bit-gamer.net

MS: Xbox 360 to continue for five more years, at least

MS: Xbox 360 to continue for five more years, at least

Microsoft reckons that the Xbox 360 has at least five more years in it, thanks to Kinect.

Microsoft's Chris Lewis has commented that the Xbox 360 console has "at least" five more years of competition in it thanks to new ideas like Kinect, MS' new controller.

An official European price for the Kinect controller hasn't yet been announed, but Lewis reckons that Kinect will go down a storm across the continent when Kinect is finally released.

"Kinect for 360 is big for France, Italy, Germany and Spain, where there is a market for the casual gaming appetite that we can now address without the physical barrier of the controller," Lewis told GI.biz.

Kinect, a camera-based controller that detects player movements, has been listed at $149.99 USD in America.

"2010 will be a very big year for us. It is in many ways for us mid-lifecycle. What you've seen is with this new sleek design and Kinect for Xbox 360 we've got at least another five years of this generation where we continue to offer great experiences for people."

Interestingly, Lewis doesn't think that 3D features will be important for home consoles for another year or two; unlike Sony and Nintendo, who have been pushing 3D devices heavily recently.

"Certainly for this Christmas the timing isn't yet right. Over time there will be a lot more interest as the price points get more realistic, we'll see families feeling better about having that kind of infrastructure in the home.[/i]"

"I think we'll see in 12-18 months from now that will become more important.[/i]"

Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

69 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Gh0stDrag0n 22nd June 2010, 10:49 Quote
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.
Teh C 22nd June 2010, 10:49 Quote
Hardware that was outdated 5 years ago that barely runs games at 1280x720 without any AA is going to last 5 more years? No thanks.
Hustler 22nd June 2010, 10:52 Quote
Most depressing tech news story of the day...................
proxess 22nd June 2010, 10:57 Quote
If Nintendo says 3D is what matters, then it is. Pff newbs, Nintendo are always ahead of the game!!!1111one1!11

[/fanboy]
BlackMage23 22nd June 2010, 11:19 Quote
Well lets be a bit fair here, after 5 years the PS2 and Xbox were looking really dated, but the games on the PS3 and 360 still don't look too bad, and remember that not everyone has the money to buy a pc that can run Crysis on max settings.
LeMaltor 22nd June 2010, 11:24 Quote
5 more years of mocking it, cool.
DirtyH 22nd June 2010, 11:26 Quote
where has it been listed in america?
on an official microsoft site? any sources?

anywhere else this price is just pure speculation without an official annoucement.
crazyceo 22nd June 2010, 11:33 Quote
Why isn't Kinect big for the UK?
neocleous 22nd June 2010, 11:33 Quote
The whole game industry seems to have stagnated releasing a new controler is no substitute for a new console.

On the other hand early adopters (me) have definitely got there moneys worth from their console.
LightningPete 22nd June 2010, 11:39 Quote
I think he is correct. With the entire of Europe all doing their budgets an overhaul, it will see many people unable to afford the whole 3D experience. Perhaps this device is a cost saver for expanding the life of your xbox360. However until the UK especially gets to grips with employment and the deficit then the market for anything physical on the consoles is not going to go down a storm in the next forseeable 12 months anyway.
yakyb 22nd June 2010, 11:42 Quote
does anyone not see this as a good thing for the PC? with the GPU becoming more and more powerful and games like fallout online coming out we may attract a few more console gamers ot the light side.
erratum1 22nd June 2010, 11:43 Quote
Pc's are already running games at 2560x1600 because the games are made for console hardware. What are we going to do as pc's get more powerful over the next 5 years, we need a higher resolution or something. This is quite depressing because I really think the consoles will hold the pc back for the next 5 years.
NuTech 22nd June 2010, 11:44 Quote
There is no way the industry can support a new generation of consoles any time sooner. 4/5 years sounds about right to me.
lacuna 22nd June 2010, 11:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh C
Hardware that was outdated 5 years ago that barely runs games at 1280x720 without any AA is going to last 5 more years? No thanks.

Well either you're one of the current crop of arrogant pc gamers and therefore don't need to concern yourself with this or you have a 360 and in that case you're just going to have to deal with it.

The PS2 is still available to buy new in some countries (from what I am aware) and developers are still producing games for it so its still going after 11 years.

Sony have also said that they are looking for a 10 year life cycle from the PS3 and as a PS3 owner I am happy with that. I don't care if games aren't as shiny as their PC counterparts because that doesn't matter.
johnnyboy700 22nd June 2010, 12:05 Quote
Lets face it, if any company ploughs a lot of time and money into one of its products they will look to flog it to death. I seem to recall seeing some where that most consoles are actually sold at a loss and they only really recoup any money from the software.
EvilRusk 22nd June 2010, 12:17 Quote
He says:

"we've got at least another five years of this generation where we continue to offer great experiences for people"

Does this necessarily mean the current generation will be the latest in all of that time? Look at the PSX after the PS2 came out?

The way I look at it there are the "Premier" consoles and the "casual" consoles. Premier sees competition between the PS3 and XBox360 with top graphics etc, whereas the Wii sits largely untouched in the casual sector, which is absolutely huge.

If Sony think 3D is the next step for consoles, then the consumer has to be ready for 3D. At the moment I can't see people throwing away their HD TVs just yet to get the latest Sony 3D megatron TV or whatever. With the economy as it is it will be a few years before adoption rates start to reach meaningful levels. Sony's driver for 3D consoles is obviously the sales effect it will have on their TV division. People have HD TVs, they want to sell them something newer. Microsoft don't make TVs so they wont be driven that way. They just want to sell more games.

If the next generation of consoles will be anchored on 3D as the selling point, it makes no sense to go for it now as barely anyone will be able to take it up. You couldn't launch a new non-3D console if in a year or two a new 3D one was coming out, it would destroy your sales. In my mind this means that the Premier console market is on hold.

The casual market on the other hand has only really got the Wii and that looks pretty bad on a big screen TV at times. Even a 5 year old 360 is an upgrade in graphics terms compared to the Wii, and this is what Microsoft are doing with it. Put it up against any Wii HD and go for the casual market. This way they can take an old product and really ramp up the profits by selling to Wii owners as a kind of fancier graphics console. This way Microsoft get more sales until the Premier market is ready to move again.

This does however mean that PC gaming has a chance to expand to fill the "Premier" sector by early adoption of 3D etc. It could be golden days for the PC as long as the developers make the most of it.
Ficky Pucker 22nd June 2010, 12:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0stDrag0n
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.

LOL

that was 1st thing on my mind after i read the headline...

:(
javaman 22nd June 2010, 12:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0stDrag0n
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.

This. Doubt games released for this will even need to push hardware. What consoles need are keyboard and mouse support for RTS and FPS games, not motion controllers.
Gunsmith 22nd June 2010, 12:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilRusk


"we've got at least another five years of this gullible generation buying recycled and wholey unoriginal gaming experiances, why would we give that up?"

FTFY
Hustler 22nd June 2010, 12:24 Quote
[QUOTE=lacuna]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh C

Well either you're one of the current crop of arrogant pc gamers and therefore don't need to concern yourself with this

If only that were true......Pc gamers are being shafted as the only games we get are ports of console titles programmed to a 2005 DX9 base line.

Until new consoles arrive with at least a DX11 class GPU in them, development of new cutting edge Gfx engines wont happen.

Of course the upside to all this is that my 18mth old 4850 can still run even the latest games and i can see no reason whatsoever to spend £200 or more on a decent DX11 GPU.....as they will never be fully pushed by any console port....
yakyb 22nd June 2010, 12:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by erratum1
Pc's are already running games at 2560x1600 because the games are made for console hardware. What are we going to do as pc's get more powerful over the next 5 years, we need a higher resolution or something. This is quite depressing because I really think the consoles will hold the pc back for the next 5 years.

thats a good point actually, the thing is tho, what are the specs of the PS4 / Xbox3 going to be as i cannot see the standard resolution (1080p) for consoles increasing so as long as you can deliver dx11 (dx12) at that resolution you should be okay i..e if they where to build this console today (or in 3 years when it is likely the hardware will be put together) i could not see them using much more than a 5770
mikeuk2004 22nd June 2010, 12:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Another 5 years is great news, means I got plenty more use out of my 360 to come. The games look great and im not ready to buy new hardware for the sake of a GPU upgrade.

I think I have invested almost £2k on my 360 with over 100 games and accessories and do not want to give it up yet.
Fizzban 22nd June 2010, 12:57 Quote
What they mean is, as graphics really haven't changed/improved that much in the last 3 years they don't need to start developing another console. They have no goal to reach. Not like it used to be. We need Dx11 to be embraced by PC game developers and really moved on. Dunno about you, but I'm starting to get a little tired of the Unreal 3 engine. Sure it looks nice but it could look better.
Nowell @ CCL 22nd June 2010, 13:12 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0stDrag0n
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.

Exactly... the hardware used in console is well behind what a PC can achieve... i hope this means devs will concentrate on moving forward with PC again.. i hate the crap excuse we get for a pc game nowadays.
V3ctor 22nd June 2010, 13:13 Quote
OMG... My Q6600 will last forever with my HD5870... :'( Stupid consoles are stagnating evolution
lacuna 22nd June 2010, 13:19 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler


If only that were true......Pc gamers are being shafted as the only games we get are ports of console titles programmed to a 2005 DX9 base line.

Until new consoles arrive with at least a DX11 class GPU in them, development of new cutting edge Gfx engines wont happen.

Of course the upside to all this is that my 18mth old 4850 can still run even the latest games and i can see no reason whatsoever to spend £200 or more on a decent DX11 GPU.....as they will never be fully pushed by any console port....

As an (almost) ex-pc gamer I can see a slow down in hardware development as a good thing for pc gaming in general. The reason I stopped bothering with pc gaming is because it was far too expensive to keep up with requirements for the latest games, the frustration with this is compounded by the fact that my PC is more than adequate for every other use I have for it. The most cost effective solution to being able to play the latest games is to buy a console and in addition to that, the PS3 is so versatile that my parents have one that has never had a game in it!
Altron 22nd June 2010, 13:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by javaman
[What consoles need are keyboard and mouse support for RTS and FPS games, not motion controllers.


QFT.
Give us some flexibility. Take a break from pushing gimmicky motion-sensitive controllers targeted solely at casual gamers, and start providing support for the controllers that gamers already have, already know how to use, and already prefer - keyboard and mouse. TBH I was a little shocked that despite coming out with USB ports, none of these consoles could take a keyboard and mouse.

One of the biggest reasons I don't have a current gen console is because of no keyboard/mouse support. The only games I can stand to play with thumbsticks are racing games. You have so much more precision by being able to move your mouse across a 12" mousepad than you do by trying to tilt a thumbstick across 0.5" of motion. I don't want to wave my hands in front of a TV like a loony person, I just want to be able to accurately move my cursor across the screen.

They go through so much trouble to make these touch-sensitive and motion-sensitive controllers, but they put zero effort into improving their old controller designs, which would go a lot farther towards serious and intermediate gamers. Sony is maybe the worst, with a controller fundamentally unchanged from the original Playstation DualShock controller from the late 90s. Why don't they improve those, or at least come up with some different designs for variety? Incorporate more buttons, allow macros and hotkeys to be programmed, provide bigger thumbsticks or another technology to replace thumbsticks. Give us something that has an appeal beyond that of novelty. I've played on Xbox, PS2, Gamecube, PS3, 360, and Wii and the only game that I actually liked motion sensitive controlling for was Wii Frisbee Golf, which is the epitome of a casual game, and which I only ever play as the LAN party winds down at 4am and the SSBB players have abandoned the Wii to go sleep, and I've just finished a few hours of TF2, and I want to have a laugh.
rollo 22nd June 2010, 13:25 Quote
thats the way of life lol
memeroot 22nd June 2010, 13:30 Quote
the computer I had at the time produced better graphics than the 360 when it came out... and that was hardly an expensive system....

having said that my (2nd) xbox is going strong in the living room so it certainly has its place in the home and for what it does (xbla games mainly) it does it well and I cant see a need to upgrade it to be honest... heck the wii is fine for most games that I'd play in the living room.

kinect will be a fine addition as I hate losing controlers - it is to expensive though.

--- I dont think pc gaming is very expensive to be honest - but you do have to buy one gen back top of the range gear....

Id say the 4890's, gtx275's, 9800 gx2's and gtx295's are looking esp good value at the moment.
mrbens 22nd June 2010, 13:42 Quote
Bloody hell, console games look crap compared to PC games now, never mind in another 5 years of PC developments!

This is truly bad news. :(
dyzophoria 22nd June 2010, 13:43 Quote
well honestly that seems fair, ps2 still have some market as far as I can tell (in my country that is), and besides, for a better console we dont need better hardware, we need better games (content-wise). deliver more fun games please. (for example braid was a really interesting game, and I doubt graphics/console power had that much to with it)
BlackMage23 22nd June 2010, 13:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by V3ctor
OMG... My Q6600 will last forever with my HD5870...

My E6600 will last forever with my GTX280... lol

Or maybe just another 5 years.

Anyway, yes this will mean that GPU makers may get lazy as there are not going to be many titles pushing the hardware.
rollo 22nd June 2010, 14:17 Quote
dout we will see alot of gpu development in the next few years douted it anyway

the 5xxx series is just a rehash really and the performance is poor

will the 6xxx series double the old 5 series performance wise i dout it

less said about fermi the better
lacuna 22nd June 2010, 15:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altron
Quote:
Originally Posted by javaman
[What consoles need are keyboard and mouse support for RTS and FPS games, not motion controllers.


QFT.
Give us some flexibility. Take a break from pushing gimmicky motion-sensitive controllers targeted solely at casual gamers, and start providing support for the controllers that gamers already have, already know how to use, and already prefer - keyboard and mouse. TBH I was a little shocked that despite coming out with USB ports, none of these consoles could take a keyboard and mouse.

Incorrect. PS3 works fine with USB keyboard and mouse and I use mine with my old logitech dinovo (bluetooth). The problem is that games very rarely support them (I can't think of any) but the facility is there. Im hopeful that valve will include it as an optional control method for Portal 2.

Personally I really like the playstation controller and I can't think of any part of it that I would want to change. I never got along with the orginal xbox or 360 controllers.
Mik3yB @ CCL 22nd June 2010, 15:30 Quote
I don't see why everyone is so pissed off to be honest..

If a new super powerful games console (or gpu for that matter), was released tomorrow what benefits would they bring? I think we'd see a higher resolution and maybe some new physics than the current games but that's all... They'd still play the same, so what's the rush for the new tech? Come on, it's all about gameplay... :D
NuTech 22nd June 2010, 15:49 Quote
Wow, more blind hatred for consoles. Why am I not surprised?

I tell you what guys, make more people buy PC games and then you can dictate what hardware games are designed around.

Current gen consoles and the average gaming PC are both capable of presenting gorgeous visuals, but that doesn't necessarily mean the studios have the millions it requires to produce these visuals.

If the PS4 and XboxWhatever were released tomorrow, I guarantee we wouldn't even see a massive jump in graphical fidelity for years. Just look at how many games are released each month that don't even come close to maxing out the abilities of current consoles. The money just isn't there to hire all the designers and artists required to do it.
gavomatic57 22nd June 2010, 15:55 Quote
Can you imagine how many 360's your average 360 owner will have gone through by the time the next 5 years have passed? I know people who are on their sixth already.

Still, looks like Nvidia were right...the future of GPU's isn't in gaming, not when an 8800GTX will still hold its own.
sharpethunder 22nd June 2010, 16:22 Quote
The problem with the consoles market is that its going to hinder game development ie
1.No improvement in game ai (take up use of cpu)
2. If people want better looking graphic the maps or area of play will have to be smaller like on mw2
3. The future of gaming as a whole will be on the pc as they will move from the office to where you have your tv in you home so in that time
4 i have 2 of my friends work in the game industy and they have been told that to plan of the end of the console market in the next 10 years
MajestiX 22nd June 2010, 16:48 Quote
when Microsoft sells software the shelf life is 2-3 years, when it comes to hardware we're looking at like 5-10.
13eightyfour 22nd June 2010, 17:03 Quote
Personally i dont think its going to make any difference tbh, We already get crappy console ports and the likelyhood of this changing is slim.

I suppose whilst it may have another 5 years in it, doesnt mean a newer console couldnt be released before this time.

My perspective of PC gaming has changed alot in the last couple of years, imo it now all about the indie/smaller devs that are offering something new, rather than the rehashed sequals from the bigger studios.

Dont forget you dont need a massive budget to create an awesome game, But what would be nice if if the larger studios could have dedicated PC porters so that we PC gamers get the experience designed for the PC.
Altron 22nd June 2010, 17:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpethunder
3. The future of gaming as a whole will be on the pc as they will move from the office to where you have your tv in you home so in that time
4 i have 2 of my friends work in the game industy and they have been told that to plan of the end of the console market in the next 10 years

I don't think it is so cut-and-dry as "ending the console market"

What we're seeing now is the gap in functionality between HTPCs and consoles closing.

In a decade, we’ve gone from consoles that don’t have a real OS, and won’t boot up without a game in them (i.e. N64) to consoles with an OS that has a lot of functionality outside of gaming. My brother’s 360 can stream music and video over the network, and can do some messaging stuff through Xbox Live. The hardware is capable of doing everything that a HTPC is, plus gaming. I would be shocked if internet browsing does not arrive on the next generation of consoles. Sony markets the PS3 (and forgive me if I don’t know all of its features, I’ve never used one – although my new roommate has one, and I’m going to make him get GT5) as a HTPC type device that you could use for all of your gaming, video, and music needs. I think that the current “Media PC” type devices will converge with the current “Game Console” type devices. Fundamentally, the only difference is customizability – the consoles use a specific set of hardware, and a proprietary OS, whereas the PCs have user-interchangeable customized hardware, and a standard OS. I can’t predict which features will survive, but I’d be shocked to see no next-gen consoles, or a next-gen console without a web browser, media player, and all of those other things that used to be PC-only and are now making their way into the console market. With keyboard and mouse support, you could probably put most of the functionality of a basic home/office PC onto a game console. They’ll appeal to a lot more than just gamers. You can see with the current console generation, they’re trying, but I don’t think that they’re fully there yet.
logonui 22nd June 2010, 17:21 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajestiX
when Microsoft sells software the shelf life is 2-3 years, when it comes to hardware we're looking at like 5-10.

I'm not too sure what you're trying to say here... Microsoft software often last far longer than 2-3 years. A prime example being Windows or the office suites. I know many people who are still using windows 2000 and office xp.

Additionally, most machines that I come across which are more than 4 years old are well past their prime and often need replacing.

I should point out that I am speaking of standard users rather than enthusiasts.
zimbloggy 22nd June 2010, 17:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0stDrag0n
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.

That will never, ever end.
rollo 22nd June 2010, 17:26 Quote
problem is 13eighty most people cant afford a new console at this moment in time Cost of hardware is still rising to even put in a decent gpu with cpu combo is looking at above £500 now assume they get it at cheap cheap rates say its only £300 including the motherboard. add on blue ray drive hard disk memory and the cost breaks £500 and we not started yet.

New controller design new leads audio development. list goes on and on

ps3 was cheap compared to next gens consoles. Which will cost nearly £500 + at launch id guess. Its a cost most cant or wont pay. Wii is highest selling console for a reason and thats cost. 2 wiis or 1 xbox at launch.

Game development now is at the point were the casual market dominates

Biggest selling games on pc are the sims and WOW both are quiet casual games these days.

people now are more and more looking at cost as the reason for purchase. ps3 and xbox360 have had poor uptake if you compare it to old gen consoles. Ps2 sold 100million units nither the 360 or ps3 will reach that figure.

you can browse the internet on both the ps3 and 360 (ps3 im certain not so on 360)

As for the media player / games console. wasnt ps3 that and it badly effected sales because of the cost of the console. now they have removed some features and cost it is selling well.
Toploaded 22nd June 2010, 17:48 Quote
Honestly.... I'm kinda happy to see the 5 year cycle for console hardware turn into a 10 year one.

Maybe it will mean more game devs can focus on new, original games with cool game mechanics rather then having to chase the latest graphical effects and learn how to optimise new hardware. It also means the £2000 I just dropped on my PC will be a better investment over time...

If this had happened during the Xbox/PS2 era, Duke Nuke'em forever might have actually been released :)
mastorofpuppetz 22nd June 2010, 17:57 Quote
The COST of upgrading and playing games on PC is one of the most ecxaggerated things ever. I have spent more on my PS3 the last 2 years then My PC, and I have a high end system.
honyin 22nd June 2010, 18:23 Quote
New xbox 360 slim hope they fixed the rrod problem my first xbox only lasted 3 months
Altron 22nd June 2010, 18:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastorofpuppetz
The COST of upgrading and playing games on PC is one of the most ecxaggerated things ever. I have spent more on my PS3 the last 2 years then My PC, and I have a high end system.

It's exxagerated because people here always need to have the best equipment. $800 or so, every couple years, is enough to get a PC that can play most games at decent settings. But there is that appeal of having the best hardware around, so you get guys who will go after those last few clock cycles, no matter the cost.

Financially, it makes sense to buy a new $800-$1000 PC every 2-3 years than it does to spend $1500+ on a PC and expect it to last 4-5 years. The bang for the buck just isn't there once you get in the four digit range for building a PC. Right now, a nice Phenom II X4 or Core i7-900 rig with a decent Radeon 5700 or 4800 or a Geforce 200 is like a thousand bucks, and has 80% of the performance of the top-of-the-line Radeon 5900 or Geforce 400 at half the cost. In another two years, the newer generation intermediate hardware will be on a par with current generation top-of-the-line hardware.

It''s easy to build a decent budget gaming PC. However, because we're all registered here, we all go crazy over having the best and the newest, so there is a biased opinion that staying current in gaming means buying a $2000 computer every year, or every time a newer generation of CPU/GPU comes out.

My current $800 gaming PC will be able to play every game I want to for the next three or four years. Considering the PS3 was $600 new, that's not much of a price difference, especially since I would still need a $300-400 PC to do e-mail, internet, office applications, etc. on.

If you're willing to not always have the newest games and best hardware, PC gaming is much closer to console gaming in terms of cost.
NuTech 22nd June 2010, 18:37 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mastorofpuppetz
The COST of upgrading and playing games on PC is one of the most ecxaggerated things ever. I have spent more on my PS3 the last 2 years then My PC, and I have a high end system.
When you put it in context, PC upgrade costs aren't that exaggerated. Especially when you compare it to a launch PS3 (£400) which doesn't require a single extra penny spent on it for at least 8 years (so long as you don't break it).

You can't leave a PC untouched for 8 years and expect it to play the latest games. What you've probably spent on your PS3 is for accessories, not upgrades.
javaman 22nd June 2010, 18:38 Quote
there is a balance, Game development will stagnate since performance is almost at a peak for console games. Thats my biggest complaint but look back 2 years ago when £400 will get you an E2200, 8800gt, 2gb ram and 160gb HDD. Now your looking at an anthlon x3, 4gb ram, HD5770. You can practically play all games at true 1080p with AA smoothly for less cash and thats due to this stagnation. Now PC gamers are looking at tri monitors, 3D, improved physics and lashings of AA to justify progress. Unfortunatley motion controllers are gonna "damage" the market further. a series of mini games of frantic stick waggling. The only one that excites me is Natal but it looks expensive and will probably not get a decent game designed for it.

I think the general idea is, if consoles advance, developers will move away from the EA/Activision model of churning out the same crap every year and increasing the number in the title by 1, and therefore AI, Graphics and game design as a whole can progress since companies can be competive.
Guinevere 22nd June 2010, 22:54 Quote
It's a real shame that game developers no longer reliant on people replacing their game collection for the new console will have to produce decent games to get them to sell.
<A88> 23rd June 2010, 00:42 Quote
Don't you just hate it when companies try to squeeze every last drop of value out of a product instead of releasing new hardware every couple of years and expecting you to fork out hundreds to keep up with the trend?
Gunsmith 23rd June 2010, 01:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by <A88>
Don't you just hate it when companies try to squeeze every last drop of cash out of a product instead of releasing new and imrpoved ideas every couple of years and still expect you to fork out to keep up with the trend?

ftfy
murraynt 23rd June 2010, 02:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by <A88>
Don't you just hate it when companies try to squeeze every last drop of value out of a product instead of releasing new hardware every couple of years and expecting you to fork out hundreds to keep up with the trend?

he has a good point, the best example is intel. Look at every one complaining about socket 1156 being replaced by 1155 next year, people are going crazy over it but yet microsoft try to do the first decent thigh they ever did by helping people out in the recession and people are responding the exact same way.
look at all the best games Dexus Counter strike ,none of these have great graphics but nobody minds.
This time 10 year pc gamers we (my self included)are still going to be on bit-tech giving out about games being ported,mainly because that is where all the money is
yakyb 23rd June 2010, 08:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13eightyfour

My perspective of PC gaming has changed alot in the last couple of years, imo it now all about the indie/smaller devs that are offering something new, rather than the rehashed sequals from the bigger studios.


i agree with this i have found myself playing lesser known games recently

- the excellent global Agenda whilst being seemingly limited at the moment the game is growing very fast and come September the content should be more than double what it is now and all this is built on a very solid engine

- Mortal online i played during a troubled beta but found myself really enjoying it i'm going to following this more as it progresses

- the witcher this game came from a smaller dev company but is regarded as one of the best recent RPGs

im personally yet to play he likes of MW2 or BC2 as i find it difficult to justify buying a rehash of the same idea (although i do buy pre evo every other year or so)
_Metal_Guitar_ 23rd June 2010, 08:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacuna
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh C
Hardware that was outdated 5 years ago that barely runs games at 1280x720 without any AA is going to last 5 more years? No thanks.

Well either you're one of the current crop of arrogant pc gamers and therefore don't need to concern yourself with this or you have a 360 and in that case you're just going to have to deal with it.

The PS2 is still available to buy new in some countries (from what I am aware) and developers are still producing games for it so its still going after 11 years.

Sony have also said that they are looking for a 10 year life cycle from the PS3 and as a PS3 owner I am happy with that. I don't care if games aren't as shiny as their PC counterparts because that doesn't matter.

Well great. You don't care. I, however, don't care that you don't care. Some of us like the extra 'shine' (you mean better graphics, more control options) that PC gaming brings. Maybe if your PS3 was being held back by something you'd understand, but its not.
Unknownsock 23rd June 2010, 09:05 Quote
There's always other avenues you can explore, like Eyefinity for the time being, that will vastly improve most peoples gaming experience.
rollo 23rd June 2010, 10:47 Quote
not until they make boarderless screens so you dont have big black bars down the middle destroying it
javaman 23rd June 2010, 12:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by NuTech
When you put it in context, PC upgrade costs aren't that exaggerated. Especially when you compare it to a launch PS3 (£400) which doesn't require a single extra penny spent on it for at least 8 years (so long as you don't break it).

You can't leave a PC untouched for 8 years and expect it to play the latest games. What you've probably spent on your PS3 is for accessories, not upgrades.

Thats balanced out by higher cost games, and random accessories. Ps3 isn't the best example but wii is. When I got mine it didn't have any wrist straps for the remotes. The cost of a 2nd controller (eventually 2 more since the wii is a party tool) and numchuck. A few games need the balance board and even for it you can get rubber anti slip mat.

For the 360 you have their own special HDD, wireless controller chargers and even subscription to xbox live. even the HDMI lead. What about the mic for voice chat too and some people even got the little keyboards for more "hardcore" chat if theres such thing.

Basically while consoles are cheaper but they do have alot of hidden costs. Yes most of those things can be argued as non essential but would you really get a 360 without paying year on year (10years worth now) of xbox live or play mario kart with the family with only one controller? Even down to the humble battery costs extra money depending how extreme you want to calculate costs.

PCs do have these costs too but when keyboards can be obtained for £5 or mice for £1 and even carried from each build. I have 3 PS3 controllers and 4 PS1 controllers at home doing nothing these days simply because each new console requires new controllers.
nakchak 23rd June 2010, 16:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altron
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharpethunder
3. The future of gaming as a whole will be on the pc as they will move from the office to where you have your tv in you home so in that time
4 i have 2 of my friends work in the game industy and they have been told that to plan of the end of the console market in the next 10 years

I don't think it is so cut-and-dry as "ending the console market"

What we're seeing now is the gap in functionality between HTPCs and consoles closing.

In a decade, we’ve gone from consoles that don’t have a real OS, and won’t boot up without a game in them (i.e. N64) to consoles with an OS that has a lot of functionality outside of gaming. My brother’s 360 can stream music and video over the network, and can do some messaging stuff through Xbox Live. The hardware is capable of doing everything that a HTPC is, plus gaming. I would be shocked if internet browsing does not arrive on the next generation of consoles. Sony markets the PS3 (and forgive me if I don’t know all of its features, I’ve never used one – although my new roommate has one, and I’m going to make him get GT5) as a HTPC type device that you could use for all of your gaming, video, and music needs. I think that the current “Media PC” type devices will converge with the current “Game Console” type devices. Fundamentally, the only difference is customizability – the consoles use a specific set of hardware, and a proprietary OS, whereas the PCs have user-interchangeable customized hardware, and a standard OS. I can’t predict which features will survive, but I’d be shocked to see no next-gen consoles, or a next-gen console without a web browser, media player, and all of those other things that used to be PC-only and are now making their way into the console market. With keyboard and mouse support, you could probably put most of the functionality of a basic home/office PC onto a game console. They’ll appeal to a lot more than just gamers. You can see with the current console generation, they’re trying, but I don’t think that they’re fully there yet.

I would be surprised if M$ didnt bring out annother xbox SKU aimed at HTPC market, with mouse and keyboard, and a version of office on it

End of the day money lies in Consoles, NOT PC, y subsidise the development of games for a tiny majority of a small market? IF the average pc is 3 years old and cost £500 new thats the standard they will develop for. Buy new shiny hardware, but as always software follows hardware.

Ultimatly i see bleeding edge hardware the same as super cars, halved in value as soon as you bought it and if you wait a year would cost a lot less, and/or the tech trickles down anyway. Carrying on the car analogy you wouldnt expect to drive that super car on the motorway at top speed, so y expect ur hardware to to be pushed? Just cos it has the potential doesn't mean its given the opportunity and that's the sad truth, just accept it and move on
llamafur 23rd June 2010, 20:12 Quote
Why don't they just fix the 360?
Nikols 24th June 2010, 20:40 Quote
= developers get bored, more games come to pc with dx11 content to stimulate their fragile little minds. Pc gamers get to rule the world again, time to put on a few pounds, stop using deodorant and stay outa the sun.. I wanna be ready for the second age
Elton 24th June 2010, 21:31 Quote
So in about 3-4 years Criterion will release their 2nd iteration of Gun Porn(Black2)? That's what I'm thinking, they still have a bit of steam consoles that is, but it's starting to peter out. I'd say give it 3 years until they develop a new one, then another for it to release, then another surge on the PC market, then repeat of now.

I still don't think people realize that consoles are sold at a loss, the profit is from the licensing fees from the games and software. No way all that hardware can be sold for $300 a pop.

Oh and they make a killing on peripherals.
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 21st July 2010, 07:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gh0stDrag0n
5 more years of crap console ports and gimped PC games......Damn.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teh C
Hardware that was outdated 5 years ago that barely runs games at 1280x720 without any AA is going to last 5 more years? No thanks.

just think in 3 more years our PC's will so powerful that we will be able to run a PS3 and Xbox 360 emulator.

And in 2 more years after that Half lIfe 2 Episode 3 will finally be released and we all will forget what consoles are.
Bindibadgi 21st July 2010, 07:35 Quote
Both MS and Sony are waiting for the time when they can offer a price and feature controlled Steam-like service direct to your house: when broadband is faster and more available, and when drive data density cost comes down. Goodbye retail chains and optical media. Goodbye 2nd hand market. Goodbye that bulky, noisy optical drive. Goodbye game leaks, ISOs and a lot of piracy.

You think you won't accept it? Most people will because they are lazy to shop. They already have with Steam and Arcade and the marketing machine will come into full effect. "Never loose or damage a game again!" "Get game releases ON release day!"

Think you won't pay a monopolistic $60 for Modern Warfare 6? Activision profits state otherwise. :(
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 21st July 2010, 07:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownsock
There's always other avenues you can explore, like Eyefinity for the time being, that will vastly improve most peoples gaming experience.

I like Eyefinity for everything including watching sports but why the hell are all the LCD companies sitting on their hands and not producing No bezel or Ultra thin bezel screens as the technology and market is already there.

Let me guess they opted for 3d 120Hz monitors right?
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 21st July 2010, 07:41 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Both MS and Sony are waiting for the time when they can offer a price and feature controlled Steam-like service direct to your house: when broadband is faster and more available, and when drive data density cost comes down. Goodbye retail chains and optical media. Goodbye 2nd hand market. Goodbye that bulky, noisy and failtastic optical drive.


Hasn't the PC already proven your point? Most PC gamers use Steam or D2D or Big Download anyway. I can even download and game online without noticing (somewhat).

Next gaming gen is just gonna be a Encrypted HDD that you add to your PC and purchase games through a Digital store and you gotta stay connected to the internet to game as consoles are SO DEAD.
Bindibadgi 21st July 2010, 07:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krayzie_B.o.n.e.
Hasn't the PC already proven your point? Most PC gamers use Steam or D2D or Big Download anyway. I can even download and game online without noticing (somewhat).

Exactly. Yet, a contradictory report that said "most gamers prefer physical media" - which is only true because they are used to it.

Your other point.. I don't think so sorry.

RE: Eyefinity - it's a niche branding compared to "3D" which is EVERYWHERE. It's mainstream - it's cinema, it's TV, it's game consoles, it's blu-ray movies. Companies have no reason to make zero bezel - consumers don't scream for it.
Altron 21st July 2010, 13:20 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
Exactly. Yet, a contradictory report that said "most gamers prefer physical media" - which is only true because they are used to it.

It does have some advantages. Unlike PC games, where the disc is easily copied and the piracy control is the CD-Key, with console games the discs are harder to copied and afaik copies only work on modded consoles. And there is split-screen multiplayer.

What this means is that gaming with your friends, each of them needs a copy of the game and a PC to play it on, so virtual copies of games are fine. You rarely have a copy of a game that you want to install on a machine other than your own, since you can't run two instances at the same time, and you want to play. But with consoles, you can play a game with a friend on his/her console, without having to bring yours with you.

But, with physical media designed for consoles, you can easily bring it places with you, and play it on other consoles without the hassles of installing it, uninstalling it, or needing a CD Key.

If I buy the newest PC game, and want to play it with my friends, I tell them to get copies, and then we all bring our laptops and play it.

If I buy the newest console game, and want to play it with my friends, I can bring my game disc over to their house, pop it in their xbox, and we can play it together.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums