Pachter says no next gen until 2015

Pachter in his new show at Gametrailers says that the next successor of the 360/PS3 won't arrive until at least 2013 (most likely 2015).I don't know how much more the developers can push these consoles for another 4-5 years, because I see them peeking in the next 1-2 years. I could be wrong since I don't know much about their technical aspects but 2015 even 2013 seems really long because PCs are already so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power. So do you guys want this gen to last this long?

LINK

I hope so the way the economy is going i dont want to buy another 400 dollars console in the next 2 years

Pachter in his new show at Gametrailers says that the next successor of the 360/PS3 won't arrive until at least 2013 (most likely 2015).I don't know how much more the developers can push these consoles for another 4-5 years, because I see them peeking in the next 1-2 years. I could be wrong since I don't know much about their technical aspects but 2015 even 2013 seems really long because PCs are already so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power. So do you guys want this gen to last this long?

LINK

BURSTIIIFIRE

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

I myself thought they be out by 2014, but I dont really mind when they come. As long as they have the games I'll buy them.

I wish people would stop giving Pachter attention.

My guess is 2014. Nintendo needs to do something sooner though.

New consoles won't replace 360 or PS3 for at least 3 years. The hardware in them can handle the software.

The Wii needs a replacement BADLY, but Nintendo won't do anything as long as people buy it, which is smart business for them. If people stop buying the thing, then they will have to replace it with better hardware.

Natal and Move will probably have a 3-4 year lifespan depending on their success as platforms. If they do well, then these consoles will probably last another 4 years until 2014-2015 as predicted (after all, four years is only two development cycles; that's only enough time for developers to create one sequel to a successful game launched in, say, 2011 for either peripheral). On the other hand, if they bomb (which would not surprise me), then we may see MS launch their next-gen console as soon as 2012.

New gen in 2012 confirmed!

I wish people would stop giving Pachter attention.

Chutebox

[QUOTE="BURSTIIIFIRE"]

Pachter in his new show at Gametrailers says that the next successor of the 360/PS3 won't arrive until at least 2013 (most likely 2015).I don't know how much more the developers can push these consoles for another 4-5 years, because I see them peeking in the next 1-2 years. I could be wrong since I don't know much about their technical aspects but 2015 even 2013 seems really long because PCs are already so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power. So do you guys want this gen to last this long?

LINK

Persistantthug

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Pachter is wrong a lot of times...Jamani

[QUOTE="Jamani"]Pachter is wrong a lot of times...mordin-solus

[QUOTE="Jamani"]Pachter is wrong a lot of times...mordin-solus

My guess is 2014. Nintendo needs to do something sooner though.

PatchMaster

why?they are outselling the competition and winning the ps2 should of been stopped but it isnt yet.

Good. The longer this gen lasts, the happier I am.

[QUOTE="mordin-solus"][QUOTE="Jamani"]Pachter is wrong a lot of times...skinny_man_69

I agree with him. Aside from the Wii 2, I don't see the true next generation arriving until late 2013. We're still finding ways to push the 360 and PS3 further and further. I expect a new Xbox before I do a PS most definitely though. The 360 may not have reached its limits quite yet, butit's definitely closer than thePS3 is.When Sony said the PS3 would have lifespan of 10 years, I didn't really believe it until now. While not quite 10 years, I see it lasting until late 2014, with a new Xbox likely releasing a year before that the way it occurred this generation.

[QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

[QUOTE="BURSTIIIFIRE"]

Pachter in his new show at Gametrailers says that the next successor of the 360/PS3 won't arrive until at least 2013 (most likely 2015).I don't know how much more the developers can push these consoles for another 4-5 years, because I see them peeking in the next 1-2 years. I could be wrong since I don't know much about their technical aspects but 2015 even 2013 seems really long because PCs are already so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power. So do you guys want this gen to last this long?

LINK

XPierreKirbyX

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

Persistantthug

That is because 90% of engines today are made with console limitations in mind.

Crysis 2 will show the true power of the PC but other than thatalot of games are multiplat and need to be made with what consoles can handle.

We are no where near a "wall" in terms of graphics.

DX11 also brings alot to the table and if a native DX11 game is built it will obliterate any game ever made in graphics.

I think it should be for PS3 and 360. Wait for economy to get back up, and for development costs to lower. Meanwhile, there should be a new Wii in 2010 or 11.

Pachtersays lots of things......

Pachter is wrong a lot of times...Jamani

more like all of the time

[QUOTE="XPierreKirbyX"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Persistantthug

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

I'm gonna say earliest is late 2012, but most likely 2013. 2015 is a stretch considering 360 and PS3 performance is becoming tapped out, and please save me the CPU debate... ugh.

[QUOTE="BURSTIIIFIRE"]

Pachter in his new show at Gametrailers says that the next successor of the 360/PS3 won't arrive until at least 2013 (most likely 2015).I don't know how much more the developers can push these consoles for another 4-5 years, because I see them peeking in the next 1-2 years. I could be wrong since I don't know much about their technical aspects but 2015 even 2013 seems really long because PCs are already so far ahead of the consoles in terms of power. So do you guys want this gen to last this long?

LINK

Persistantthug

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Why cant the consoles go until 2015? MS and Sony will make more continuing support of current gen than launching new consoles. Also the devs and publishers will make more by not having to improve graphics and not having learn to program for a new console.

All Microsoft has to do is release their next console before Sony. MS has the means to drop a new console anytime they want, Sony doesnt.

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

Persistantthug

Seriously man consoles are light years behind PC.

Some facts:

resolution (2.5X - 3.8X better than consoles)

PC
1920x1200 - 2304000 pixels

consoles
1280x720 - 921600 pixels
1024x600 - 614400 pixels

fps (2.5x better than consoles)

PC
60fps

consoles
25fps

anti aliasing (2.0x better than consoles)

PC
4xAA 8xAA

consoles
0xAA 2xAA

texture resolution (4.0x better than consoles)

PC
2048x2048(or even 4096x4096) + anisotropic filtering 16xAF

consoles
1024x1024(or even 512x512) + anisotropic filtering 0xAF

Also PC games have much better: shades, lighting, shadow(shadow-map, shadow
filtering), view distance, physics, geometric detail, parallax mapping, volumetric
stuff, ambient occlusion etc.

[QUOTE="XPierreKirbyX"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Persistantthug

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

Good. The longer this gen lasts, the happier I am.

Vari3ty

Same with me. Money is just too tight these days and with firmware updates often it keeps things up to date pretty well. Graphics are fine along with everything this gen..."besides 360 hardware:)"..

2015 is too long :|

As much as im loving this gen, i want next gen consoles like 2012/2013.

[QUOTE="XPierreKirbyX"][QUOTE="Persistantthug"]

I think PC's are better graphically and technically, but the degree of "better" this generation I believe is more marginal than ever in any of the other previous generations.

I believe a wall has been approached and we are now seeing and getting the "diminishing returns" effect in terms of a "power to graphics ratio" level.

I don't believe these consoles will go all the way to 2015 though. 2013 would be viable though. However, I suspect there will be another major console maker to enter...maybe Apple, maybe Google....maybe someone else.

Persistantthug

Either you misunderstood or maybe it just hasn't occured to you...

But nothing on the PC thus far is LIGHTYEARS better, lookwise than console games. Yes, it looks better, but nothing like it used to be in previous gens.

To put it in analogous terms, it would be like having the choice of chick A who is hot, and chick B who is hot.

Chick A may be supermodel hot and better than B, but B is a super hot chick already and the majority of people couldn't care to be bothered to pick out the small detailed differences between the two. Why? because both chicks are already smokin hot.

Dumb analogy, but easy to understand.

Hardware =/= Software

Also, playing a game at 2560x1600 with filtering is always better than console gaming at sub-HD.

This is one of the few times i agree with Pachter. I don't think we'll see new consoles from Sony and MS soon. The release of Natal and Move are pretty good indications that they want this generation to last a lot longer. Frankly, i don't mind. As long as they keep releasing great games, it's fine by me.

2012 world ends, no more consoles

2015 is too long :|

As much as im loving this gen, i want next gen consoles like 2012/2013.

I hope not, I will want to move on to some new tech before then. I'm still guessing a 2012 launch.

If true, it could be bad news for consoles if the previous gen are anything to go by. once the consoles run out of power they will turn to pc where they can run their game they way they want. only so much you can do with 512mb total ram when you average pc has around 4gb + 512mgb+ vram. Once all the in dev big consoles games come out I'd be surprised if there is anything big that hits consoles this gen. imprezawrx500

I don't know how PC gaming was in the past but I dooubt it has become much more simpler now than it was before.Rockman999