 years of 2006 - 2016 I don't know if Sony's planning on keeping it at the front of their console lineup or if they plan on introducing PS4 to take the spotlight at like 2012 or so... I wouldn't blame them for not having a solid plan though, since it's anybody's guess as to what the console market is gonna be like even 4 years from now...
with each console Sony has increased the lifecycle. so lets say the PS3 will have an 8 year lifecycle before PS4 is released. thats still leaves 3 years to compete against a 720. Sony have bigger plans than we know...Originally Posted by LiquidEagle
Well PS1 was out for about 6 years until PS2, and PS2 was out for slightly less than that before PS3. So actually they have decreased the lifecycle. The "10 year" thing is exactly what they did for PS1, they stopped production slightly after its 10 year anniversary. I assume they will do the same for the PS2 and PS3. Its a Sony tradition I guess similiar to how they always have a console redesign after about 4 years.Originally Posted by cliffbo
I some how have feeling that the PS4-concept is gonna change fundamentally, something like, upgradable.
there might be a graphic jump from ps3→x3, but certainly not gonna be a ps2→ps3 jump. 5 years later ps3 will have great library, low console price, I don't think people would even rush to get a new console because of the graphical update. instead, in my believe most people would wait for the true next next gen, the PS4.
I might be wrong on the graphical prediction but however, and no bashing but when did ms ever or brave enough to come up with something completely new? x3 prolly just gonna be the updated version of x2.. personally not expecting much from it...
Music, The Most Beautiful.
There are a great deal of unknowns .. most prominent being how well the consumers will react to the 600 price. At that price point, its difficult to conceive that PS3 can achieve the same kind of numbers that PS2 achieved in the same time frame. If MS cuts short the console cycle again, PS3 will have to just hang tight and probably compete against a 3rd generation xbox with their PS3 for quite some time. That may not necesasarily be bad for consumers. If the MS cycle and Sony cycle were staggered, we would not necessarily have to "choose" a console that are pretty much the same .. after all, most people are multi-console owners anyways. You would be an MS console, and a few years later buy a Sony console, and so on.
The huge risk that MS took by not biting the bullet on price is possilby allowing Sony to achieve that digital conversion. That would be more difficult to overcome than introducing more powerful hardware.
The one advantage of using bleeding edge technology is the hardware will not be outdated in the near future... The PS3 is fairly future proof, the only area of potential weakness is the GPU, but Sony has addressed this weakness with the architecture and how the RSX collaboratively works with the cell to tackle graphics rendering. The PS3 & 360 are showing the importance of developers instead of hardware...
I believe the next-gen we are experiencing now will be all about the developers to really see the power of the consoles. This will also apply to the upcoming generation of hardware launches. The average consumer is starting to have difficulty seeing the subtle differences in visuals and the importance of interesting game play will be the key to grow the gaming industry.
If MS decides to just release an evolution in hardware for the next console it could be a fatal mistake... The PS3 should be able to hold it's on against new hardware, but if MS launches another piece of hardware with more RAM and a more powerful GPU it will allow developers to create great results with minimum effort. The PS3 would be able to keep pace, but would require more effort and work from the development community...
I would really like to know what Ken is cooking up for the PS4, because I would imagine he is anticipating a major shift in the industry and not just a simple hardware upgrade.
Sony's route from PS1 to PS5 imo is
PS1 basic elements & concepts → PS2 graphics & network → PS3 network & linux software penetration → PS4 hardware & software concepts changes depend on the software(linux) penetration rate from PS3 → PS5 major home entertainment device competes with PC
The main reason for me to think console will one day compete with pc directly is because the functionalities of console is simply growing every gen(PS) but PC is not changing much as console. Not sure if it's just me or something but if you think about it, what does the ultimate-home-entertainment-device-with-opened-source equal to?
Competing directly with pc means to competes with ms, thus imo in order for ms to avoid the situation is to achieve the vitual-hardware aka the home entertainment Sony is now trying to achieve, because you can only do so much on the software and can't avoid the invasion from hardware.
conclusion, imo, there's no worries about x3 coming out early at all, that just means PS4 will be far superior than x3, and the most important thing is..
ms usually just upgrade what they have for now instead of going to the next step. and that is when the vision needs to come in.
KK are you laughing right now?
Music, The Most Beautiful.
for the post above off mine, I believe, will be totally destroyed by the virtual reality technologies in future. Only if PS can survive untill its fifth gen it will have chance competing with pc, having
large share of market is not needed imo.
last question, what's the ultimate pc? and what's the ultimate console... they should be the same like KK has stated many times.
sorry a lil off topiced but hope someone knows what I am talking aout loL.
Music, The Most Beautiful.
Well, you're probably correct that the theoretical "ultimate console", which can't exist, since the hardware will continue to be upgraded fpr all eternity, is the same as the "ultimate PC".Originally Posted by Viano
But if, theoretically, TV resolution becomes high enough to be used instead of a pc monitor, so that using your TV for your PC becomes standard, won't PC edge out the consoles, since the basis of a console is that it's a closed enviroment, which can't be upgrded? Or will PC and console simply merge?
We're starting to see developement in this direction, as Windows Media Center will ship with the high-end versions of Vista, at least it's in the beta version of Vista ultimate that I'm currently running.
The basis of Media Center, for those who don't know, is hooking up your PC to the TV, which is easy, since most current GPU's ship with a TV-out.
Also, we're seeing an explosion in pure Media Center PC's, with Dell and other PC-making-companies building computers designed to fit in your living room, right on top of your DVD-player. Is it possible that the theory is becoming reality?
we need to keep in mind that a certain consoles life cycle doesn't mean much for the new model. some think the next PS won't come out till after 10 years of PS3's launch. that isn't the case at all. we can expect PS4 around 2010. PS3 will still be going if theire are sales. if PSOne was still getting support, SOny wouldn't have stopped it, uless the profits made from it are no longer that good that they are not worth spending resources on it.
I don't think there would be a technical reason to update PS3 or X2 before at least 6 years on the market. the only one that I see that might jump the gun is Ninty. for business and technical reasons, I can see them bringing something new (compatible with Rev games) in 4 years or so.
but all this depends on how they all perform really. if one system proves to be a flop and is sinking fast, you can bet that the maker will try to cut their losses and start a new if they couldn't revive it.
as for the future updates, I don't see the logic behind calling MS's next console 720. it's called '360' for the concept of it 'surrounding you in entertainment'. so adding or subtracting to that particular number seems illogical. I would say they'll go with a totally different name (that may involve the word 'box' in it). by that time, I think they'll support the disk platform that seems to have the better future.
SOny on the other hand have their job cut out for them if only due to Cell and BD- if the latter is still living by that time.
one of Cell's great features is that it is scalable and very flexible. SOny could very well just simply upgrade PS3's main core hardware, while introducing some of the new tweaks to the GPU and what not. maybe something like what Ninty is doing with Rev.
in any case, it is far too early to talk about the next wave when we still haven't seen two of the three main players this coming generation.
I am more interested in the next wave of handhelds than consoles.
"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
- Steven Weinberg
“If Jesus had been killed twenty years ago, Catholic school children would be wearing little electric chairs around their necks instead of crosses.”
- Lenny Bruce
I totally agree with you. I, too, thought about this as well. I believe Sony is trying to force Microsoft into a bottleneck.Originally Posted by Viano
well for one if MS has to make a third Xbox in less than 3 years and they choose to drop support for 360 like they did to xbox1 than you would be nutz do get involved with them.
as far as 10 years life cycle for PS3 its not that much of a strech.
remember they overlap systems
PS1 has a run of what 12 years? 6 of thouse 12 where durring PS2s life.
PS2 will be aroud for the first half of PS3s run
halfway though PS3 in will enter PS4 (everysix years acording to KK)
MS strategy for the new Xbox will depend on how well the "headstart" tactic works for 360. if it fails we may see MS take there time, if they even try again after having two no profit consoles. if it works expect to see rushed systems everytime anyone thinks about making a new system
We the people...
Nah...I really doubt Microsoft to release anything in three years. I was thinking more line of launching before Sony. Maybe Sony is playing the field to that particular advantage.Originally Posted by jaxmkii
one thing I really like about playstation brand is they've extended the life cycle of every passing generation. And they continue supporting their consoles even after focus has shifted.
I honestly think we'll know about the next Xbox by late 2007.
Even if not the "true next Xbox" I think they will release a slightly updated X360 with HD-DVD games.
Sony as always will take their time.
I think people get crazy about the timing, it comes down to two things. Powerhouse franchises and *cough* price point.
It's if people still have faith in Gran Turismo, Final Fantasy, Tekken, yadda yadda. And they did have the GTA series, but it's drifted.
It's all down to that. Nintendo have the Maro and the Zelda thing, people buy their consoles for that because they're sure they'll get great games, ?Xbox has Halo, there's Halo heads who play that game 24/7.
I think the Sony timing is a little off, but their hand has been forced.
Its the other way around. It could be end game for sony .this could be the end game for MS unless they can win this next gen war or at least draw. Vista has hit the headlines of late and perhaps this is a sign that MS are gravitating back to its roots.
Ms has the cheaper console.
Ms designed the console to quickly drop in costs . There are no hardware components that will not drop in price , unlike the ps3 with hits hardrives.
Ms also has a year advantage.
They are also the cheaper console with the same graphical capabiltys .
Sony will continue to play catch up and whats worse. Sony may have 2 years left in thier little ps3 when the xbox 3 comes out and the ps3 may still at that point (4 years after its launch) be around 200$ .
Ms made great moves and the only thing that can possibly affect them is the lack of a next gen optical format. However they can simply go multi disc like sony did for many psone games. Any multiplatform games will target dvd 9 and the few that need more space will ship on 2 discs that would be much cheaper than 1 bluray disc.
Well since your making it look bad for Sony ill make it look bad for MS, just to be fair .Originally Posted by gljvd
Sony has the more powerful console.
Sony designed the console to drop in costs quickly and massively as well as to be futureproof so consumers dont get stuck with old hardware after just a few years unlike the 360 with its DVD and no standard Hard drives.
Sony has never launched first and has always dominated the console that has launched before them in a generation.
They have better phyics, sound, and graphical capabilities as well as a higher maximum resolution.
Sony is launching a year later so when the Xbox 3 comes out people wont be ready for yet another MS console and will refuse to pay for it. They will want to keep their big PS3, and maybe buy a little PS3 at that time. Also at that point it will be around the same price the PS2 is now, just like every previous generation.
Sony made great moves. The only thing that can possibly effect them is if they lose any exclusives, but the odds are that wont happen. If it does they can just go the way of Xbox 1 and make a game like Halo that everyone that owns a PS3 will thrive on and use it in every console debate argument.
P.S. JVD please dont respond to this saying im a fanboy, this post was more of a joke than anything as I assume your post was as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)