When is this going to become too old?

[Takedon]

I know that the PS3 got a little too old from 2012, when the good graphics appeared. They just couldn't run on a 512 mb system. How long will it take for the PS4 to get old too?

 

[don_bidarian]

I assume this gen life cycle will be shorter. Maybe 5 years?

This gen didn't start well compared to previous gens, the graphics aren't impressive and lots of developers are going indie route so I think this time the giants will come up with a new console earlier.

 

[Nackles]

I think 5 years is probably a good guess too. If you look back starting with the release of the NES and Sega Master System (outside of Japan which I think was around 85) all the generations have had around a 5 year lifespan. Last generation was the first one that has lasted as long as it did.

 

[Haze]

I agree with 5-6 years. They have said too that this generation would not last as long as the previous gen.

 

[abcdefghijun]

So compared to the Ps3, the Ps4 ain't that much of an upgrade? Or next-gen gaming is just that demanding?

 

[Haze]

So compared to the Ps3, the Ps4 ain't that much of an upgrade? Or next-gen gaming is just that demanding?

Honestly, people expect way too much. They expect the absolute maximum already.

 

[SpaceTiger]

I give it 7-8 years until new consoles are announced and revealed. Still shorter than the last.

 

[don_bidarian]

Honestly, people expect way too much. They expect the absolute maximum already.

Well maximum is what they showed in graphic engine demoes couple of years ago when they were mentioning (next-gen graphic engine), so naturally many people expected that kind of graphics out of PS4/Xbone, but we just got PS3 graphics with better lighting and texture and ofcourse 1080/60fps, which the 60fps part i dont care about.

 

[sparkblade14]

Yeah, I agree with 5-7 years, maybe 8. This past gen's life cycle was abnormally long. They really stretched out the system capabilities of the 360/PS3. I think we'll see that threshold be approached faster this generation.

 

[Wolfhyrr]

I'd risk myself being wrong, but i'd say 4 years at best... 5 with luck

If my sources are correct, a new texture modeling paradigm is soon coming to the world of videogames. One that will require really hardcore hardware.

Imagine no more polygons, but particles, like atoms!

This I got from a very reliable source, and that it's gonna be out soon. And if i had to guess, Nvidia jumping the gap with their new GTX Titan makes me think they're trying to get ahead in the race.

So I'd say it will not be too long before a new console generation is needed.

 

[Haze]

Well maximum is what they showed in graphic engine demoes couple of years ago when they were mentioning (next-gen graphic engine), so naturally many people expected that kind of graphics out of PS4/Xbone, but we just got PS3 graphics with better lighting and texture and ofcourse 1080/60fps, which the 60fps part i dont care about.

Ah I admit I did not know that.

 

[Takedon]

I suppose the standard time is going to be 7-8 years.

 

[SkilledJerk]

This cycle is either going to be really short or there will be a major revision in the next 2 to 4 years.

Both consoles came out just as 4K became a reality. Consumers will be begging for 4K on consoles in a few years.
The hard drive capacity is small, there aren't many options for expansion, and SSDs are going to become the standard soon.
The virtual reality headsets will probably accompany a new bundle.

 

[BlacKnight1090]

Every generation we get all types of speculations, close sources, so on and so forth, that claim what a company like Sony will do or "have" to do. It's never right and no one ever hits it head on. The industry is constantly fluxuating, but when was the last time you've seen a console make drastic changes to keep up with technology? I don't think ever. The most you'll get are revisions to the console as they do every generation. They'll have the first model (which I own with PS4) and then plan on making revisions to the next one. Now think about this: Do you really think the 3 console producers are going to make a huge leap in as little as 4 to 5 years to please consumers?

I don't recall them loving us that much. As a matter of fact, that's a bit premature. While last gen, enjoying my PS3 to the fullest (and obviously still will for many people like myself) for those long stretch of years was considered "abnormal," it's not likely they'll be peaking enough to move on. Think about the game developers heavily working on titles now. The many promised features and cloud services we have to wait on and other business activities. I can go on and on, but to keep it short, I agree with the 7-8 years span. They can barely keep up with the promises they made to us now, so I doubt they'll put the money, time, or energy into another console that soon. I expect this gen to be in a good stride about year 3 or 4 before peaking. Then a few more years to enjoy. Am I crazy?

As a consumer and gamer, I know the community wouldn't appreciate fast transitions. I guarantee there won't be record number sells again if they tried to pull that stunt. I know I'd feel it's too soon and careless.

 

[Razor]

I think 5 years is probably a good guess too. If you look back starting with the release of the NES and Sega Master System (outside of Japan which I think was around 85) all the generations have had around a 5 year lifespan. Last generation was the first one that has lasted as long as it did.

Actually the NES had a 10-12 year run depending on the continent with the last official games being dropped in 1995 (same with Genesis). I'd say the typical lifespan for a console is 8-10 years where there's a steady stream of official titles released and an additional 2 years where there's a "trickle" of titles (ports, indie games, bench titles from major developers, and in the case of DC, NES, Genesis, and PS1 lower tier games from studios that want to break into the industry).

This generation will be no different. While most believe it'll be a 5-7 period (5 is far, far too short to be introducing a new console) that's just enough time for developers to get a good feel for the console with the 6-9 year mark being when all of the truly land mark stuff hits. The lifespan doesn't end when a new console comes out.

Console generations have always overlapped and the generation doesn't really end until the last game on a console is released and Sony says "Any games released after 2018 or 2019 aren't official."

 

[Nackles]

Actually the NES had a 10-12 year run depending on the continent with the last official games being dropped in 1995 (same with Genesis). I'd say the typical lifespan for a console is 8-10 years where there's a steady stream of official titles released and an additional 2 years where there's a "trickle" of titles (ports, indie games, bench titles from major developers, and in the case of DC, NES, Genesis, and PS1 lower tier games from studios that want to break into the industry).

This generation will be no different. While most believe it'll be a 5-7 period (5 is far, far too short to be introducing a new console) that's just enough time for developers to get a good feel for the console with the 6-9 year mark being when all of the truly land mark stuff hits. The lifespan doesn't end when a new console comes out.

Console generations have always overlapped and the generation doesn't really end until the last game on a console is released and Sony says "Any games released after 2018 or 2019 aren't official."

I was speaking generally by when the next console was released. Your right that the new consoles don't automatically end a gen, but it's closer to the end than when the last game is released in the eyes of the gaming community. What you said is technically true, but I don't know how many people actually consider 4 months ago the end of the PS2. 13 year run sounds amazing though.

By your standards I say 5 years... With another year of halfway relevant games and 4 more years of FIFA releases.

 

[Nackles]

Every generation we get all types of speculations, close sources, so on and so forth, that claim what a company like Sony will do or "have" to do. It's never right and no one ever hits it head on. The industry is constantly fluxuating, but when was the last time you've seen a console make drastic changes to keep up with technology? I don't think ever. The most you'll get are revisions to the console as they do every generation. They'll have the first model (which I own with PS4) and then plan on making revisions to the next one. Now think about this: Do you really think the 3 console producers are going to make a huge leap in as little as 4 to 5 years to please consumers?

I don't recall them loving us that much. As a matter of fact, that's a bit premature. While last gen, enjoying my PS3 to the fullest (and obviously still will for many people like myself) for those long stretch of years was considered "abnormal," it's not likely they'll be peaking enough to move on. Think about the game developers heavily working on titles now. The many promised features and cloud services we have to wait on and other business activities. I can go on and on, but to keep it short, I agree with the 7-8 years span. They can barely keep up with the promises they made to us now, so I doubt they'll put the money, time, or energy into another console that soon. I expect this gen to be in a good stride about year 3 or 4 before peaking. Then a few more years to enjoy. Am I crazy?

As a consumer and gamer, I know the community wouldn't appreciate fast transitions. I guarantee there won't be record number sells again if they tried to pull that stunt. I know I'd feel it's too soon and careless.

You're not crazy! You make some great points. I am guessing 5 years (based on console history)and calling last gen an anomaly, but it could just as easily be the beginning of a new trend with consoles in the "easy update" age being longer. Of course there might not be a traditional console up next (while we're speculating!!).

 

[SpaceTiger]

I was speaking generally by when the next console was released. Your right that the new consoles don't automatically end a gen, but it's closer to the end than when the last game is released in the eyes of the gaming community. What you said is technically true, but I don't know how many people actually consider 4 months ago the end of the PS2. 13 year run sounds amazing though.

By your standards I say 5 years... With another year of halfway relevant games and 4 more years of FIFA releases.

I'd say both you and Razor are correct. Technically consoles tend to have these longer lifespans, but gamers usually consider the generation ended when the next consoles in line come out and major developers stop putting out their main content. Like EA might not put out anymore of their major games on PS4 in 2019 or 2020, but they'll publish some titles afterwards.

A hard 7-soft 8 years sounds accurate to me with a total of 11 or 12 change being the total lifespan as far as actual retail availability being in effect. The last generation was typically in the same active range of 7-8 years before winding things down.

 

[Stuck_X_Button]

I'd say seven years at the minimum in the case of PS4. One of the reasons it was so late in PS3's run when graphics were used to the console's maximum is that PS3 was hard to develop for.

 

[nickjt]

I think 5 years is much shorter than I would expect. Sony and Microsoft are both trying to make console generations last longer as this saves them huge amounts of money in R&D. It is also too early to judge the graphics of the consoles. If you compare the PS3 launch games to games like The Last of Us, the developers improved massively with exploiting the potential of the consoles, and this will happen again.