Can't find a Wii...get ready to search for the Wii 2...

highly doubt it's the successor to the wii, probably just a new shell/hd-ready version of it... like the ds lite or slim ps2.

 

There has to be an upgrade on the DS Lite before they start making new platform consoles.. that's just how the timeline seems like it's going.. handhelds then game consoles

 

Well, Wii is last-gen in terms of its engine and graphics, so it makes sense that they'd want to catch up some in that regard. Also, given how major a shift in game play they've gone, they've probably got plenty to smooth out and introduce to how the Wiimote is going to work. PS and MS haven't changed that much fundamentally, just have gone bigger with processing and graphics. Wii could probably do a lot more with developers this second time around.

360 wants to catch up a little with PS3 in terms of pure technology. PS3 has got no reason whatsoever to move forward with a new console, given how far ahead of itself it already is. A PSP2 is the only thing that might make sense for them - They could take some cues from the iPhone.

Evan

 

I am not so sure about all this.

Nintendo, we know, marches to a different drummer than Sony and MS. Nintendo has the advantage of focus - they do games, and that's all.

Anyway, of the three, Nintendo is also the most likely to benefit from an 'upgrade'. 360 and PS3 already take full advantage of the best a person can have on their game-playing screen, which Nintendo has yet to do.

I mean, we already have full HD gaming with the Sony and MS boxes, and developers are only now starting to really figure out how to really use the hardware inside them, so it seems that both systems are still very early in their life-cycles. What would be the point of an entirely new system that couldn't be accomplished more easily and cheaply with peripheral upgrades?

Nintendo, though, obviously can go a long way in upgrades for both their portables and their console. People are going to become less and less tolerant of their video products which don't take advantage of their precious new Hi-Def systems.

It almost seems like these companies are undergoing a sort of role-reversal - Sony and Microsoft are in a position of having their highest priorities be 'great games' for their powerhouse hardware, whereas Nintendo is in the position of having to come up with better hardware to complement their established prowess at creating great games.

Of the three, I can see Nintendo doing something fairly soon, but we're should be looking at at least 3 - 4 years before we see anything new from the other two.

 

IF MS came out with a new system in 2010, which is questionable. The only way it would make sense for MS to do that is if their new system was a big leap ahead of the PS3. Otherwise they would be throwing huge money down the drain just when the PS3 hits it's stride. Game developers would have to retool again.

Tell me why you think MS would do this? Will the 360 be a failure by then? I doubt it.

 

Well the biggest reason I think they could launch a new console in 4 years is because that is precisely how long it took them to release the 360 after the first box. I'm pretty sure they could cram enough tech in there to make it worth it in some people's eyes.

Regardless of whether it's 2010, 11, or 12, MS is in a much better position to get a headstart once again, and I would be surprised if they didn't take advantage of that.

 

I defintely think MS would be able to put something significantly better than the PS3 by 2010. The trick is that the system has to be competitive with the PS4 if the PS4 comes out within 18 months of it.

 

Part of it may have been that Sony was caught offguard. Originally, I don't think they wanted a new console until 2007 or 2008 IIRC (maybe 2006 in Japan, 2007 in US?). If they had launched then, the PS3 probably would have retailed for $400 or maybe even less (maybe even with some better specs too). With the 360 launching early, they may have tried to move up the release date. But since they were so committed to Blu-ray, Cell, a standard HDD, etc., they couldn't really drop those things. Probably not their best plan, but since the costs would drop (and have dropped) dramatically, it might have been a decent alternative.

Now I'm not saying that is how things happened. They may have been aiming a 2006 release the whole time actually. Seems like you can see evidence that points to both (Blu-ray's launch, software being behind at launch, tech specs, etc). Just an idea though.

They'll have to be REALLY careful on how they do this, assuming they shorten the console cycles (every 3 years or whatever). Obviously, I'm not sure how willing people will be to putting up $250-$300 (plus controllers or whatever) every 3 years, especially since the casual gamers the Wii appeals to might just be fine with WiiFit, Wii Sports, etc., and not whatever comes out on Wii2 (it would have to be equally as impressive).

Developers wouldn't like it either. I'm sure they'd love to spend years on a Wii exclusive, building up a great engine from scratch, only to find out that they can scrap it all in 3 years. And if they don't start that all within 1-1.5 years after the launch, they might as well start planning for Wii2 (or Wii3). These longer cycles really allow them enough time to build their engines, release a game, and then release a few more games based on their initial work.

If it didn't interfere with their profits, sure. But I don't think MS is just going to do it to create a monopoly and/or to put Sony in a bad situation (or at least, they would think it would). If they cared that much, they'd sell the 360 for $100 or something like that. A much easier way to get a monopoly.

I do agree that they'd probably try to launch before Sony's next console if they can though. Maybe not at all costs, but they'd prefer this I imagine. They botched a few things this-gen, but they certainly are in a good situation; they can certainly try to fix their mistakes if there is a next time. Of course, even if they couldn't, launching before Sony would generally always be a better idea, at least for MS. Launching after would probably play more to Sony's advantages, and not to their disadvantages.

I more or less agree, although like I said, I'm not sure how likely it would be to see Nintendo putting out a new console so soon. There's certainly a (strong?) possibility if consumers flock to the 360/PS3 at <$300, but there's no real evidence right now indicating that would happen.


Going back to the discussion Joe Joe, CriscoKidd, and A_3PO are having (too lazy to quote their posts)...

It is kind of hard to predict when Sony and MS plan to release their next consoles without knowing exactly what they're planning. At a glance, MS obviously has an advantage. But they do have to figure out a new CPU architecture, along with other pieces of technology. On the other hand, Sony seemed to design the PS3 with the PS4 (and further Playstations?) in mind. Cell could certainly end up a monumental failure, but if it plays up to its potential, the design could really save Sony a lot R&D resources. They could just scale up the PS3's processor when it comes to designing the PS4's CPU. Instead of 1 Cell chip with 1 PPE with 7 SPEs clocked at 3.2 GhZ, they can put in 2 PPEs with 16/32 SPEs at 4GhZ-5GhZ (no idea how much faster clocks will be in the next few years). They could even use their Cell GPU idea, but I'm guessing they'll probably just work with Nvidia again. I guess they could work together on a Nvidia GPU that uses parts of Cell's design too (a hybrid of sorts). Then you obviously got Blu-ray, a HDD, etc., making a return.

This would lead to pretty powerful system with relatively little effort from Sony (compared to say the PS3's design). And to top it off, developers wouldn't have to get used to a vastly different architecture. Depending on how they do it, they might even be able to take their PS3 engines, throw it onto the PS4, scale things up a bit, and get some pretty good results (probably still want to customize the engine for the best results though). It would be weird to see developers loving to develop for a recently launched Playstation actually.

As I said, Microsoft would have to deal with designing a new architecture, which could put them at a bit of a disadvantage if they have any hiccups. Regardless of the situation, they could end up releasing a console that is much less powerful (yet possibly as expensive or more expensive) than the PS4 and probably more difficult to program for (at least early on). It could give Sony some time to react if they're caught offguard. Of course, they'd certainly have to think long and hard about releasing a new console so close to the PS3's launch.

I think MS has the advantage, but I think Sony could be in a better situation this time than they were last time. Just some points to think about.

The only reason they launched so quickly after the Xbox1 was because the Xbox was a huge failure. The only reason I'd think they'd launch so quickly after the 360 would be if it, too, was a failure. Now, worst-case scenario, I could possibly see Microsoft continuing to struggle outside of the US, and possibly even losing out to Sony in the US. They may even sell only a few million more consoles than the original (not sure how, just a hypothetical). But even then, it would probably be MUCH more successful than the original...well, outside of the RROD and those issues. So even then, they may not necessarily want to start over in 4 years.

edit: MS would also be cutting it close to the same issues I mentioned for the Wii earlier (developers/consumers not on board).

 

RC Cola, thanks for the comments. I agree the only reasonable incentive for MS to create a new Xbox so soon is if they determine the 360 will be a failure. Some here have mentioned that scenario in prior threads but it seems like wishful thinking to me.

 

I don't see that it would hurt long term profits provided they can make a system that Sony can't match for 18 months.

 

That begs the question: If the PS3 is hitting it's stride in 2010/11, why would people flock to a new Xbox with limited games available? On top of that, knowing Sony would reply within 18-24 months and probably trump the new Xbox, why would people buy it?

Why would developers want to bother learning yet another platform?

Concerning profits, I don't think the Xbox and 360 have been kind to MS up to now. Launching another platform so soon would be throwing a bunch more money down the sinkhole.

But you never know what might happen.