Poll: Will this console gen be shorter?

[Saucycarpdog]

Heard some of my friends talk about it and it really peaked my curiosity. Consoles are one of the few tech devices today that don't update every year but instead every 7-8 years. So perhaps Microsoft and Sony will update their consoles more frequently in the future?

What do you guys think?


Edit: accidently put PS4 instead of PS5 XD. Pretend that 4 is a 5.

 

[Strelok]

Yes,but mainly because consoles are not likely to survive till the end of the planned cycle. Technology moves far to fast for such an archaic and worn out system to survive, and the start of this cycle started so badly with both being underpowered. Microsoft was headed in the right direction before the rabid technophobic fans forced them to back track, which is good, who would want Microsoft at the forefront of cloud gaming? No one should be the right answer to that. Cloud gaming will wipe out consoles most likely long before the 10 year mark, worst case at the end of this console stagnation cycle (10 years according to Microsoft), there will not be another.

 

[Supernova1138]

Likely not to be the case due to the loss-leader business model that the console manufacturers have adopted, where they sell their hardware at a loss and try to make up the profits on game licensing fees and online service fees eg. Xbox Live or Playstation Now. As such, it's in the console manufacturer's best interests to drag the generation out as long as possible to keep raking in those fees, that's why the 7th Generation lasted as long as it did and the only reason we have new consoles now is because Nintendo decided to upset the apple cart and announce the Wii U. Sony and Microsoft were then forced to start developing new consoles lest they be seen as falling behind the curve and wind up losing market share to Nintendo.

Granted, this generation doesn't seem to be quite as expensive for the console manufacturers, they don't seem to be selling their consoles for a loss of several hundred dollars each as they were last generation, but this is coming at the cost of the new consoles already feeling obsolete because they can't do 1080p/60FPS. Depending on how fast internet infrastructure advances, the whole idea of consoles may very well be obsolete by the time a new generation starts in about 8 years or so, as people may decide to just stream their games from a cloud gaming provider rather than have a piece of hardware that can run the games locally.

 

[Maximum Bert]

I obviously dont know but I would probably say that it wont be shorter maybe even longer due to diminishing returns sure you can do more with more power but its getting less and less visible each time. I still know many people who are happy with their PS3s and Xbox 360s and see upgrading as a neccessary annoyance but people were really hyped for the jump from NES to SNES right up until the PS2 era but from the PS2 to PS3 or Xbox to 360 there wasnt so much excitement at least from my perspective.

I just dont think most people will want faster cycles now there is no longer the clamour for higher tech consoles and comp that there was in the past. Cloud gaming will probably happen in this consoles lifecycle but I dont think it will be very effective at all to start with and will be many many years before it becomes the de facto thing I mean look at the outcry (rightly so imo) when microsoft tried a digital only service. I dont think we will see many more console gens after this one probably one or two more at most imo.

 

[MysticSlayer]

It will probably be shorter than the last one, but the seventh generation was unusually long. If I remember correctly, past consoles tended to last 4-6 years, but this last generation saw a 6-8 year span between consoles. If this generation is shorter, I'd imagine that it will be along the lines of a 4-6 year span. However, this last generation may be an indication that we'll start seeing longer time spans between console releases, so it is really hard to tell exactly how long the Xbox One and PS4 will last before their successors come around.

 

[tippy2k2]

It'll be interesting to see one way or the other.

On one hand, all three systems have introduced some pretty gimmicky crap that no one wants that is kind of handicapping their own systems (touch pad on PS4, Kinect 2.0, and weird giant tablet thing).

On the other hand, we're hitting a graphical ceiling (yes, I know that you CAN have it get shinier but I and many console gamers just don't care all that much; if we did, we'd be on a PC). Really, with where everything is at now, there's not much need to push it farther as we're getting such diminishing returns on your investment. The boost from PS1 to PS2 was HUGE. The boost from PS2 to PS3 was noticeable. The boost to PS3 to PS4 is...there but not all that impressive.

I'd lean more towards shorter because of the gimmicky stuff and I think if there's one black mark that is going to hurt these new systems, it's that 30 v 60 thingy. While I don't think it's as big of a deal as others make it, I do think it's going to matter more and more as TVs advance (like these 4K things and whatnot). If the systems have to start sacrificing power and abilities to make the system look good on the new TVs (remember how bad SDTV started looking as HDTV took over?), people are going to want to have their systems to get stronger to meet the new tech demand.

EDIT: Wait...does the technical stuff with TVs on the horizon affect how 30 FPS is going to look? I'll be the first person to say that I don't 100% understand that stuff so if it would affect it the way I stated above, I stand by it. If it does NOT affect it that way, I'm changing my answer to "Just as long or longer than PS3/360/Wii generation" due to the graphic ceiling that I talked about earlier.

 

[laggyteabag]

I hope so, yes. The thing that is different about this cycle as opposed to the 360/PS3 cycle is that when those consoles came out, they were the most powerful machines on the market, whereas this cycle showed us that the consoles now are less powerful than the average gaming PC (or at least in my experience). What I have also noticed is that a lot of people are jumping ship now, especially considering that very little has changed in the console world. Sure the graphics got prettier, but they are still running at sub-1080p 30FPS most of the time, which for a new generation is incredibly disappointing. On the other hand though, the last generation was unusually long, considering that the space between the Xbox and the Xbox 360 was about 3-4 years, the gap between the 360 and the One was double that, so I don't imagine that it will be easy to keep the One/ PS4 going for as long as the previous gen, especially considering my first point.

 

[BrotherRool]

If tech world doesn't drastically change in direction, then know. This console generation has only looked healthier and stronger than the ones before it so far and a long generation benefits everyone. The customers pay lower prices as manufacturing becomes easier, the platform owners don't have to spend more on launch publicity and R&D cycles, the publishers get to sell to large stable install bases and the developers don't have to continual inflate game development in the drive for ever advancing graphics. Even the laptop owners benefit because a long console cycle means games becoming increasingly available to everyone instead of just the elite.

However their are multiple ways the tech world may well change and they would disrupt the cycle.

The only reason we'd get really short yearly cycles is if the steam box model takes over, where people are selling devices for profit instead of platforms at a loss. Because otherwise, as I said above, long console cycles benefit everybody, especially with the diminishing returns on graphics. At the moment console manufacturers basically sell at a loss and make it back through game sales. If they wanted a yearly production cycle they'd have to aim to make a profit by selling the physical machine.

Steam Boxes could take off and make this happen, but I think it's a long shot.

Or VR could hit it big. But in that case I think we're more likely to see Sony and Microsoft try to adapt their products to make VR work than anything else.

Or streaming could hit it big, in which case console cycles will completely disappear and we'll all move into an age where you own the product digitally but the device you play it on doesn't matter at all.

 

[Crazy Zaul]

It will probably be just as long with the slow speed they add features and the fact that barely any games come out in the first year or 2 of a new gen.
Although it probably should be shorter since the technical capabilities of the new consoles are utterly pathetic from what we've seen so far and maybe the next set of consoles could be more genuinely next gen.

 

[Something Amyss]

Yes,but mainly because consoles are not likely to survive till the end of the planned cycle.

People said this about the last console cycle, and it lasted longer than most expected.

I'm not saying it will happen this time around too, but I think it's a touch foolish to repeat the same claims again when they were wrong before.

 

[Strelok]

Yes,but mainly because consoles are not likely to survive till the end of the planned cycle.

People said this about the last console cycle, and it lasted longer than most expected.

I'm not saying it will happen this time around too, but I think it's a touch foolish to repeat the same claims again when they were wrong before.

Really? Don't remember talk like that in the tech world, death of the PC from the uninformed console crowd yes, but consoles no, sure you got that right? Probably not, cause it isn't 2006 anymore.

 

[Something Amyss]

Really? Don't remember talk like that in the tech world, death of the PC from the uninformed console crowd yes, but consoles no, sure you got that right? Probably not, cause it isn't 2006 anymore.

Consoles have been on their way out the entirety of the last generation because ermagerd, there's no way they could keep up with PCs.

I know that the population of the boards here are PC-centric, but it's not just PCs that have been happily dying for a long time. Consoles haven't been declared dead for nearly as long, but it's been fairly persistent. People were declaring the current gen a failure before it launched, and despite having an impressive (and realistically, it was impressive) launch and continued sales, people are still calling it a failure. But last gen wasn't much different, if we're being honest.

and the PS2 era was speculated to be the "last." And I don't remember if the PS1 was speculated, but I wouldn't be shocked to find it was.

 

[J Tyran]

Really? Don't remember talk like that in the tech world, death of the PC from the uninformed console crowd yes, but consoles no, sure you got that right? Probably not, cause it isn't 2006 anymore.

Consoles have been on their way out the entirety of the last generation because ermagerd, there's no way they could keep up with PCs.

The issue this time isn't PCs though, its just about everything else. With a completely serious face I bet there will be fridges and chopping boards with more processing power and higher visual fidelity (greater than HD screens are already a thing) by the end of this console generation. Nvidias Tegra K1 is more powerful than the 7th gen consoles right now, whats the future going to hold in 2-4yrs time?

The App store and Google Play have far more customers than consoles do, what happens when you can just pick up a wireless controller and play the latest multiplat game from a big publisher in 4K with just a TV or synced from your phone/tablet? When Google and Apple can turn around and offer the likes of EA and Activision penetration into hundreds of millions of homes with minimal extra investment from the consumer they will soon start to switch focus, PCs stand a chance of not being swamped by that because there will dedicated system builders that find as much entertainment in building and fiddling with the PCs as the games themselves.

 

[Strelok]

Really? Don't remember talk like that in the tech world, death of the PC from the uninformed console crowd yes, but consoles no, sure you got that right? Probably not, cause it isn't 2006 anymore.

Consoles have been on their way out the entirety of the last generation because ermagerd, there's no way they could keep up with PCs.

I know that the population of the boards here are PC-centric, but it's not just PCs that have been happily dying for a long time. Consoles haven't been declared dead for nearly as long, but it's been fairly persistent. People were declaring the current gen a failure before it launched, and despite having an impressive (and realistically, it was impressive) launch and continued sales, people are still calling it a failure. But last gen wasn't much different, if we're being honest.

and the PS2 era was speculated to be the "last." And I don't remember if the PS1 was speculated, but I wouldn't be shocked to find it was.

Has nothing to do with PCs man, don't know where you are getting that, just reflects your lack of understanding at what is currently happening to consoles, and their future, of which they have none. PC will not escape the coming change unscathed either. Desktops will go the way of the Dodo by 2020. Our workplace is embracing the office of the future, all mobile devices. When that happens the price of desktops will skyrocket. I won't bother explaining any more to you, still stuck in the Consoles VS whatever mentality.

*Also I was ninja'd above

 

[FPLOON]

That third option left me in positive stitches...

OT: I wouldn't necessary call it "shorter" nor would I predict it to be "longer" than the previous gen, for example... I will say that this gen would be "different" in the sense that each console basically has to work overtime before the possibility of building a PC that's "better" than a console and it's cost WAY less than a Wii U as a means to establish their "permanent" mark on the current gen spectrum...

<link=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzKKjJuujSs>In other words... I just hope it isn't too short... (That would suck...)

 

[FillerDmon]

Nitpick: I can't help but notice that the op doesn't seem to mention the WiiU anywhere when considering this current Gen, despite the fact that it itself kicked off this generation. Maybe I just can't find it, and my eyes can't see it highlighted when I search for it electronically.

I see it shooting the console runners and those who rely on them in the foot if the generations become shorter. It takes much more effort to make the consoles and get everyone geared up for them than one probably would think, which means they have to earn profit from the games sold on them. Shortening the generation only serves to limit the time before they'd need to put all that work into another generation, and makes everyone less likely to invest in the generation at all: those working to make it profitable will have their nuts in a vice and will be forced to make the end product more expensive or put less effort into it, and the customers will know to just wait for whatever the next big thing will be around the corner sooner.

 

[Vigormortis]

Christ, I hope it is. The last few console generations, besides overstaying their welcome, have been responsible for not just stifling hardware progress and utilization but also stifling open creativity. In the land of spunkgargleweewee and prohibitive licensing agreements there's little room for the little guys with "non-standard" ideas.

Thankfully some like Sony have taken steps (incredibly tiny baby steps, mind you, but still) in trying to address this, but their efforts are ultimately moot given the inherent closed nature of console gaming.

Now I'm sure someone will take my comment as a cry of hate towards consoles. It's not. I game on consoles almost (but not quite) as much as I game on PC. I hold fond memories of my old consoles to this very day. I even still own and occasionally use some of my old consoles. In fact, I've given serious thought to buying a PS4. There isn't a single bit of ire in me towards console gaming.

However, when I see a pattern of interference I'll call it out.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

Probably, last gen was longer than the previous one and this new generation started off with slightly weaker hardware which in the end won't really do Sony and MS many favours in the long run.

I do hope though that it will last maybe at least 5-6 years and hopefully by then the economy as a whole will be more positive and in the plus so that by then MS and Sony could throw in some more hardware into a new gen instead of holding back, maybe also developing a few parts here and there seeing as how we've gotten to that point where they either have to go unique or they're just a "pc".

For me I wasn't exactly sold on this gen as much as I was the last, I started off with a PS3 until that died a year and a half later which prompted me to go grab a 360 and ride that side out for most of the generation and I ended up avoiding the Wii altogether because it didn't really have anything I was interested in at the time, now this generation it's taken some time but I'm sold on a Wii U first, an XB1 next year and probably a PS4 a few years later because so far they don't really want me to grab their system as of yet.

I do hope it won't drag on for another 8 years though, I'd rather they go for 5, make new systems with improved hardware that won't dent them as much yet allow them to make profit for that generation (well for Sony at least), Nintendo could do with some hardware improvements themselves but not as much as say Sony and MS.

 

[Bellvedere]

I don't think so. It's not really in anyone's interest to have shorter generations.

Console manufacturers make their money through games licenses not through hardware sales (unlike mobile phones, tvs, etc. ect. that are constantly moving). A new console generation means spending big bucks to ensure they get a significant portion of the consumer base so that third party developers want to make games on that system and therefore pay for licensing. Even if they end up doing poorly in terms of market percentage, skipping a generation ahead whilst competitors stick with the current generation is unlikely to work out. Not to say that there isn't a time, obviously it has happen least the concept of console gaming stagnates and dies off completely, but just that it is an expensive and risky time for console manufacturers and I imagine that they wouldn't want to go through that every other year.

Game developers aren't particularly keen to release games for brand new systems either because they don't yet have as large a potential player base as systems from the previous gen since there are many gamers are waiting for a multitude of reasons (money, enough games they want, that special system seller, price drops, security in the quality of hardware, etc.) before they adopt the new console generation. Costs are also initially higher as they adapt to new platforms and hardware.

Then there's consumers, many of which either can't or don't want to spend hundreds of dollars on a new console every couple of years. As we seem to be getting to the point of diminishing returns on upgraded hardware, there's a more lackluster reception to current gen games too. Or rather what we get from the upgrade isn't as immediately noticeable as the move up from previous gens has been so it isn't quite as exciting, which will certainly slow the adoption of new hardware. Also given how hit and miss backwards compatibility has been from one generation to the next, I'm not sure people really want to have several gaming systems taking up all their room or saying goodbye to all their old games every few years.

 

[Rozalia1]

Spoiler

It'll likely last longer if anything else, sorry marks.
Also to the couple of guys doing it this is a thread about generation length, not a "I luv mobile gaming, bring on ze future" thread.

Why don't we let things play out for a good 4 years before we start with the little uninformed predictions shall we friends.