I don't think there should be another generation for atleast another 10 years!

lets look at what we have

nes to snes era= Big difference. It was a real leap and you could easily tell it was a whole new generation of technology.

Snes era to n64/psx= Another huge leap. Games were much bigger and even the introduction of 3D games.

N64/psx era to Dreamcat= Another huge leap. People can argue this is the first generation to get 3D games right. No more choppy animation and the games looked great.

Dreamcast to Gamecube/ps2/xbox era= Not a major improvement. Sure there were more enemies and some things were bigger, but overall it was not a drastic improvement. You could argue most of the gc/ps2/xbox games could of been 5th generation Dreamcast games.

GC/ps2/xbox era to current= Not much of a difference. If you take away high resolution (which most people don't have) the difference is even smaller. So many games that have potential flop because devolopers put so much emphasis on graphics. Nice graphics are great but it's a burden when it affects gameplay. Such as games running 30 fps or under due to performance issues.

I believe it we had another console in 2010 it would not be a huge leap over current generatio machines. Maybe more ram and faster processors but the development time would be longer and harder. I just could not warrant a purchase unless I see something that blows my mind in which I don't think there will be.

All I'm seeing is HD support and better online implementation with this gen...

Oh yeah and more stuff on screen and

Most games Vomit out HDR lighting and tries to blind you.

Sick of HDR Lighting it makes things too dark or too bright.

I hope the next xbox comes in 2010. PC hardware is getting very powerfull right now in 3 years console will look like ps2 games do now.zero9167

You're looking specifically at graphics. The next real console revolution is the online one, and Xbox Live is leading the way as far as console online services go. I think you're going to see less and less graphical revolutions and more of the supplemental features.-Tretiak

I partially agree. In fact, I think Sony should've done that with the PS2 instead of sinking so much money into the PS3, they could've extended the PS2's life a couple of years, made a ton of money and with all those profits that you are making and not spending on the PS3 they could've secured some awesome exclusives and further worked on their online infastructure. Then when the time is ready they could've launched the PS3 to what could've been a more successful and well well thought out launch. Now that the PS3 is out, if Blu-Ray wins and PS3 turns it around (which I believe they will do) I think Sony should really consider doing the whole 10 year life-span thing with the PS3, with the complexity of it's hardware developers are not going to even come close to maxing it out from a technical standpoint for a few more years (similar to how it took devs awhile to really show their stuff on the PS2) and with Blu-ray in there and being a 1080p system, they should be all set for the HDTV revolution which is just around the corner.

However, Nintendo is going to almost undoubtedly have to release a successor to the Wii before 10 years is up. I mean eventually the price of the PS3 is going to be within spitting distance of the Wii, and once the world adopts HDTV's as the standard I really can't see the Wii being able to sustatin it's popularity, I mean in 10 years cell phone games will probably have better graphics then Wii games (heck some of the cell phone games at TGS were pretty damn close).

I think current-gen games look FAR better than last gen :|

i think u need a HDTv and a HDMI cable ...... Norg

Why do you say that. I play on a monitor at 1280 X1080 resolution. I see just fine thanks.

Lets also not forget abou all the sacrifice deveopers make

-Sacrifice framerates for better graphics

-Lenghts of games for better graphics and presentation

on and on

Erm, no, just not.

First off, the generational leap has been quite notable.

Second: I'm sorry, I want my games to improve. More and better technology will allow for better games (well, allow for, dont' get into a nonsensical discussion that depends on developer's goals), and will give more freedom to devs. The actual imrpovements will no longer just be graphical revolutions, but evolutions and refinements. I'm all for it.

Then watch the hermits gloat....meetroid8

Hermit's don't apply when it comes to console generations.

i think its bad for microsoft and good for sony if this gen is longer. IMO this current gen started about two years to soon. it would be better if they (sony, microsoft0 had realeased this holiday with hd drives. two years ago was to early for one so microsoft didn't do it. last was too early because it drove the cost of ps3 up way to high for a mass-market system. if they had both launched this holiday they would have both been able to have hd-drives at a more reasonable (still a touch expensive) cost.Hihatrider87

Last gen: 1999-2005, 8 years.

I think that's fine.

Lol KungfuKitten,I'm such a tard - hahaha - 6 years!

16-bit gen: 1989 - 1994 - 5 years

32-bit gen: 1994 - 1999 - 5 years

Last gen was the longest since the 80's. Theres no reason as to why this gen should last another 10 years, that would just be ridiculous.