40 replies to this topic

[Crimefighter]

So, there won't be a PS9, XBox 1920, nor a Nintendo 1024 console - apparently we'll all be playing games on your flat screens without a console. *pffth* Really? REALLY? And recordable media will go away too...I'm sorry but I'm not replacing DVDs with USB flash drives anytime soon if ever...far more likely to use recordable blue ray discs instead.

http://shopping.yaho...-around-in-2020

Video Game Consoles

Popular video game systems such as the Wii, PlayStation and Xbox may still be in homes next decade, but they will look much different. Rather than buy a separate console, Enderle expects that consumers will instead buy smart televisions with a gaming system built into it, not to mention tablets and smartphones that will continue to ramp up their gaming options.
“It looks like analog game systems won’t make it until the end of the decade,” Enderle says. “You are already seeing the Wii have a tough time holding on to the market and PlayStation has been struggling for a while.”
The gaming systems that will succeed in the future will be those that manage to move away from being focused solely on video games and more on other entertainment options such as movies, evolving from a traditional game console into more of a set-top box.

[A_Locomotive]

Yeah I'm calling BS at that, if the actual physical media vanishes we sure as hell won't be going to TVs with them built in, they will become digital only if anything. Like the Onlive or PSP Go. And if that happens it will make me even more thankful for the games of yesteryear.

[DickNixonArisen]

Yeah. You'll have a sort of generic controller that's branded with the TV, or aftermarket ones that are genre or publisher-oriented, and the games will be download or streaming only. Maybe not this decade, but soon enough. I mean, Nintendo is already making a new console, which uses physical media alongside digital-only distribution. It'll be out in a year, and the lifespan of it will be three or four years Minimum, if past console history has ANY relevance. It'll already be 2016 by that point. If there is just one console made after that, even if it's Digital-only, essentially a PC with the nintendo logo on it and exclusive titles. No idea what Sorny or Mycosoft are planning; but the Go failed pretty hard. XBLA is cool, PSN is ok, Steam is good, but Nintendo's online stuff is pretty iffy. I predict that N will be less likely to jump ship on physical media simply for the reason that they're not very good without it right now. Why give up what's working?

We talk about integration, like everyone will own only one thing which is simple/portable gaming, phone, sex toy, organizer, PC, Camera, Game console in-depth gaming, Video Camera, MP3 player, and Ebook reader; yet things keep coming out with specific functions, like the Kindle, and selling really well - despite the fact that a desktop PC can do all of those functions already and has been able to for quite a while. Selling one device ain't nearly as profitable as selling five; and there usually is overlap, but where functional overlap DOES occur, it shows the limitations of size and form. You can listen to MP3's on Kindle, but nobody wants a foot-long board strapped to their armband when they're out jogging. I can browse the web on the Wii and even DC, but can't do what I would normally do with it anyway. You can take pictures with a DSi, but they don't look so hot. You can play games on an Iphone, but they're on a tiny screen and lack depth. Hell, I even bought one of those pre-R4 things for the DS, walking around with a lump attached to mine which had a giant CF card stashed in it, and read books on it.

That size thing is mostly the issue - and yes, someday much farther off when we really DO have an integrated device, it will attach to a screen. You'll do all the portable functions (Phone, Simple gaming, organizer, camera, MP3 player, light internet) on it, come home and dock it, and use the big flat screen as a monitor for the same device where it does those functions plus sex toy, in depth-gaming, "Web browsing" in depth, video chat and conferencing, movies and television, etc. Basically your portable device will be much more integrated with your at-home device; which will have already integrated TV and the internet. The main processing power will probably reside in the home device, but stored content will be shared between them. Savegames will be on the portable object, just like DC VMU's were kind of supposed to be, carry them around and go play the same game at a different house. Laptops are taking over TV, finally, after the initial failures like webtv and such.

[Rex Dart]

Sounds like another old fart who underestimates the attraction of having that little game-playing box beside your TV.

[Metal Ghost]

You know a big reason why I highly doubt the 'smart TV as gaming device' option? Because the upgrade cycle for people's TVs are much slower than that of a game console. Even noting the fact that this generation the Xbox 360 and PS3 will be supported longer than in previous ones (in the 360's case at least), people aren't looking to upgrade that great $2000 TV in 6-10 years even. They're waiting until that sucker breaks. And MS, Sony and Nintendo are absolutely not going to prevent consumers from buying their console because they've now hamstrung the purchase to a much larger dollar outlay for a TV.

I don't argue the fact that consoles are moving more towards complete home entertainment though. But that's been hapening for years....nothing new there. Every current gen console, Wii included, has some form of non-game entertainment that is accessable from it.

And it's possible that the console manufacturers may liscense the ability to play their games through streaming for download into TVs (especially Sony, being integrated with TV manufacturing), but I would only look at this as being one way that they sell their gaming services, not the only way, for the reason noted above.

[Reaperman]

I've actually been thinking that a the idea of consoles as they have historically been is a bit obsolete.
I don't really see an immediate end to consoles by the end of the decade, but I'd guess in 25 years that we will all have pretty different ideas about "modern gaming," and what a constitutes a "console."

Perhaps consoles themselves will evolve into scalable platforms, and around the time we expect to see Playstation 6, if it will really be something like a Playstation 4-i2 which runs all software down to "playstation 4" titles without emulation. Getting crazier, maybe competing one-chip platforms put out by ati/nvidia could fit inside existing devices (TV's and media players), or we could see mobile devices with more extensive docking cradles and controllers.

Finally there is 'the cloud' which to my surprise, really works. Onlive currently has plans to go built-in, and it wouldn't surprise me if its competitors in the streaming world were looking at similar.

"Physical media" and "ownership" are ideas which gradually coming to accept as only having limited relevance in the future. We don't need either now, and since many of us were happy enough to do away with them for something like movies, then it's fair to think that the average game fan (not us old crusty extremists), really doesn't give a rip, and is happy to have the added shelf space.

[akator]

Enderle and others have been preaching about integrated TVs for 15 years. They all said WebTV was amazing, and the end of the traditional PC in the home. Now they're preaching about consoles instead of WebTV. Whatever.

[OldSchoolRetroGamer]

Meh, the so called "Tech Experts" typically predict more wrong then right so whatever................

[Metal Ghost]

I know that a recent video article by Todd Kendrick (in-game @MSNBC), in talking about the upcoming Vita, says basically that it could potentially rival a PS3 and that by Sony not having any extensive TV-out or docking options is really shooting themselves in the foot....i.e. if they aren't the first to come out with a 'dockable console', someone else will. The only problem that I have with that is that there are always tradoffs between size/power/features/price. Yes, you could probably get PS3 power into a Vita-sized solution, but that is without a doubt going to be more expensive than a traditional console. To some it may be worth it....to others, not so much.

So what I would like to see, using the Sony ecosystem in this example, is complete cross-compatability. If I buy a game for my Vita, I can download and play on that. The Vita can be docked and to play on my home TV. This pocket sized console would almost certainly come at a cost premium though. If I didn't value portability, I can buy my console sized Playstation. The traditional sized unit costs less than the pocket sized unit (presumably less expensive to produce) but is able to play the same exact games. Even in this scenario the traditional console doesn't go away. It just yields some space to different units that offer portability for instance.

[HuckleCat]

Whenever I want real, honest, great news that I know is absolutely right, I always go to "Yahoo Shopping" for it.

No. Just, no.

[Rex Dart]

Metal Ghost, on Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:52 AM, said:

I know that a recent video article by Todd Kendrick (in-game @MSNBC), in talking about the upcoming Vita, says basically that it could potentially rival a PS3 and that by Sony not having any extensive TV-out or docking options is really shooting themselves in the foot....i.e. if they aren't the first to come out with a 'dockable console', someone else will. The only problem that I have with that is that there are always tradoffs between size/power/features/price. Yes, you could probably get PS3 power into a Vita-sized solution, but that is without a doubt going to be more expensive than a traditional console. To some it may be worth it....to others, not so much.

So what I would like to see, using the Sony ecosystem in this example, is complete cross-compatability. If I buy a game for my Vita, I can download and play on that. The Vita can be docked and to play on my home TV. This pocket sized console would almost certainly come at a cost premium though. If I didn't value portability, I can buy my console sized Playstation. The traditional sized unit costs less than the pocket sized unit (presumably less expensive to produce) but is able to play the same exact games. Even in this scenario the traditional console doesn't go away. It just yields some space to different units that offer portability for instance.

Shit, I just want TV-Out support on the Vita.

[Austin]

"“It looks like analog game systems won’t make it until the end of the decade,” Enderle says. “You are already seeing the Wii have a tough time holding on to the market and PlayStation has been struggling for a while.”

Some reasoning that is.

Edited by Austin, Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:43 PM.

[A_Locomotive]

Austin, on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:42 PM, said:

"“It looks like analog game systems won’t make it until the end of the decade,” Enderle says. “You are already seeing the Wii have a tough time holding on to the market and PlayStation has been struggling for a while.”

Some reasoning that is.

I'm sure the author just ignored the whole world wide economic crisis when writing the article.

[Reaperman]

A_Locomotive, on Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:50 PM, said:

I'm sure the author just ignored the whole world wide economic crisis when writing the article.

...and Sony turning to pure evil, and Nintendo all but throwing in the towel on new releases for some reason.

If modern publishers really want full control over the programs they release, and to keep me online at all times, can I at least have the benefit of them storing their own damn datafiles, and giving me a small client that starts the game and pulls the rest from them? Like playstation home--but something that doesn't suck.

Edited by Reaperman, Thu Oct 20, 2011 12:56 PM.

[Cynicaster]

Quote

The gaming systems that will succeed in the future will be those that manage to move away from being focused solely on video games and more on other entertainment options such as movies, evolving from a traditional game console into more of a set-top box.

So basically, we have a tech pundit calling the 3DO the wave of the future? We'll see, but I must say the whole notion lacks a certain level of plausibility.

[Animan]

[Lord Helmet]

Actually, I agree with the idea. You've gotta understand that it's in a game company's best interest to sell you nothing but bits, becuase they're cheap. Consoles are made of plastic and metal etc. Plus theres packaging shipping etc. You also have to worry about piracy of media and all of that stuff.

No console and digital delivery on demand to your TV set? That makes far more business sense than the current model. It also means that as a consumer I won't have to go anywhere to get games. I can just click from my couch.

It will suck for collectors, but it's going to happen all the same. The only variable is time.

[Reaperman]

Lord Helmet, on Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:38 PM, said:

It will suck for collectors, but it's going to happen all the same. The only variable is time.

Yeah, but I doubt that even current games are going to be collectible anyway, and I only see the trend continuing. They're so hobbled--and not just when a new generation comes out. I have enough current gen games that have already been rendered pretty much worthless by servers going offline. The thought of every AAA game having a 'collector's edition' makes me laugh a little. If anything, it's the 'greatest hits' versions with updated patches/dlc that are going to be worth even half a crap 5 years from now.

For collectors, I think that most of what there is has already been released, so that's what I'm concentrating on. Once physical distribution disappears, I'm not sure if the value of my collection will start to climb, or plummet through the floor.

Edited by Reaperman, Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:03 PM.

[Rex Dart]

HOLY CRAP HE WAS RIGHT MY PLAYSTATION DISINTEGRATED

[RevEng]

Lord Helmet, on Fri Oct 21, 2011 12:38 PM, said:

Actually, I agree with the idea. You've gotta understand that it's in a game company's best interest to sell you nothing but bits, becuase they're cheap. Consoles are made of plastic and metal etc. Plus theres packaging shipping etc. You also have to worry about piracy of media and all of that stuff.

They want to sell you nothing but bits, for sure, but they have to be bits that are controlled completely by the large game company making the bits. Otherwise they won't buy into the scheme. This is why Nintendo doesn't produce games for IOS.

Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft will not hand over control of the DRM to another company so they can sell their wares in someone else's app store. There's too much money to be made by running the store themselves.

Integration of the console into the TV may eventually happen though convergence of consoles and integrated media players, but 2020 is way too aggressive an estimate.

[godslabrat]

This is yet another example of a tech writer (a job for which there are zero qualifications) playing a little mental game of "Let's imagine something happening, point to the three reasons it could happen, ignore the SIX DOZEN reasons it couldn't, and then claim it's inevitable and anyone who argues is a doofus."

Let's ignore for the moment that building a console into a TV is not a new idea, and involves adding a $250+ feature to a set that is of no interest to many consumers. Oh, yes, that's a brilliant move in a market where margins are already super-thin. No, let's ask, WHICH console would be built into the TV? Nintendo's? Sony's? Microsoft's? Do we essentially hand one of those companies a monopoly over that generation of hardware? Or, do we let them make their own deals-- tie someone's choice of TV in with their choice of consoles? "Want a PS5? You have to buy a Sony. Want a Wii3? Then you need to buy a Visio." Oh, sure, THAT'S going to be popular with consumers.

Maybe our brilliant solution will be to incorporate all three systems into this TV. Yes, let's raise the price by $700 instead of $250! That's the answer! Or... maybe we'll get all the major industry players to agree on a standard, and that they'll all adhere to it.

... sure. Because that's worked so well for them in the past.

[the.golden.ax]

If they push this digital age hard enough and then have more failures like the PS3 and Blackberry outages as examples, I'd be willing to predict another great media crash like the one in 1983/84. You will see a resurgence and greater new age after that. Just my best guess. Our fuddy duddy old console games will always be highly prized by someone in the future.

AX

[Rex Dart]

The Roku 2 is a set-top box that plays games, streams video, and is everything described in this article except for the fact that it's not physically attached to a television.

Raise yer hand if you've got a Roku 2.

[Pixelboy]

godslabrat, on Fri Oct 21, 2011 1:11 PM, said:

Let's ignore for the moment that building a console into a TV is not a new idea, and involves adding a $250+ feature to a set that is of no interest to many consumers. Oh, yes, that's a brilliant move in a market where margins are already super-thin. No, let's ask, WHICH console would be built into the TV? Nintendo's? Sony's? Microsoft's? Do we essentially hand one of those companies a monopoly over that generation of hardware? Or, do we let them make their own deals-- tie someone's choice of TV in with their choice of consoles? "Want a PS5? You have to buy a Sony. Want a Wii3? Then you need to buy a Visio." Oh, sure, THAT'S going to be popular with consumers.

Maybe our brilliant solution will be to incorporate all three systems into this TV. Yes, let's raise the price by $700 instead of $250! That's the answer! Or... maybe we'll get all the major industry players to agree on a standard, and that they'll all adhere to it.

... sure. Because that's worked so well for them in the past.

Um, no, that's not a likely scenario. What I would expect is that future TVs will come with supplementary connectors, with which you will be able to connect directly to the internet, in parallel to regular TV content (cable, satellite, etc.). So when you're in the mood to play something on your TV, you switch to the "internet channels", log on to a dedicated server (owned by Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo or some other company), and select a game. It's the concept of cloud gaming hard-wired into TVs, where your gaming session runs on a remote server CPU, and the visual/audio content is streamed to your TV. The technology already exists, but there's a lot of room for improvement and development.

Of course, we'll need an industry standard for connecting wireless controllers to the TV, which supports regular gamepads, Wiimote-style interfaces, Kinect-style gizmos, whatever is required to play a specific game. And that will likely be a hassle, but not to the point of ruining the experience.

Edited by Pixelboy, Fri Oct 21, 2011 2:16 PM.

[Metal Ghost]

Yea, this all sounds like it's going to happen inside of the decade. Errr.....right.