Originally Posted by KingBroly A big graphical leap forward for PS4/720 would mean losses by the hardware manufacturer. While I'm sure Sony is up for that again, I doubt Microsoft is. I think Microsoft has reached a complacent level with 360 and I doubt they'll go all out for their next console unless they are really, really stupid and want to throw those big profits away.

I really don't think that Sony can stomach the kind of losses it sustained with the PS3 launch.

"TOKYO—Stung by its long-struggling television business, Sony Corp. said Wednesday it swung to a quarterly net loss and now expects to lose more than $1 billion this fiscal year, its fourth straight year in the red."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...123765996.html

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 All these labels are fairly silly IMO, but they get used regularly. When I see the core gamer term tossed around I take it to mean basically the average 360 or PS3 gamer who's been gaming for a long time, prefers traditional controls and traditional genres like FPS, platformers, fighting games, sports games etc. Online gaming, DLC etc. goes along with that, as well as wanting top of the line graphics and so on. In other words, exactly the type of gamer Nintendo mostly ignored with the Wii by putting out a console with last gen graphics, motion controls with no packed in controller option suitable for PS3/360 ports, crappy online system, focus on casual games and rehashing their franchises etc. I just don't see the Wii U doing a ton to change that. Nintendo's focus will always be more on families and kids than on older core gamers and their game libraries will always reflect that. I don't see the control option being much better and few people are going to want to play the latest shooter or fighter with that giant tablet controller. Online may go to a more unified account, but they'll probably still keep stupid numbers rather than letting people pick their own screen names since they think that helps protect kids for whatever reason. Graphics wise the Wii U will probably be on par with the 360 and PS3, maybe a tad past them. As we discussed earlier in the thread, the real key will be how far beyond that the next Xbox and Sony systems go. If they take a big step forward and make the Wii U seem outdated a year or two after launch, then the Wii U will definitely fail with core gamers.

I would contend the WiiU Tablet looks like it would handle more traditional game controls without issue.

However, you are correct that the fundamental "go to market" problem remains. How to move the initial units to existing 360 and PS3 customers and keep them favoring the WiiU version of a title, including against the potential XB3/PS4. A good start would be a decent online platform as all of the gamers you mentioned really like playing online*.

We'll see.

*It is interesting to see Nintendo so far behind on this aspect. Previously Nintendo has been a trendsetter in distribution, ect. The Satellite systems and the flashable cartridges were ahead of the their time in Japan. I understand their currnet focus on party gaming, but one would think they need not be such singularly focused.

Originally Posted by Blaster man I really don't think that Sony can stomach the kind of losses it sustained with the PS3 launch.

They won't have to. They had such huge losses as they forced in Bluray right when it first came out and was still expensive as hell.

It won them the HD format war, but cost them their lead in the console war as the PS3 was just too pricey launching at $500-600 and them still losing a lot on each console.

They won't have anything like that to drive up costs this time, so they can launch a powerful console at $300-400 and not lose as much as they lost on each PS3 at launch probably.

Originally Posted by foltzie I would contend the WiiU Tablet looks like it would handle more traditional game controls without issue.

But who would want to play with that clunky behemoth of a controller, vs. a nice, ergonomically sound controller like the 360 controller?

I see that being a hard sale. The tablet controller just looks uncomfortable and unwieldy compared to a 360 controller or a dual shock controller. I can't see many people seeing that controller and saying "I'd rather play Modern Warefare 4 with that than my Xbox controller."

If Nintendo really wants to make a push for core gamers, they need to pack in a wireless, Wavebird like controller with every console so there's a standard controller that comes with every console that third party developers can program for as they know everyone has one. It won't work if it's sold separately like the Classic Controller Pro as people never develop much for peripheral accessories that not every console owner has.

Originally Posted by foltzie *It is interesting to see Nintendo so far behind on this aspect. Previously Nintendo has been a trendsetter in distribution, ect. The Satellite systems and the flashable cartridges were ahead of the their time in Japan. I understand their currnet focus on party gaming, but one would think they need not be such singularly focused.

I think it is a combination of them not seeing it coming, and lots of focus on "party gaming" as you say. Personally, I get more out of group gaming with the people in the room rather than the rather detached online gaming. I've never quite embraced online gaming like others have.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 But who would want to play with that clunky behemoth of a controller, vs. a nice, ergonomically sound controller like the 360 controller? I see that being a hard sale. The tablet controller just looks uncomfortable and unwieldy compared to a 360 controller or a dual shock controller. I can't see many people seeing that controller and saying "I'd rather play Modern Warefare 4 with that than my Xbox controller." If Nintendo really wants to make a push for core gamers, they need to pack in a wireless, Wavebird like controller with every console so there's a standard controller that comes with every console that third party developers can program for as they know everyone has one. It won't work if it's sold separately like the Classic Controller Pro as people never develop much for peripheral accessories that not every console owner has.

Then, where's the incentive to move on from another console, if all you are doing is mimicing the other consoles? I've already said that I don't think faster CPU/better graphics are going to be enough anymore.

Fact is, the controller is going to be a key in the success of the WiiU to find creative ways of using it for gameplay that you can't get with just a gamepad. I expect growing pains with it just like with the motion controls of the Wii.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 They won't have to. They had such huge losses as they forced in Bluray right when it first came out and was still expensive as hell. It won them the HD format war, but cost them their lead in the console war as the PS3 was just too pricey launching at $500-600 and them still losing a lot on each console. They won't have anything like that to drive up costs this time, so they can launch a powerful console at $300-400 and not lose as much as they lost on each PS3 at launch probably.

if memory serves, the PS3 was estimated to cost them $1,000 to make but they sold it for $500-$600. So I have to wonder how much of that cost was blu ray and how much was the rest of the hardware like the cell processor? I'm sure there's some old iSupply news articles from back then that would provide those figures. I seem to remember reading that the diode needed for the laser was maybe $300? I can't remember for sure though.

I do agree that they won't be pushing a technological advancement of optical or processor technology. This next generation will be an evolution in technology and not a revolution. I'm kind of expecting to see a PS3.5 and an Xbox2.5 kind of like the Wii was just a GameCube1.5.

My prediction is that MS will have a more advance Kinect packed into all consoles and Sony will have a move controller and camera included.

On a side note, given Sony's poor showing in the TV market, I'm hoping they'll stop charging $3,500 for the same $2,000 tv that Samsung makes in the same factory. Sony just isn't competitive any longer. They haven't adjusted their prices to be in line with current rent supply and demand. Though I'm honestly most interested in LG because they have passive 3D instead of active shutter.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 But who would want to play with that clunky behemoth of a controller, vs. a nice, ergonomically sound controller like the 360 controller? I see that being a hard sale. The tablet controller just looks uncomfortable and unwieldy compared to a 360 controller or a dual shock controller. I can't see many people seeing that controller and saying "I'd rather play Modern Warefare 4 with that than my Xbox controller." If Nintendo really wants to make a push for core gamers, they need to pack in a wireless, Wavebird like controller with every console so there's a standard controller that comes with every console that third party developers can program for as they know everyone has one. It won't work if it's sold separately like the Classic Controller Pro as people never develop much for peripheral accessories that not every console owner has.

Hey, I liked the Duke!

Until I get to try one I dont know if it are easy to hold or not, The e3 reviewers indicated they were OK to hold, but as the old PA indicated, that is should not necessarily be assume to be a universal truth.

Regarding packing in a Wavebird like controller, I agree, but I think that is a step too unlikely for them. I dont even think they are apt to pack in a CCPro... It's sell the tablet or bust.

Originally Posted by Blaster man if memory serves, the PS3 was estimated to cost them $1,000 to make but they sold it for $500-$600. So I have to wonder how much of that cost was blu ray and how much was the rest of the hardware like the cell processor? I'm sure there's some old iSupply news articles from back then that would provide those figures. I seem to remember reading that the diode needed for the laser was maybe $300? I can't remember for sure though. I do agree that they won't be pushing a technological advancement of optical or processor technology. This next generation will be an evolution in technology and not a revolution. I'm kind of expecting to see a PS3.5 and an Xbox2.5 kind of like the Wii was just a GameCube1.5.

IIRC decent stand alone Bluray players were $500+ at the time the PS3 launched.

Again, I don't expect a PS 3.5 or Xbox 2.5 type advancement. It's been too long since these consoles launched for them to do a half-assed upgrade in 2013 or beyond and expect people to buy. I don't expect a gigantic leap by any means, but still a big improvement as games continue to move closer to photo realism.

Originally Posted by foltzie Regarding packing in a Wavebird like controller, I agree, but I think that is a step too unlikely for them. I dont even think they are apt to pack in a CCPro... It's sell the tablet or bust.

Yep. And it will most likely be bust again with core gamers IMO. The core gamer group already has a stigma against Nintendo, and launching with a "weird" controller again will just further that.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 Again, I don't expect a PS 3.5 or Xbox 2.5 type advancement. It's been too long since these consoles launched for them to do a half-assed upgrade in 2013 or beyond and expect people to buy. I don't expect a gigantic leap by any means, but still a big improvement as games continue to move closer to photo realism.

Well, given the time that has passed since the PS3 and 360 was developed, modest improvements probably can be done without breaking the bank. Unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo probably can't afford to take the hit in going big (not that they'd likely get good ROI on it anyways.)

Yep. And it will most likely be bust again with core gamers IMO. The core gamer group already has a stigma against Nintendo, and launching with a "weird" controller again will just further that.

Yet, many of those people embraced the Gamecube controller, which is still an odd bird. Personally, I like the Wii controller - Nunchuk combo even without motion controls.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 IIRC decent stand alone Bluray players were $500+ at the time the PS3 launched. Again, I don't expect a PS 3.5 or Xbox 2.5 type advancement. It's been too long since these consoles launched for them to do a half-assed upgrade in 2013 or beyond and expect people to buy. I don't expect a gigantic leap by any means, but still a big improvement as games continue to move closer to photo realism.

geez, I just don't know about that. Obviously there will bea bigadvancementamd they can still make money because of technological advancement. I guess what I mean by 3.5/2.5 is that they will be using current technology or maybe a little better than what PC's can do but they won't be pushing the envelope much. I would expect better graphics and all games to run at 60FPS in 1080P. That's it, I don't expect the graphics to completely blow me away when compared to what PC's can do right now. Better? Yes. Lots better? No.

Originally Posted by TheLongshot Yet, many of those people embraced the Gamecube controller, which is still an odd bird. Personally, I like the Wii controller - Nunchuk combo even without motion controls.

The GC was still mostly a flop with core gamers. Nintendo hasn't really succeeded much with core gamers since the SNES. N64 got beat soundly by the PS1, GC was way behind the PS2 in sales.

But even being odd, the GC controller was still a pretty standard controller. Only major flaw as not having a standard second analog stick. The right stick was pretty crummy.

I'm not a fan of the Wiimote/nunchuck combo personally. Just doesn't work as well as standard controller IMO--especially for the genres I play like FPS (don't care for pointer aiming) and WRPGs. Just not enough buttons and really need two analog sticks or you end up having a crummy camera like in Skyward Sword since you don't have camera control.

Originally Posted by Blaster man geez, I just don't know about that. Obviously there will bea bigadvancementamd they can still make money because of technological advancement. I guess what I mean by 3.5/2.5 is that they will be using current technology or maybe a little better than what PC's can do but they won't be pushing the envelope much. I would expect better graphics and all games to run at 60FPS in 1080P. That's it, I don't expect the graphics to completely blow me away when compared to what PC's can do right now. Better? Yes. Lots better? No.

We'll see. Huge mistake to launch before they can make a big improvement IMO. Games are still selling like hotcakes on the 360 and PS3, so it would be stupid of them to put out new hardware that they'll take a loss on if it doesn't really advance things.

They can just continue dragging out this generation now that they're making profits. Not like Nintendo is going to move the graphics envelop forward and put any pressure on them.

If they drag it out until 2013 or 2014 and still don't make a big step forward in graphics, then I may well just take a generation off from gaming if not quitting completely. I'm not going to drop $400 on a new console that's a marginal improvement over the 360 giving my current (and declining) interest in gaming in general.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 We'll see. Huge mistake to launch before they can make a big improvement IMO. Games are still selling like hotcakes on the 360 and PS3, so it would be stupid of them to put out new hardware that they'll take a loss on if it doesn't really advance things. They can just continue dragging out this generation now that they're making profits. Not like Nintendo is going to move the graphics envelop forward and put any pressure on them. If they drag it out until 2013 or 2014 and still don't make a big step forward in graphics, then I may well just take a generation off from gaming if not quitting completely. I'm not going to drop $400 on a new console that's a marginal improvement over the 360 giving my current (and declining) interest in gaming in general.

Both companies took major losses at the start of this generation so I believe they are doing a sort of chicken game right now. Trying to see how long they can go without launching another console but they also don't want to launch a year after the other console. Everyone now knows that's a huge mistake.

I'll be getting another gaming console the next generation despite my declining interest as well. The difference is that I'm only getting one the next generation. This generation I have all three. More than likely it will be the Xbox 3 because I feel like the Xbox has a better controller for my hands. I feel like the Playstation controllers are just too small. Another thing, I'll be waiting until the second hardware revision is released the next generation. There's plenty of stuff in my backlog right now and no doubt there will be in the future.

I have noticed that I'm much less likely to put up with a game that I don't completely enjoy. I had never played any Gears of War game or any Halo game. I got the Gears triple pack and played Gears of War 1 and 2. Those were fun/good games. Then I tried Halo 3 and it just didn't seem fun. Now I'm going to sell Halo 3 without finishing it. I have too many games to play that interest me to screw around with that game. Another thing is that my backlog is a bit too large so I'm going to have to do something about it. I have games in it like MySims Sky Heros because I got it really cheap but I really don't have any interest in playing. I've stopped buying games because they are $5 or less.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 I'm not a fan of the Wiimote/nunchuck combo personally. Just doesn't work as well as standard controller IMO--especially for the genres I play like FPS (don't care for pointer aiming) and WRPGs. Just not enough buttons and really need two analog sticks or you end up having a crummy camera like in Skyward Sword since you don't have camera control.

See, coming from PC gaming, I hate playing FPS with a gamepad. For me, Wii remote - nunchuk comes closer to mouse - keyboard that I'm used to. I also like that it isn't as cramped as a gamepad.

I understand the occasional need for a 2nd analog stick and more buttons, but I often find the 2nd analog stick to be a pain when I need to use it and press buttons.

Originally Posted by Blaster man I'll be getting another gaming console the next generation despite my declining interest as well. The difference is that I'm only getting one the next generation. This generation I have all three. More than likely it will be the Xbox 3 because I feel like the Xbox has a better controller for my hands. I feel like the Playstation controllers are just too small.

Yeah, I basically went one console this generation after having 3 last gen. Started with the Wii, didn't care for it much and ditched it after getting a 360 in fall 2007. Now I have 2 again as I rebought a Wii when my Xbox Live account got hacked in October (and is still locked while they're trying to restore it).

I'll almost definitely go with only 1 again next gen if I do buy one. Most likely Xbox as I like their first party games more than Sony's. Though I'm pretty grumpy with their slow response to my account hacking currently....

I'll only get a Wii U if they have a lot more games that appeal to me than the Wii has had, and even then I'd only buy it later in the generation after a few price drops.

Originally Posted by TheLongshot See, coming from PC gaming, I hate playing FPS with a gamepad. For me, Wii remote - nunchuk comes closer to mouse - keyboard that I'm used to. I also like that it isn't as cramped as a gamepad. I understand the occasional need for a 2nd analog stick and more buttons, but I often find the 2nd analog stick to be a pain when I need to use it and press buttons.

Yeah, that's the difference. I've always been a console gamer and ing despised keyboard/mouse controls the few times I've tried to play PC games. I just hate doing anything at a PC at home after spending hours working on one every day, so I generally don't want my hands anywhere near a keyboard/mouse in my precious free time!

The 360 controller is the best I've every used. I love offset analog sticks and the controller just fits my hands perfectly. Only downside is the dpad sucks (though I hear the new one is better) but that's pretty much moot as I don't play any games that use it for anything more than changing weapons or calling in things (basically just as extra buttons rather than for movement).

Originally Posted by foltzie Until I get to try one I dont know if it are easy to hold or not, The e3 reviewers indicated they were OK to hold, but as the old PA indicated, that is should not necessarily be assume to be a universal truth.

Perception carries a lot of weight though. The WiiU controller may be passable for comfort, but it certainly doesn't look that way.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 In any case, taking a nice step forward in graphics will be key. Cutting edge graphics are huge in selling consoles to the core market. People are going to get whatever console Call of Duty, Madden etc. look the best on among the Nintendo, Sony and MS offering.

Not necessarily true. The Xbox was the most powerful console last gen and the PS3 is clearly more powerful than the 360 yet neither won over American gamers. The lesser powered PS2 and 360 trumped their more powerful competition. (and yes, the Wii trumped them all)

At this point I'm not so sure that we don't have hard and firm allegiances in place for all 3 companies. With online structures in place, friends and online purchases, who's to say people don't just stick with what they know next time out? It will take major bungling(think pre-PS3 launch or RROD) on all three companies parts to lose their existing base.

I am paid up for Live for 2-3 more years. I have a digital library of games and DLC tied to MS that I don't want to part with(assuming any of that content moves forward). As a consumer, I'm probably not going with the competition next time out simply because of that content. I'd venture there are a ton of people in the same boat for both 360 and PS3. Less so with Nintendo since they didn't offer much in the way of online stuff on the Wii.

Originally Posted by Blaster man Both companies took major losses at the start of this generation so I believe they are doing a sort of chicken game right now. Trying to see how long they can go without launching another console but they also don't want to launch a year after the other console. Everyone now knows that's a huge mistake.

Whenever they decide to launch, I think Microsoft will try and pull an Apple and announce at E3 and launch that fall, at least in America since this is their territory. Of course it would take some serious effort on their part to not have third parties leaking info to the press about games in the next-gen pipeline. This way Sony gets caught with their pants down and MS beats them by a year again, unless they have something waiting in the wings as well. With the hit they took on the PS3, I see them being very reactionary this time out.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 I'll almost definitely go with only 1 again next gen if I do buy one. Most likely Xbox as I like their first party games more than Sony's. Though I'm pretty grumpy with their slow response to my account hacking currently.... I'll only get a Wii U if they have a lot more games that appeal to me than the Wii has had, and even then I'd only buy it later in the generation after a few price drops.

Same here. I own all three and next time out, one will probably suffice, and as I said above even not knowing anything about the next consoles, MS is likely to get my money.

I will concede that owning a Wii was nice for when the 360 was out for month long at a time repairs.

I can't rule out the WiiU though since Nintendo has so many killer franchises. It might be my first price drop Nintendo purchase.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 I just hate doing anything at a PC at home after spending hours working on one every day, so I generally don't want my hands anywhere near a keyboard/mouse in my precious free time!

Amen to that. I like the Wii/Nunchuck combo (minus motion and pointing controls) strictly on the split controller aspect, but the Wiimote 2.0 really needs the four traditional buttons (A,B,X,Y). However, the lack of a second analog still presents a problem without resorting to pointing.

Originally Posted by dmaul1114 The 360 controller is the best I've every used. I love offset analog sticks and the controller just fits my hands perfectly.

I am a stickler for ergonomic controllers and the 360 can't be beat. The DualShock just can't touch the offset analog sticks and their trigger and bumper buttons are pitiful. The controller on the whole is just not ergonomically comfy either. It was great in 1997 but it's time for Sony to move on. We aren't still using N64 controllers, why should we still be using PS1 controllers?

The D-pad argument seems moot at this point. It all comes down to fighters and it just doesn't seem like a thriving genre anymore. I'll qualify this with "I'm not up on that genre anymore" but look at Street Fighter IV sales. Looks like it sold roughly 2 million combined on 360 and PS3. That's 2 million people out of a pool of about 120 million. What's that, less than 2% of the user base? I can see why they leave it to third parties to provide special controllers.

Originally Posted by Corvin Perception carries a lot of weight though. The WiiU controller may be passable for comfort, but it certainly doesn't look that way.

Indeed. Perception is really key to sales. And Nintendo would have to make dramatic changes to improve their perception among core gamers.

Launching with an unwieldy looking tablet controller isn't a good start on that front....

Not necessarily true. The Xbox was the most powerful console last gen and the PS3 is clearly more powerful than the 360 yet neither won over American gamers. The lesser powered PS2 and 360 trumped their more powerful competition. (and yes, the Wii trumped them all)

I wasn't necessarily saying that the most powerful console wins each generation.

Just that core gamers expect a new console to offer a jump forward in graphics. The Wii won from getting non-gamers to buy in big numbers.

Right from day 1 there was a lot of bitching from core gamers about how the graphics weren't much better than the Gamecube. If a core gamer is going to shell out for a new console, they expect it to take some steps forward from that company's current console to be worth their while.

At this point I'm not so sure that we don't have hard and firm allegiances in place for all 3 companies. With online structures in place, friends and online purchases, who's to say people don't just stick with what they know next time out? It will take major bungling(think pre-PS3 launch or RROD) on all three companies parts to lose their existing base.

Agreed, and very good point about people being tied into downloaded games, friends lists etc.

Honestly, Nintendo's best bet would probably be to just focus on handhelds as far as hardware goes and go third party in the console arena and just make millions selling their killer franchises on consoles that other companies are taking losses on. Or maybe go second party and partner with Sony and get some say in controller design etc.

I can't rule out the WiiU though since Nintendo has so many killer franchises. It might be my first price drop Nintendo purchase.

I'm kind of in the same boat, and will probably pick one up after a price drop or two for Mario, Metroid and Zelda. But I am a tad tired of those franchises so they'll have to make some strides forward in those games. I'm not sure I'll buy if it's just the same ole, same ole with an new coat of HD paint.

I am a stickler for ergonomic controllers and the 360 can't be beat. The DualShock just can't touch the offset analog sticks and their trigger and bumper buttons are pitiful. The controller on the whole is just not ergonomically comfy either. It was great in 1997 but it's time for Sony to move on. We aren't still using N64 controllers, why should we still be using PS1 controllers?

Agreed. I never cared much for the Dual Shocks. Just too small, and I hate the side by side analog sticks for dual analog games as well. And agree that the triggers are terrible for shooters.

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by Corvin Not necessarily true. The Xbox was the most powerful console last gen and the PS3 is clearly more powerful than the 360 yet neither won over American gamers. The lesser powered PS2 and 360 trumped their more powerful competition. (and yes, the Wii trumped them all)

I think a thing to remember is that the PS2 continued to have a long life even after the PS3 came out. Any new console from Sony or Microsoft is going to have to contend with that, particularly if they don't go with backwards compatiblity, which both companies fell down on in this generation.

At this point I'm not so sure that we don't have hard and firm allegiances in place for all 3 companies. With online structures in place, friends and online purchases, who's to say people don't just stick with what they know next time out? It will take major bungling(think pre-PS3 launch or RROD) on all three companies parts to lose their existing base.

It sort of happened with the last generation as well, tho the online thing isn't a big deal for me. As usual, content is going to be king and the main driver is going to be who has the exclusive titles that you want to play.

Same here. I own all three and next time out, one will probably suffice, and as I said above even not knowing anything about the next consoles, MS is likely to get my money. I will concede that owning a Wii was nice for when the 360 was out for month long at a time repairs. I can't rule out the WiiU though since Nintendo has so many killer franchises. It might be my first price drop Nintendo purchase.

With the Wii being the odd duck, I think we had more multiple console households than we had previously. Unless you were just a casual gamer, it was hard to just have the Wii in your house. Personally, I went with Wii and PS3, the latter because it is my main media device in my living room with Blu-ray, streaming music from my server and HD Netflix. I never saw the point in owning an Xbox. I had no interest in the exclusives, and a lot of games would come out for PC as well.

That being said, I think any new console will be a hard sell for me, particularly since I have a huge backlog on all three of my consoles that will keep me busy for a long time. (I also have a PS2)

Amen to that. I like the Wii/Nunchuck combo (minus motion and pointing controls) strictly on the split controller aspect, but the Wiimote 2.0 really needs the four traditional buttons (A,B,X,Y). However, the lack of a second analog still presents a problem without resorting to pointing.

I tend to agree that having more buttons would be better, but again I'm used to a mouse, which does have two butons. I don't mind the pointing if they work on making it less flaky. As I said, I like using my right hand as a mouse and my left as the keyboard. The problem I always have with analog sticks with camera movement is that they autocenter. I like the freedom a mouse gives you with looking around without something pressuring you to go back to center.

Originally Posted by TheLongshot I think a thing to remember is that the PS2 continued to have a long life even after the PS3 came out. Any new console from Sony or Microsoft is going to have to contend with that, particularly if they don't go with backwards compatiblity, which both companies fell down on in this generation.

And that's a big part of why I think they won't launch until they can put out consoles that make enough of a step forward that people want to buy them and play the awesome looking new games rather than keep playing 360/PS3 games. People aren't going to shell out $400+ for a new console if the games aren't noticeably better looking than current gen games.

As usual, content is going to be king and the main driver is going to be who has the exclusive titles that you want to play.

I don't think that will get many to change loyalties. With third party exclusives mostly being a thing of the past it just comes down to first party exclusives which probably won't change much.

People who love Mario, Metroid and Zelda will want a Wii U, people who love Halo and Gears of War will want a 720 and people who love Uncharted, Gran Turismo etc. will want a PS4.

So Corvin is likely right that most people will just buy the successor to whatever console they liked most this generation as their main console the next go around when you factor that in, along with friends lists, content tied to a console's account etc.

I never saw the point in owning an Xbox. I had no interest in the exclusives, and a lot of games would come out for PC as well.

I was the same way with the PS3 (minus the PC part). The big launch price turned me off, especially since I didn't have an HDTV at the time and thus no interest in Blu Ray. I don't really dig Sony's exclusives--the Uncharted games are the only ones I've really wished I could play. And even once I got an HDTV, I prefer to have a standalone Blu-ray player rather than use a game console and put extra wear and tear on it.

That being said, I think any new console will be a hard sell for me, particularly since I have a huge backlog on all three of my consoles that will keep me busy for a long time. (I also have a PS2)

I'm also in no rush. I don't have a gigantic backlog as I'm really only interested in AAA type games, but i have enough to keep me busy for a while. Mainly I just have no interest in shelling out money for a console unless they can make a pretty big step forward with the graphics. Until then I'm happy just playing sequels and new games on the 360, so I hope they drag out this console cycle a few more years.

I don't mind the pointing if they work on making it less flaky.

For me the pointing will just never be precise enough for me to use it for aiming in a fast paced FPS game. I just don't have very steady hands.

A new console is a very hard sell for me, launch titles always drop in price, and better versions and limited edition consoles always come out eventually. There is simply no need for me to have it first because its just too costly. I just bought the XBox 360 a couple months ago so I have a whole generation of games to catch up on before I even think about the new consoles.

I have to wonder how many people are in the same boat, especially with the economy the way it is, there are always hardcore gamers and rich people who have to have it first but how many will actually spend the money to get the console day 1 this time around?

It costs an awful lot of money to get set up with a new console day 1, console is full price and games are full price too, same with accessories,and we all know they will definitely drop in price. The only way I can see it working is if the consoles were launched in October or November to capitalize on holiday sales, they really shouldn't be launching during any other time period or else we will all have to listen to the companies whining about low sales. Nintendo released the 3DS in March and we all know how that turned out.

Originally Posted by SaraAB I have to wonder how many people are in the same boat, especially with the economy the way it is, there are always hardcore gamers and rich people who have to have it first but how many will actually spend the money to get the console day 1 this time around?

Plenty. All it takes is a good buzz reel of Halo & Call of Duty footage to get people excited. FPS players have to have the latest and greatest (hence the yearly CoD releases) and jumping to a new console will be no different.

You forget, new consoles always come at Christmas. They make great, albeit expensive, gifts.