An article at the register speculates that new consoles from Sony and Microsoft will be announced in Spring 2004. The speculation is that Microsoft may be planning on giving some details about its new console at the Game Developers Conference in March, but that Sony may try to steal their thunder by also giving details on the upcoming PS3.
Ok, I can see why Sony would release the new Playstation. Come spring, it will have been around for going on 4 years (and I”m sure the release will get pushed back, making it ever closer to 4). But Microsoft? I don’t get it, the X-Box has been around for only 2 years as of a week or so ago. That means that in the spring, it will only have been out for 2.5 years. That makes no sense.
If I had to make a guess, the PS3 rumor may or may not be true, its just as likely either way. But the new Microsoft system is either Microsoft just trying to get into the news, or a whole lot of unfounded and unconfirmed reporting.
Because the Xbox has not sold well. Microsoft is ready to write off Xbox 1 and try to match Sony at launch next time. Nintendo is also accelerating development of their next console to be deployed at the same time.
They DO still exist and have the no. 2 position in sales worldwide, y’know.
might enter the game system market next Christmas as well…
That might actually make things interesting. Personally, I want one of those Phantoms. ; )
I’d tell you that a new BeDoper is out, but I would get modded down, for some reason.
Also if you read the article it said to expect it 20 months after the GDC which would be late 2005……read article then post…..that should always be thinking that now so you don’t look retarded.
I hear Walmart is having a huge sale on Friday with GC at $79.
There’s a chance of Sony announcing something, since PS2 sales are really dropping off, but I doubt they’d do it with the PSX (PS2 + PVR) coming out really soon. Interest in that would get killed if they announced PS3 details.
For Microsoft or Nintendo, beginning hype of their next systems would absolutely kill their current ones. Nintendo mentioned the GameCube as little as possible until the year leading up to its release. I doubt that’ll change this time around.
The PSX and PS3 are totally different products. Read up on the details.
As for X Box 1. MS is coming out with X Box 2 because during some months even the PS 1 is outselling it. Amazing as that is.
And yes. As someone mentioned above. X Box is number three, when it is that high, behind Sony and Nintendo. Gameboy actually outsells X Box also.
I have an Xbox and I bought 3 Xbox games today, maybe that will help balance the score?
There is a reason why console launches fall around the holiday season …
I hear there’s not going to be a gamecube2
I have an Xbox and I bought 3 Xbox games today, maybe that will help balance the score?
Yeah, I bought 5 PS2 for the kids in my family… this will tilt the balance…
might enter the game system market next Christmas as well…That might actually make things interesting. Personally, I want one of those Phantoms. ; )
Don’t hold your breath for either one.
As for Sony or MS announcing their new hardware early next year what’s so unusual about that? It’s fairly standard to show off tech demo stuff and announce specs (to get all the fan-boys excited) of the actual system long before the first unit ships. Nintendo probably won’t announce anything because it still unclear what exactly they are going to do ( which is funny to me because I remember reading and speculating about “Project Reality” LONG before the N64 ever shipped not mention those tech demos running on SGI (Onyx, I think) machines). But talk about Sony and MS has been going on for a while now. Popular opinion has it that MS wants to get out the door first in fall 2005. Sony will either try to beat that if they can or launch at most a few months later. As for the announcements from MS and Sony, I fully expect to hear something within the first four months of next year (E3 at the latest).
For Microsoft or Nintendo, beginning hype of their next systems would absolutely kill their current ones. Nintendo mentioned the GameCube as little as possible until the year leading up to its release. I doubt that’ll change this time around.
All current consoles have peaked in terms of sales neither the X-Box nor the Cube can realistically grab more market share. And the Great majority of the video gaming public is blissfully unaware of these announcements. If anything these announcements only confirm that this generation is on it’s way out and serve notice to developers to get started on projects for the next generation (which tend to take a bare minimum of 18 months) so they arrive on time for the console launch. MS and Big N have nothing to lose by announcing early next year. People won’t stop buying consoles over night.. hell the PS1 still sells well in some places.
An example of much too early pre-hype silliness, was Sony with its’ “Cell” technology. Message boards were lit up with annoying 12 yr old fan-boys proclaiming the almighty Cell “1000! (or was it 100?)times more powerful than current pentiums”.
Yes the PSX and PS3 are completely different. But it doesn’t mean they dont affect each other. If the PSX was released too close to the PS3, no one would buy it. If the PS3 gets hyped soon, people will question purchasing a PSX.
To the comment about GameBoy outselling Xbox… it outsells even the PS2 by a lot. The GameBoy outsells any 2 of the other consoles combined, and comes pretty close to the sales of the other 3 combined.
The current system sales haven’t necessarily peaked. GameCube sales for this year are above last year’s, and are drastically higher thanks to the price drop. The PS2 has a decent amount of sales left in it, if for no other reason than how often the PS1&2 break.
But if the new consoles get announced, word of mouth will get around to the casual gamer. I’ve talked to several people that are considering getting a current console, but feel that if they do it’ll get obsoleted by the next generation fairly soon. Any truth about the new consoles would completely scare them away.
The other biggie… if you’re in the lead, hyping your next console isn’t so bad. It can help keep your momentum, if you don’t over do it. But if you’re trailing, it’ll just completely kill you in the current generation.
I want polygons! and visuals! I am hearing all this hype about Ps2 is the way to go because of the amount of games but thats a bogus argument because nobody wants thousands of games. They want quality and only a few game companies make those type of games.
Go to any gaming site and compare identical games . The driving car games were way superior and realistic on Xbox.
The reason Ps2 outsells xbox is because of hype about game selection . Thats a real bad way to determine which is better. It’s XBOX by a big margin.
hype about game selection?
True xbox gets a bad rap for games,but rightfully so.As nintendo has great inhouse games and sony has great third party games and xbox has what halo? lol
> am hearing all this hype about Ps2 is the way to go because of the
> amount of games but thats a bogus argument because nobody wants
> thousands of games.
Ironic. Isn’t market share and software selection the big argument for using Windows over everything else?
Oh, and Gamecube 2 is in development. A Google search will reveal some of the news and a lot of speculation. I believe IBM and ATI are involved again.
Yeah, on paper the XBOX is way better technically. It will also hold a lot more paper down, under gale force conditions. The GameCube is very small and light, I can shove it in a back pack and bring it to a friends house if I like. If I owned a XBOX it would probably be easier if I go to my friends house and carry him back to mine!
Every current generation console has something that it does better than the others. PS2 has some killer games, that XBOX doesn’t have, and vice versa. Just buy what you want to buy and enjoy it. I have played SC II on XBOX and GC, and there’s no difference in graphics that I can see.
Looking forward to PSP though… wow that sounds like it’s going to be really cool. And if it’s as cheep as they say… it’s going to make a nice mp3 player too.
No way is sony anywhere near ready for the PS3 yet. They have the thing planned for 2007 at least. Think about it: why would they make a new model of the ps2, and a new set top box using the emotion engine-on-chip technology, and then toss all of that out the window? Besides, Sony has to invent a new ram technology to support the uber powerfull cell processer, nothing we have right now has enough bandwidth.
“I believe IBM and ATI are involved again.”
Tipical IBM. Rather that put their money on one thing, they do it ALL XD
I’d say that Sony’s projections are right on time, given the massive redevelopment of the chipset, etc., that they are undertaking. Anyone know if they are still committed to the “Cell” chip? If so, that is going to take a while, particularly since they have also committed to backward compatibility….should be an interesting system if they can get it developed in time.
XBOX2, NeXt, or whatever it is being called is just as far away, if only because, at this point, they just started getting developer support for Xbox games, and it’s too early to force them to start developing for a new platform.
Supposedly, Microsoft has gone with ATI and IBM PPC, which means that there will need to be some sort of compatibilty layer on the XP embedded OS if they want to keep compatibility with the current Xbox game catalog.
I don’t realy understand the business decision to switch chipsets here to PPC from x86, since one of the key accelerators for developing the Xbox catalog has been that it’s essentially a computer in a box, making ports from PC relatively simple. Switching chipsets means some recoding to get it right….maybe MS should consider acquiring Aspyr, which has expertise in this area (although they do have the Virtual PC team, their competency has been applications, not games.).
Nintendo’s big issue is the game catalog, not their hardware. The Gamecube is fairly powerful, and currently is a sweet price point, but without some third party involvement, I don’t see them gaining any headway against microsoft. Sure, Zelda, Mario, and Metriod are good games, but what else do you have: third rate ports from PS2 or PC, and a few retreads from N64.
Popular web opinion is that the first to market will own the next battle in the console wars. Everyone wants to be first to market, or at the very least, meet the 400 lb. gorilla, Sony, at market with the latest console.
I think this is a mistake over all-develop the game catalog first, then worry about the hardware.
I’d say that Sony’s projections are right on time, given the massive redevelopment of the chipset, etc., that they are undertaking. Anyone know if they are still committed to the “Cell” chip? If so, that is going to take a while, particularly since they have also committed to backward compatibility….should be an interesting system if they can get it developed in time.
They’re still working with IBM and (Hitachi?) on the Cell chips, and they recently started fabrication of single-chip PS2 CPU/GPU silicon at a smaller micron fabrication plant, which would put them right in line for a Japanese console launch probably in 2005. The PS2’s backwards compatability used an I/O chip that also contained the functionality for the PSOne, so with a single-chip solution for the primary functionality of the PS2 they can probably follow a similar path on the PS3. If the Japanese PS3 launch is early or mid 2005, then we can probably expect the North American launch in time for the XMas rush. Microsoft and Nintendo have both said that they will not be caught a year behind this time around, so it’s likely that you’ll see all 3 consoles on the market around the same time.
XBOX2, NeXt, or whatever it is being called is just as far away, if only because, at this point, they just started getting developer support for Xbox games, and it’s too early to force them to start developing for a new platform.
Supposedly, Microsoft has gone with ATI and IBM PPC, which means that there will need to be some sort of compatibilty layer on the XP embedded OS if they want to keep compatibility with the current Xbox game catalog.
Microsoft licensed some processor technology from IBM, but there hasn’t been anything specifically stating it’s PPC technology, yet. Additionally, they already purchased VirtualPC, which should allow them to emulate an XBox on the next XBox, assuming they have enough system power. They can probably keep a lot of the developer tools the same with some enhancements to handle the ATI chipset and any differences that might arise in the CPU architecture that would affect the games (in other words, whatever isn’t abstracted by the OS).
I don’t realy understand the business decision to switch chipsets here to PPC from x86, since one of the key accelerators for developing the Xbox catalog has been that it’s essentially a computer in a box, making ports from PC relatively simple. Switching chipsets means some recoding to get it right….maybe MS should consider acquiring Aspyr, which has expertise in this area (although they do have the Virtual PC team, their competency has been applications, not games.).
The business decision to license processor technology rather than having Intel or AMD build chips is rather simple: if you build a plant specifically to build the processor for your box, or even have a fabrication plant do the processor on a specific design, you get better reductions in cost over time, and can make optimizations that can lower your costs. If you have Intel or AMD build a chip based on their existing chips, your cost won’t go down much over time because you’re using one of their assembly lines that otherwise would have been putting out significantly faster chips by the time you even get a box on the shelves, let alone 3-5 years down the line. Can you even buy an Intel Pentium-based chip under 1GHz any more? Note that this sort of thing is exactly why Sony builds their own CPUs and GPUs, and their combining of the CPU and GPU in both the PSOne and PS2 is exactly the kind of advance that cuts costs and helps them in the long run.
Nintendo’s big issue is the game catalog, not their hardware. The Gamecube is fairly powerful, and currently is a sweet price point, but without some third party involvement, I don’t see them gaining any headway against microsoft. Sure, Zelda, Mario, and Metriod are good games, but what else do you have: third rate ports from PS2 or PC, and a few retreads from N64.
Nintendo’s second in world-wide sales, and their North American sales have been coming in strong since the price drop. The new Zelda bundle can only help going into the holidays (Friday will be a good indicator but unless they put out a press release it’ll be a while before we see the results of that). Finally, we’re starting to see some good 3rd party titles coming along, like Viewtiful Joe, and some good multi-console releases are selling well (Soul Calibur 2, NFS Underground, Simpsons Hit & Run, Prince of Persia). Third rate ports have problems selling on the Cube because of the quality of the 1st and 2nd party titles, which is, of course, why we saw a couple of companies pulling their support for the Cube earlier this year. Everyone that has a Cube knows that there’s absolutely no reason for a multi-console title to look like a 3rd rate port from the PS2, because the hardware is superior and there are plenty of titles to showcase that. That being said, I generally buy multi-console titles for the XBox, but that’s simply because developers have a better history of making strong XBox ports, and there aren’t enough good exclusive titles for the platform.
Popular web opinion is that the first to market will own the next battle in the console wars. Everyone wants to be first to market, or at the very least, meet the 400 lb. gorilla, Sony, at market with the latest console.
No one wants to be late to market, as Nintendo and Microsoft were this time around. However, first to market this time was also the first out of the market: the DreamCast. Now many people don’t even consider it part of the same generation, but all you have to do is look at Soul Calibur and then look at Soul Calibur 2 to see the real story. No one wants to be late because they’re afraid that Sony will get an early lead again, but no one wants to be too early, either, because they know that Sony has the clout to push a marketing machine that will make people hold off to see what Sony will put on the table (like they did when the DC came out a year ahead of the PS2).
I think this is a mistake over all-develop the game catalog first, then worry about the hardware.
They have to have the hardware specs before anyone will commit to development. Once they have the specs, they still have to build development hardware for the developers to test against. All of this is why it’s completely possible that Sony and Microsoft could announce their specs early next year and even possibly show off some prototype hardware. Developers are going to need 18-24 months to develop good launch titles for each of the systems, and it’s unlikely that any of them would be willing to even commit to development without at least the specs of the machine. Nintendo’s biggest mistake besides being late to market on this run was not giving 3rd parties enough time to develop for launch. They assumed the 1st and 2nd party titles would be enough to secure a good position from which to bring in 3rd parties, especially after the poor (but profitable) showing of the N64. They only proved, once again, that they are their 3rd parties’ strongest competition in many cases.