sparklecopy
CAGiversary!
If ps2 had a 6 year lifespan before the ps3 came out and it sold gangbusters how long will ps3 have when it sells nearly not as good until ps4 comes out?
ps3 lifespan?
- Thread starter sparklecopy
- Start date
machoman_93
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 34 (100%)
We'll I think it'll last more like 7 or 8 years. I think that the sales will start increasing in 2009, when the tv signals change from analog to digital. So i think most people will just buy and hdtv, then realized their dvds look worse than blu ray discs. So, yeah. Something like that.
I'm guessing the PS3 will have a shorter lifespan than both the PS1 and PS2. The PS2 is lasting so long because of its enormous fanbase. All the Wii-ports are also helping the PS2s lifespan. But, I really can't see any console this gen having the huge marketshare that the PS2 had, and, without the fanbase, developers won't be as willing to support it as long they supported the PS2.
On top of that, the PS3 out late in the gen, which means it has less time before the next-gen starts.
My guess is about 5 years.
On top of that, the PS3 out late in the gen, which means it has less time before the next-gen starts.
My guess is about 5 years.
[quote name='dpatel']I'm guessing the PS3 will have a shorter lifespan than both the PS1 and PS2. The PS2 is lasting so long because of its enormous fanbase. All the Wii-ports are also helping the PS2s lifespan. But, I really can't see any console this gen having the huge marketshare that the PS2 had, and, without the fanbase, developers won't be as willing to support it as long they supported the PS2.
On top of that, the PS3 out late in the gen, which means it has less time before the next-gen starts.
My guess is about 5 years.[/quote]
I would say it would have a lifespan of 5-6 years. I wouldn't say the PS3 was out late, just that MS came out early. What was the xbox's lifespan, four years? Maybe shorter because all the xbox games stopped being developed before the 360 even came out, I shall always hate them for that.
On top of that, the PS3 out late in the gen, which means it has less time before the next-gen starts.
My guess is about 5 years.[/quote]
I would say it would have a lifespan of 5-6 years. I wouldn't say the PS3 was out late, just that MS came out early. What was the xbox's lifespan, four years? Maybe shorter because all the xbox games stopped being developed before the 360 even came out, I shall always hate them for that.
[quote name='Thongsy']I would say it would have a lifespan of 5-6 years. I wouldn't say the PS3 was out late, just that MS came out early.[/QUOTE]
Yea, I feel the same way, but, regardless, the gen started and the PS3 was out a year later. It just brings them that much closer to the next-gen and shortens their potential life by that much.
[quote name='Thongsy']What was the xbox's lifespan, four years? Maybe shorter because all the xbox games stopped being developed before the 360 even came out, I shall always hate them for that.[/QUOTE]
It was about 4-5. I can't say I blame them. To this day, they are still not profiting off the system. If they had 100+Million xboxs out there (like the PS2), you would see much more support.
Yea, I feel the same way, but, regardless, the gen started and the PS3 was out a year later. It just brings them that much closer to the next-gen and shortens their potential life by that much.
[quote name='Thongsy']What was the xbox's lifespan, four years? Maybe shorter because all the xbox games stopped being developed before the 360 even came out, I shall always hate them for that.[/QUOTE]
It was about 4-5. I can't say I blame them. To this day, they are still not profiting off the system. If they had 100+Million xboxs out there (like the PS2), you would see much more support.
The ps3 can last past 10 years... with the ps3 its not like they need to upgrade anytime soon.. and out of the 3, they definitely don't have to upgrade first. When they drop the system, they need to have things already in place... online, games, downloadable titles. I wouldn't upgrade until Nintendo upgrades.
CouRageouS
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 27 (100%)
I would say a good long while. Hell the PS2 is still going strong. The PS3 would be able to compete with whatever Nintendo has next and possibly the next Xbox. Early PS3 titles just aren't that impressive yet, but later ones that go balls to the wall on the blu-ray will be insane.
[quote name='Thomas96']The ps3 can last past 10 years... with the ps3 its not like they need to upgrade anytime soon.. and out of the 3, they definitely don't have to upgrade first. When they drop the system, they need to have things already in place... online, games, downloadable titles. I wouldn't upgrade until Nintendo upgrades.[/quote]
Can it last ten years, sure. Will it? Probably not. In nine years, the PS3 and 360 will be nearly two gen old by than, as much as I hate it, consoles operate on a 5 year lifespan, give or take. You come out one year later and it's a catch up race to whoever came out first, as much as I like the PS3 it's is still far behind the 360 because of this.
That one extra year that develops get to play around with codes and whatnot does help out whoever came out first.
Can it last ten years, sure. Will it? Probably not. In nine years, the PS3 and 360 will be nearly two gen old by than, as much as I hate it, consoles operate on a 5 year lifespan, give or take. You come out one year later and it's a catch up race to whoever came out first, as much as I like the PS3 it's is still far behind the 360 because of this.
That one extra year that develops get to play around with codes and whatnot does help out whoever came out first.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
You're mad. They have to update as soon as everyone else does. Thats how its always worked. Furthermore, whoever is doing not so good is expected to respond first.
I mean, they can skip a generation if they want, but I dont think its adviseable. I would like it if all the players were comfortable enough with their final position that they could all agree not to enter into fresh round of fighting, but I'm not holding my breath.
I mean, they can skip a generation if they want, but I dont think its adviseable. I would like it if all the players were comfortable enough with their final position that they could all agree not to enter into fresh round of fighting, but I'm not holding my breath.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']You're mad. They have to update as soon as everyone else does. Thats how its always worked. Furthermore, whoever is doing not so good is expected to respond first.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, but I took the 'lifespan' part to include the PS3s life after the PS4 is released. I still consider the PS2 to be alive, even with the PS3 out.
Agreed, but I took the 'lifespan' part to include the PS3s life after the PS4 is released. I still consider the PS2 to be alive, even with the PS3 out.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
In that case, lifespan will be based on their final marketshare and support. Without leading marketshare, you end up in a GC or XBOX situation in which you want to get off the sinking ship as soon as possible and onto a new boat.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']You're mad. They have to update as soon as everyone else does. Thats how its always worked. Furthermore, whoever is doing not so good is expected to respond first.
I mean, they can skip a generation if they want, but I dont think its adviseable. I would like it if all the players were comfortable enough with their final position that they could all agree not to enter into fresh round of fighting, but I'm not holding my breath.[/QUOTE]
upgrade what? PS3 has the most powerful processor [cell], best storage medium [blu ray] until the competition shows that they've actually got a product that's truly superior... I wouldn't touch the PS3. THe ps3 was didn't get off to a good start becasue sony Fumbled the launch, they didn't have enough parts, they didn't get the dev kits to developers in time. and they were too expensive..
I mean, they can skip a generation if they want, but I dont think its adviseable. I would like it if all the players were comfortable enough with their final position that they could all agree not to enter into fresh round of fighting, but I'm not holding my breath.[/QUOTE]
upgrade what? PS3 has the most powerful processor [cell], best storage medium [blu ray] until the competition shows that they've actually got a product that's truly superior... I wouldn't touch the PS3. THe ps3 was didn't get off to a good start becasue sony Fumbled the launch, they didn't have enough parts, they didn't get the dev kits to developers in time. and they were too expensive..
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
They have to have something ready, because they WONT know exactly their competitors are up to until its very late in the game, far too late to start planning from scratch. If they dont have leading marketshare or wide support by then, there isnt much incentive to keep the generation going.
In that scenario, they HAVE to do something different. As some people have learned by now, its not all about power.
In that scenario, they HAVE to do something different. As some people have learned by now, its not all about power.
sparklecopy
CAGiversary!
the thing is developers haven't even taken advantage of the system. I mean heavenly sword doesn't look THAT great at 720p. The only real game that is wowing me with ps3 promised visuals is the photorealistic Gran Turismo. when do you think we'll get rpg's that look like gran turismo? If developers aren't spending money to fill a 50gb bluray with 1080p goodness on the ps3 why would they do the same on a ps4? right now it looks like developers are filling ps3 with ps2 games on steroids with more textures and polygons, etc. But they are still working on a deficient. FInal fantasy Xii upconverted looks like a ps3 game. Will we have to wait for Nintendo to release it's second generation wii with HDTV to ever enter True High Definition gaming? If this christmas doesn't sell and we don't get any Ico or Rez level innovation and creativity then I fear ps3 will be stillborn.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']They have to have something ready, because they WONT know exactly their competitors are up to until its very late in the game, far too late to start planning from scratch. If they dont have leading marketshare or wide support by then, there isnt much incentive to keep the generation going.
In that scenario, they HAVE to do something different. As some people have learned by now, its not all about power.[/QUOTE]
its not about how you start its about how you finish... the xbox was number 3 last gen, but it did a lot for the 360, got halo, and xbox live well established. I think everyone is doing their research on their next system. todays PS2 buyers are tomorrows PS3 buyers, so Sony has got be prepared with their online and game sevices. Its almost a year later and we're just receiving games that were supposed to be ready at launch.
In that scenario, they HAVE to do something different. As some people have learned by now, its not all about power.[/QUOTE]
its not about how you start its about how you finish... the xbox was number 3 last gen, but it did a lot for the 360, got halo, and xbox live well established. I think everyone is doing their research on their next system. todays PS2 buyers are tomorrows PS3 buyers, so Sony has got be prepared with their online and game sevices. Its almost a year later and we're just receiving games that were supposed to be ready at launch.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
You seem to think that how one finishes has no connection to how one starts.
Why would anyone think MS is going to run off and make a new console in 5 years. MS has lost tons of money on the first xbox and even more so far on the 360. They need to 360 to stick around for a while so they can start making some money before they try to design something entirely new.
I see PS3 lasting 10 years, especially if they actually do make the wiggle wand for PS2, maybe throw in a few gigs of storage and a little extra power too.
I see PS3 lasting 10 years, especially if they actually do make the wiggle wand for PS2, maybe throw in a few gigs of storage and a little extra power too.
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']You seem to think that how one finishes has no connection to how one starts.[/QUOTE]
not when you're going to be using the same system for the next 10 years.. that a long term period of time to improve on the mistakes of your launch. The fact that you Sony has to make 'improvements' and 'adjustments' is a direct connection to how Sony started.
not when you're going to be using the same system for the next 10 years.. that a long term period of time to improve on the mistakes of your launch. The fact that you Sony has to make 'improvements' and 'adjustments' is a direct connection to how Sony started.
The Mana Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 41 (100%)
I actually think PS3 didn't really have to be released right now, but MS pushing 360 out early kind of pushed Sony to release PS3 earlier than expected. PS3 can last around 8-10 years, I think.
sparklecopy
CAGiversary!
[quote name='The Mana Knight']I actually think PS3 didn't really have to be released right now, but MS pushing 360 out early kind of pushed Sony to release PS3 earlier than expected. PS3 can last around 8-10 years, I think.[/QUOTE]
exactly. How can Ps3 exist for ten years when Microsoft will release xbox third generation and nintendo will release wii generation 2 in 5-8 years? wouldn't that push sony's hand to release ps4 early too?
exactly. How can Ps3 exist for ten years when Microsoft will release xbox third generation and nintendo will release wii generation 2 in 5-8 years? wouldn't that push sony's hand to release ps4 early too?
[quote name='sparklecopy']exactly. How can Ps3 exist for ten years when Microsoft will release xbox third generation and nintendo will release wii generation 2 in 5-8 years? wouldn't that push sony's hand to release ps4 early too?[/QUOTE]
A PS3 can compete against a new Wii and new 360... just like the PS2, is still holding its own against the 360 and Wii.. all you need is a fresh supply of games. PS2 outsold the Wii in March 2007 - due to God of War 2... so an old system can do well as long as its getting some top grade titles. If in the future we find out that the PS3 is really not that much better than the 360, [even with devs being able to get the most out of it] then maybe they will feel more pressure to release a new console.... but honestly, its best to take your time and get the launch right... 2 million PS4 units day one.. that way everyone who wants one gets one. With a fluery of games... not on the horizon but on the shelves!
A PS3 can compete against a new Wii and new 360... just like the PS2, is still holding its own against the 360 and Wii.. all you need is a fresh supply of games. PS2 outsold the Wii in March 2007 - due to God of War 2... so an old system can do well as long as its getting some top grade titles. If in the future we find out that the PS3 is really not that much better than the 360, [even with devs being able to get the most out of it] then maybe they will feel more pressure to release a new console.... but honestly, its best to take your time and get the launch right... 2 million PS4 units day one.. that way everyone who wants one gets one. With a fluery of games... not on the horizon but on the shelves!
[quote name='Thongsy']Can it last ten years, sure. Will it? Probably not. In nine years, the PS3 and 360 will be nearly two gen old by than, as much as I hate it, consoles operate on a 5 year lifespan, give or take. You come out one year later and it's a catch up race to whoever came out first, as much as I like the PS3 it's is still far behind the 360 because of this.
That one extra year that develops get to play around with codes and whatnot does help out whoever came out first.[/quote]
The only reason their has been a traditional (Ie. Informal) 5 year console cycle is because one company is trying to get new product out before the other one, as it always has been.
Sega was out first with the Genesis, then the Saturn.
Nintendo took their good old time bringing out the Super NES (7 years AFTER the NES)
The N64 launched AFTER both the PS1 and Saturn did in 1996. But the hardware cycle was only a 4 year gap between it and the SNES.
Gamecube made the gap 5 years between it and N64, and realistically speaking CG only made it 5 years.
Now that's not accounting for software STILL being released for a system NES games were coming out into the mid-90's, PS1 titles were still coming out fairly strong (with some fairly big named titles until 2001-2002) even after the launch of the PS2.
Anyway back to my point, since we have some facts laid down, MS killed the Xbox (which launched in 2002) and it only lasted till 2005 (when Halo 2 came out) and then almost all Xbox development was shelved and ultimately scuttled for the last 6-9 mos. (the summer of '06 saw the trickle of new games, and almost none were high quality AAA games, but shovelware and ports) of that systems existance. So whomever says that it lasted 4-5 years is really incorrect.
It lasted barely 3 1/2 years.
And yeah MS did jump the gun and launch the 360 early for the sole reason of getting that years head start, hell if I owned one of their systems I would be wary of getting my moneys worth out of it, if they were going to pull that crap again.
I applauded Sony for saying that they WANT the PS3 to last 10 years, and honestly there is no reason it can't other than tech heads having to have the latest and greatest out there, I think it will be a feasible system at least 8 years from now.
And honestly when they start getting the companies making games only for the PS3 (like J-RPG's and other games not on other systems) is when people will start flocking to it.
The games make the systems, and if Sony has their way this fall is going to be the start of their onslaught of releasing high quality titles not found anywhere else, and that's where they'll get the staying power to last damn near to that 10 year mark they so desperately want to reach.
Let's see MS or Nintendo make bold claims like that, but you know what they can't because of their limited hardware.
PS3 Expensive maybe...but so far it's pretty future proof, at least for a good 3-5 years. Just watch...you'll see.
That one extra year that develops get to play around with codes and whatnot does help out whoever came out first.[/quote]
The only reason their has been a traditional (Ie. Informal) 5 year console cycle is because one company is trying to get new product out before the other one, as it always has been.
Sega was out first with the Genesis, then the Saturn.
Nintendo took their good old time bringing out the Super NES (7 years AFTER the NES)
The N64 launched AFTER both the PS1 and Saturn did in 1996. But the hardware cycle was only a 4 year gap between it and the SNES.
Gamecube made the gap 5 years between it and N64, and realistically speaking CG only made it 5 years.
Now that's not accounting for software STILL being released for a system NES games were coming out into the mid-90's, PS1 titles were still coming out fairly strong (with some fairly big named titles until 2001-2002) even after the launch of the PS2.
Anyway back to my point, since we have some facts laid down, MS killed the Xbox (which launched in 2002) and it only lasted till 2005 (when Halo 2 came out) and then almost all Xbox development was shelved and ultimately scuttled for the last 6-9 mos. (the summer of '06 saw the trickle of new games, and almost none were high quality AAA games, but shovelware and ports) of that systems existance. So whomever says that it lasted 4-5 years is really incorrect.
It lasted barely 3 1/2 years.
And yeah MS did jump the gun and launch the 360 early for the sole reason of getting that years head start, hell if I owned one of their systems I would be wary of getting my moneys worth out of it, if they were going to pull that crap again.
I applauded Sony for saying that they WANT the PS3 to last 10 years, and honestly there is no reason it can't other than tech heads having to have the latest and greatest out there, I think it will be a feasible system at least 8 years from now.
And honestly when they start getting the companies making games only for the PS3 (like J-RPG's and other games not on other systems) is when people will start flocking to it.
The games make the systems, and if Sony has their way this fall is going to be the start of their onslaught of releasing high quality titles not found anywhere else, and that's where they'll get the staying power to last damn near to that 10 year mark they so desperately want to reach.
Let's see MS or Nintendo make bold claims like that, but you know what they can't because of their limited hardware.
PS3 Expensive maybe...but so far it's pretty future proof, at least for a good 3-5 years. Just watch...you'll see.
[quote name='sparklecopy']exactly. How can Ps3 exist for ten years when Microsoft will release xbox third generation and nintendo will release wii generation 2 in 5-8 years? wouldn't that push sony's hand to release ps4 early too?[/quote]
Why? Because Nintendo and MS didn't make systems advanced enough to look to the future, or because they'll force you to upgrade IF you want to play the latest and greatest that they have on their systems.
No one forces anybody to buy anything, it's just the mindset, that I've sadly seen that if it's new I gotta have it, and it must be better than the old thing that has crappy looking (but possibly, better playing) games.
If you want to be a mindless sheep and keep up with the Jones's, you're call, but honestly for the price Sony asked you to pay for cutting edge tech that will hopefully stand up in 10 years, you'll pay the same if not more for the current console you own as well as the new one you'll have to buy if you really, truly need THEIR next system.
Why? Because Nintendo and MS didn't make systems advanced enough to look to the future, or because they'll force you to upgrade IF you want to play the latest and greatest that they have on their systems.
No one forces anybody to buy anything, it's just the mindset, that I've sadly seen that if it's new I gotta have it, and it must be better than the old thing that has crappy looking (but possibly, better playing) games.
If you want to be a mindless sheep and keep up with the Jones's, you're call, but honestly for the price Sony asked you to pay for cutting edge tech that will hopefully stand up in 10 years, you'll pay the same if not more for the current console you own as well as the new one you'll have to buy if you really, truly need THEIR next system.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
Its insane that I have to wait 3-5 years just to get the final laugh in.
Nintendo or MS wouldnt dare make the claim to future proofing because its a fictional concept.
Nintendo or MS wouldnt dare make the claim to future proofing because its a fictional concept.
The Mana Knight
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 41 (100%)
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']Its insane that I have to wait 3-5 years just to get the final laugh in.
Nintendo or MS wouldnt dare make the claim to future proofing because its a fictional concept.[/QUOTE]Because MS and Nintendo can never make a console last as long as PlayStation and PlayStation 2. They just can't do it like Sony can, that's why they won't say it.
Nintendo or MS wouldnt dare make the claim to future proofing because its a fictional concept.[/QUOTE]Because MS and Nintendo can never make a console last as long as PlayStation and PlayStation 2. They just can't do it like Sony can, that's why they won't say it.
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Because MS and Nintendo can never make a console last as long as PlayStation and PlayStation 2. They just can't do it like Sony can, that's why they won't say it.[/quote]
Haha, my original PS2 got the DRE long before my first 360
ed up.
Haha, my original PS2 got the DRE long before my first 360
ed up.
Dr Mario Kart
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 6 (100%)
Console lifespan has NEVER NEVER had even the slightest indirect relationship to hardware power. Its always been marketshare and developer support.
You'll have to forgive the majority of us for not predicting a completely unprecedented event that completely contradicts the entirety of console history.
You'll have to forgive the majority of us for not predicting a completely unprecedented event that completely contradicts the entirety of console history.
[quote name='uncle5555']
Anyway back to my point, since we have some facts laid down, MS killed the Xbox (which launched in 2002) and it only lasted till 2005 (when Halo 2 came out) and then almost all Xbox development was shelved and ultimately scuttled for the last 6-9 mos. (the summer of '06 saw the trickle of new games, and almost none were high quality AAA games, but shovelware and ports) of that systems existance. So whomever says that it lasted 4-5 years is really incorrect.
It lasted barely 3 1/2 years.
[/QUOTE]
You're really incorrect.
The Xbox launched in November of 2001. Halo 2 came out in November of 2004. There's three years right there. As far as major releases for the Xbox, a strong case could be made that Halo 2 was not the last major release. Off the top of my head, Splinter Cell - Chaos Theory, Forza Motorsport, Star Wars - KOTOR II, GTA - San Andreas and Half Life 2 all came out after Halo 2. In fact, Half Life 2 came a year after Halo 2.
Did the original Xbox have an artificially shortened lifespan due to the release of the 360? Absolutely. Do you need to skew release dates in your favor to prove that? I don't think so.
Anyway back to my point, since we have some facts laid down, MS killed the Xbox (which launched in 2002) and it only lasted till 2005 (when Halo 2 came out) and then almost all Xbox development was shelved and ultimately scuttled for the last 6-9 mos. (the summer of '06 saw the trickle of new games, and almost none were high quality AAA games, but shovelware and ports) of that systems existance. So whomever says that it lasted 4-5 years is really incorrect.
It lasted barely 3 1/2 years.
[/QUOTE]
You're really incorrect.
The Xbox launched in November of 2001. Halo 2 came out in November of 2004. There's three years right there. As far as major releases for the Xbox, a strong case could be made that Halo 2 was not the last major release. Off the top of my head, Splinter Cell - Chaos Theory, Forza Motorsport, Star Wars - KOTOR II, GTA - San Andreas and Half Life 2 all came out after Halo 2. In fact, Half Life 2 came a year after Halo 2.
Did the original Xbox have an artificially shortened lifespan due to the release of the 360? Absolutely. Do you need to skew release dates in your favor to prove that? I don't think so.
Punk_Raven
Banned
[quote name='The Mana Knight']Because MS and Nintendo can never make a console last as long as PlayStation and PlayStation 2. They just can't do it like Sony can, that's why they won't say it.[/quote]
Oh, TMK, you are a riot:lol:
Oh, TMK, you are a riot:lol:
bread's done