4th Gen consoles or no?

With the way games are going these days I had assumed that 4th gen consoles would def be on the way around 2011-2013, but now im not so sure of that.

Project Natal for the Xbox 360is projected to have a minimum 5 year life span and the games that will be compatible with Natal are already in developement. If this is the case then does M$ have plans to release a new console, and for that matter what about Nintendo and PS? Even more so the Natal is being spec'd for the 360 so will it be compatible with a new console if they release oneor would they simply make a Natal 2 of sorts to accompany the new console even though gamers will still be waiting on games for the first Natal. I also wonder how this is going in terms of the other 2 consoles as well. Idk, it all seems a little overwhelming to me. Just thought id share.

I think your right that it will be a while, M$ and Sony won't want to wait too long though because PC graphics get better all the time and their games will lag behind in visuals in years to come. I'm pretty sure the next xbox will have a natal unit compatible with Natal games, be really silly for it not too.

You started gaming in 2000, didn't you?

Came in expecting old school system wars, SEGA Vs NINTENDO.

I am disappoint. :(

FYI, "4th gen" was the SNES era. We are currently in the 7th console generation, and so next gen will be the 8th.

You must thought PS1 was the first console ever made.

oh hahaha......haha...ha. um no.

Nice insults btw, ill box those up and keep em. No i dont think PS1 was the first console ever, no this isnt about old school consoles, I didnt start gaming in 2000 (1994 btw). Now if any of you have anything relevant to add by all means share, oh and if you actually know anything about the industry and how they only recently started classifying consoles in generations please share that info as well because if thats the case then you should actually start generations when the first video game console was made in 72, the odyssey if im not mistaken. Otherwise keep you elementary insults and misguided industry views to confines of your pea-sized brains.

What are you talking about?

oh hahaha......haha...ha. um no.

Nice insults btw, ill box those up and keep em. No i dont think PS1 was the first console ever, no this isnt about old school consoles, I didnt start gaming in 2000 (1994 btw). Now if any of you have anything relevant to add by all means share, oh and if you actually know anything about the industry and how they only recently started classifying consoles in generations please share that info as well because if thats the case then you should actually start generations when the first video game console was made in 72, the odyssey if im not mistaken. Otherwise keep you elementary insults and misguided industry views to confines of your pea-sized brains.

elfimis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_generation

oh hahaha......haha...ha. um no.

Nice insults btw, ill box those up and keep em. No i dont think PS1 was the first console ever, no this isnt about old school consoles, I didnt start gaming in 2000 (1994 btw). Now if any of you have anything relevant to add by all means share, oh and if you actually know anything about the industry and how they only recently started classifying consoles in generations please share that info as well because if thats the case then you should actually start generations when the first video game console was made in 72, the odyssey if im not mistaken. Otherwise keep you elementary insults and misguided industry views to confines of your pea-sized brains.

elfimis

It does start with the Odyssey (and kin). That was the first generation. Then the second generation was the Atari 2600/5200, Intellivision, and Odyssey^2.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

oh hahaha......haha...ha. um no.

Nice insults btw, ill box those up and keep em. No i dont think PS1 was the first console ever, no this isnt about old school consoles, I didnt start gaming in 2000 (1994 btw). Now if any of you have anything relevant to add by all means share, oh and if you actually know anything about the industry and how they only recently started classifying consoles in generations please share that info as well because if thats the case then you should actually start generations when the first video game console was made in 72, the odyssey if im not mistaken. Otherwise keep you elementary insults and misguided industry views to confines of your pea-sized brains.

eveileb-ekam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_generation

Im sorry, I didnt realize wikipedia, an all user based entry information site, wasthe premiere knowledge sourceof the gaming industry. Please excuse my manners, you are obviously clever in the ways of google. I could to get on wikipedia and write 1,000's of pages about literally anything. it doesn't make it 100% accurate.

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"]

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

oh hahaha......haha...ha. um no.

Nice insults btw, ill box those up and keep em. No i dont think PS1 was the first console ever, no this isnt about old school consoles, I didnt start gaming in 2000 (1994 btw). Now if any of you have anything relevant to add by all means share, oh and if you actually know anything about the industry and how they only recently started classifying consoles in generations please share that info as well because if thats the case then you should actually start generations when the first video game console was made in 72, the odyssey if im not mistaken. Otherwise keep you elementary insults and misguided industry views to confines of your pea-sized brains.

elfimis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_generation

Im sorry, I didnt realize wikipedia, an all user based entry information site, wasthe premiere knowledge sourceof the gaming industry. Please excuse my manners, you are obviously clever in the ways of google. I could to get on wikipedia and write 1,000's of pages about literally anything. it doesn't make it 100% accurate.

Then look at the sources at the bottom of the page. Im not going to do your research for you. The fact that a quick search on google is all it takes to prove you incorrect is telling, though.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"]

Wow, defensive much?

Its pretty much unanimously accepted that the NES is the third generation, and its contemporaries too. Previously, there was a mess of console models, but they have been categorised, too.

Here is a handy link to prove us right and you... err, well - wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_generation

eveileb-ekam

Im sorry, I didnt realize wikipedia, an all user based entry information site, wasthe premiere knowledge sourceof the gaming industry. Please excuse my manners, you are obviously clever in the ways of google. I could to get on wikipedia and write 1,000's of pages about literally anything. it doesn't make it 100% accurate.

Then look at the sources at the bottom of the page. Im not going to do your research for you. The fact that a quick search on google is all it takes to prove you incorrect is telling, though.

While those sources do infact properly site the information that they are attached to, not a single sourceon the page isfor explanation of a system used for placing consoles into repsective generations. The author just simply groups and names them as he/she saw fit.

This is so much fun =D!

It doesn't really matter what Wiki says. This is the generally accepted definition among the gaming community and press.

It doesn't really matter what Wiki says. This is the generally accepted definition among the gaming community and press.

ThePlothole

Really, so at E3 2009 when they referred to the Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii as 3rd gen consoles that was what? an industry screw-up?

This is so much fun =D!

elfimis

Watching you backpedal harder than a kid who realizes his bike brakes aren't working? Yeah, definitely fun.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"]

It doesn't really matter what Wiki says. This is the generally accepted definition among the gaming community and press.

elfimis

Really, so at E3 2009 when they referred to the Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii as 3rd gen consoles that was what? an industry screw-up?

Just who referred to it as such? If perhaps it was Sony, are you sure they weren't just talking about their own console history?

"Win with grace, Lose with class"

This is in your sig. Quite frankly, I'm not seeing any class on your part or for that matter, grace.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"]

It doesn't really matter what Wiki says. This is the generally accepted definition among the gaming community and press.

ThePlothole

Really, so at E3 2009 when they referred to the Xbox 360, PS3, and the Wii as 3rd gen consoles that was what? an industry screw-up?

Just who referred to it as such? If perhaps it was Sony, are you sure they weren't just talking about their own console history?

It was John Riccitiello and I do believe he said "with the 3rd generation of CONSOLES holding solid, the market is eager to what the future has is stow"

With the way games are going these days I had assumed that 4th gen consoles would def be on the way around 2011-2013, but now im not so sure of that.

Project Natal for the Xbox 360is projected to have a minimum 5 year life span and the games that will be compatible with Natal are already in developement. If this is the case then does M$ have plans to release a new console, and for that matter what about Nintendo and PS? Even more so the Natal is being spec'd for the 360 so will it be compatible with a new console if they release oneor would they simply make a Natal 2 of sorts to accompany the new console even though gamers will still be waiting on games for the first Natal. I also wonder how this is going in terms of the other 2 consoles as well. Idk, it all seems a little overwhelming to me. Just thought id share.

elfimis

It was John Riccitiello and I do believe he said "with the 3rd generation of CONSOLES holding solid, the market is eager to what the future has is stow"

elfimis

Riccitiello? You mean that guy who worked in high level positions at a whole bunch of companies (Clorox, Pepsi, Häagen-Dazs, Wilson Sporting Goods, and Sara Lee) before becoming the CEO of EA? The man was hired for his business credentials, not his familiarly with gaming history.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

It was John Riccitiello and I do believe he said "with the 3rd generation of CONSOLES holding solid, the market is eager to what the future has is stow"

ThePlothole

Riccitiello? You mean that guy who worked in high level positions at a whole bunch of companies (Clorox, Pepsi, Häagen-Dazs, Wilson Sporting Goods, and Sara Lee) before becoming the CEO of EA? The man was hired for his business credentials, not his familiarly with gaming history.

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

"Win with grace, Lose with class"

This is in your sig. Quite frankly, I'm not seeing any class on your part or for that matter, grace.

Ryan_Som

This is comming from a guy who literally is only on this thread to post insults.

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"]

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

Im sorry, I didnt realize wikipedia, an all user based entry information site, wasthe premiere knowledge sourceof the gaming industry. Please excuse my manners, you are obviously clever in the ways of google. I could to get on wikipedia and write 1,000's of pages about literally anything. it doesn't make it 100% accurate.

elfimis

Then look at the sources at the bottom of the page. Im not going to do your research for you. The fact that a quick search on google is all it takes to prove you incorrect is telling, though.

While those sources do infact properly site the information that they are attached to, not a single sourceon the page isfor explanation of a system used for placing consoles into repsective generations. The author just simply groups and names them as he/she saw fit.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"]

Then look at the sources at the bottom of the page. Im not going to do your research for you. The fact that a quick search on google is all it takes to prove you incorrect is telling, though.

eveileb-ekam

While those sources do infact properly site the information that they are attached to, not a single sourceon the page isfor explanation of a system used for placing consoles into repsective generations. The author just simply groups and names them as he/she saw fit.

Absolutely, my thoughts exactly.

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"][QUOTE="elfimis"]

While those sources do infact properly site the information that they are attached to, not a single sourceon the page isfor explanation of a system used for placing consoles into repsective generations. The author just simply groups and names them as he/she saw fit.

elfimis

Absolutely, my thoughts exactly.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"] Look, I dont care who said what or when, but the first generation of consoles would be when the first consoles came out. You cannot just wipe out history and ignore other consoles. If we are in the third gen, then that would place the PS1, Saturn and N64 as first. So what generation were the SNES and Genesis? By the very definition of the word, you are wrong. It doesnt matter how someone used it at an E3 once. They were wrong too. eveileb-ekam

Absolutely, my thoughts exactly.

I agree'd with you. You seem somewhat confused....

Well this thread derailed quickly. TC, just retitle your thread, "8th Gen consoles or no?" and we'll move on.

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"][QUOTE="elfimis"]

Absolutely, my thoughts exactly.

elfimis

I agree'd with you. You seem somewhat confused....

Because a second ago, you didnt agree with me :P

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"] What?eveileb-ekam

I agree'd with you. You seem somewhat confused....

Because a second ago, you didnt agree with me :P

Well for the sake of arguing, and this thread getting wildly out of control, I figure its just easier to agree:P Although, my stubborn nature sways me from retracting my previous arguement, I do infact retract it. Now, that thats all said and done with, care to answer the question that this whole thing was originally about or no?

Well this thread derailed quickly. TC, just retitle your thread, "8th Gen consoles or no?" and we'll move on.

Ryan_Som

You say that like you had some sort of logicalcontribution in this arguement at some point.

[QUOTE="eveileb-ekam"]

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

I agree'd with you. You seem somewhat confused....

elfimis

Because a second ago, you didnt agree with me :P

Well for the sake of arguing, and this thread getting wildly out of control, I figure its just easier to agree:P Although, my stubborn nature sways me from retracting my previous arguement, I do infact retract it. Now, that thats all said and done with, care to answer the question that this whole thing was originally about or no?

I read this post, and now I feel bad :(

I think this generation has been truly disrupted, and our usual terms of a four year generation dont seem to apply any more. In terms of Natal, I suppose they could launch a new model of 360 and rebrand it, as Sony have done with the Slim. This could quite easily extend its lifetime, especially if more prominence is given to Natal than the console itself.

Sony is in kind of the same boat, what with their Wand coming out soon, and the rebranding of the Slim that has done so well. I think they see the PS3 as having as long a life as the PS2, and wont be in a hurry to release a new console so soon.

I dont think that either Microsoft or Sony are willing to sink huge amounts of money into consoles again, until they can be profitable as Nintendo have always been.

As for Nintendo, their platform is going to look more and more outdated as time goes by. I dont expect them to release another console in the typical format we are used to, but may extent their home console as they have done with the Gameboy and DS brand in the past. Theyre always going to surprise us, but with Microsoft and Sony settling in for the long haul, and adding their own motion devices, I think it would be wise for Nintendo to create a Wii with graphical capabilities on par with their competitors. I dont expect them to do this any time soon, though.

Dont feel bad, forums are known for heated debates and arguements. And as far as this console thing, my whole point is pretty much what you summed up. I dont see how releasing Natal with a minimum 5 year life span, but talking about the possibility of a new console is a good idea nor investment considering what they lost on the Xbox and the first batch of Xbox 360's with thier insane 46.5% RROD rate. Sony only slightly saved some dignity in the revision of the PS3 but at the cost of backwards compatability which is a shame for those who are just now getting on the gaming bandwagon because PS2 has tons of great titles. Nintendo is doing what they have always done and it is continuously working for them, I pardon them for the Gamecube.

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

elfimis

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

To the original question... Well, with all the money they've lost, Sony might prefer to push back the launch of a PS4 so they have time to recuperate this gen. In fact I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Nintendo and Microsoft launch with a significant lead. I don't think Natal or Arc (or M+) will factor in much. Unless they are adopted en masse, which, going by the history of "accessory controllers", doesn't seem likely.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

ThePlothole

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

To the original question... Well, with all the money they've lost, Sony might prefer to push back the launch of a PS4 so they have time to recuperate this gen. In fact I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Nintendo and Microsoft launch with a significant lead. I don't think Natal or Arc (or M+) will factor in much. Unless they are adopted en masse, which, going by the history of "accessory controllers", doesn't seem likely.

Im worried that Nintendo however isnt going to do much in the way of graphical capability which will leave them looking more and more outdated as the console war progresses.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

ThePlothole

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

To the original question... Well, with all the money they've lost, Sony might prefer to push back the launch of a PS4 so they have time to recuperate this gen. In fact I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Nintendo and Microsoft launch with a significant lead. I don't think Natal or Arc (or M+) will factor in much. Unless they are adopted en masse, which, going by the history of "accessory controllers", doesn't seem likely.

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="elfimis"]

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

elfimis

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

To the original question... Well, with all the money they've lost, Sony might prefer to push back the launch of a PS4 so they have time to recuperate this gen. In fact I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Nintendo and Microsoft launch with a significant lead. I don't think Natal or Arc (or M+) will factor in much. Unless they are adopted en masse, which, going by the history of "accessory controllers", doesn't seem likely.

Im worried that Nintendo however isnt going to do much in the way of graphical capability which will leave them looking more and more outdated as the console war progresses.

Im worried that Nintendo however isnt going to do much in the way of graphical capability which will leave them looking more and more outdated as the console war progresses.

elfimis

With the costs continually coming down, next gen Nintendo could could potentially offer something at least comparable to the 360/PS3, maybe even a bit better, while maintaining a profit as they always have.

Well that almost sounds like what Sony did with the Dual Shock (except the redesign came much later). That move helped push the controller for sure, though developers were still reluctant to fully exploit the technology for the most part.

I don't know... as much as I like the system, to be honest I have a hard time seeing the Wii having an extended life cycle. And Microsoft I could see going either way.

We're in the first gen now, the next gen would be the second gen. Duh...

to be fair the Playstation 4 will be Sony's 4th generation console

[QUOTE="ThePlothole"][QUOTE="elfimis"]

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

elfimis

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

To the original question... Well, with all the money they've lost, Sony might prefer to push back the launch of a PS4 so they have time to recuperate this gen. In fact I wouldn't be entirely surprised if Nintendo and Microsoft launch with a significant lead. I don't think Natal or Arc (or M+) will factor in much. Unless they are adopted en masse, which, going by the history of "accessory controllers", doesn't seem likely.

Im worried that Nintendo however isnt going to do much in the way of graphical capability which will leave them looking more and more outdated as the console war progresses.

With the money that Nintendo is making off the Wii, they can spent some of it boosting the graphical capabilities of their next system.

We're in the first gen now, the next gen would be the second gen. Duh...

BubbyJello

No no, this is generation aqua blue. Next with be generation burnt sienna.

With the money that Nintendo is making off the Wii, they can spent some of it boosting the graphical capabilities of their next system.

jimkabrhel

It's not really about how much money they have. Nintendo flat out refuses to adopt the strategy of initially selling the hardware at a loss. There is some sense to that, since gaming is all they do. They don't have other industries to support them if the strategy backfires on them (as it arguably did with Sony this gen). But what was expensive in 2006 will obviously be a lot more affordable in 2011-2012, when Nintendo might decided to launch their next system.

[QUOTE="elfimis"]

Yeah, that guy who gave the massive speech about console evolution at E3, yeah, thats the one.

ThePlothole

Okay, I've been looking for a transcript of that speech for the better part of an hour now and I just can't find it. Though it would seem it doesn't even matter anymore. *shrugs*

Okay, important or not, it's bugging me that I still can't find this. Does anyone know a site they can redirect me to?

With the way games are going these days I had assumed that 4th gen consoles would def be on the way around 2011-2013, but now im not so sure of that.

Project Natal for the Xbox 360is projected to have a minimum 5 year life span and the games that will be compatible with Natal are already in developement. If this is the case then does M$ have plans to release a new console, and for that matter what about Nintendo and PS? Even more so the Natal is being spec'd for the 360 so will it be compatible with a new console if they release oneor would they simply make a Natal 2 of sorts to accompany the new console even though gamers will still be waiting on games for the first Natal. I also wonder how this is going in terms of the other 2 consoles as well. Idk, it all seems a little overwhelming to me. Just thought id share.

elfimis