I would think that the next generation of consoles will have the usual improvements in graphics and processor speed, but I think the real push will be in head-to-head gaming, either online or on small networks. I think the gaming industry has figured out that it’s great to be able to sell you a $50 game, but it’s fantastic to be able to sell you a $50 game and then charge you $12.95 a month to play it online.
I’m thinking that there will be more games that have lame stand-alone play (basically, just enough to get you familiar with the basics of how the game is played and get you hooked), but great potential for cooperative online play.
I’m betting that the next generation of consoles will have some networking hardware either built-in or bundled with.
I read an article (I think it was on cnn.com) some time ago that looking at patent information or something, it seemed like the PS3 was going to be geared towards distributed computing.
For non-technophiles that’s where other PS3’s that aren’t working hard will lend their spare CPU cycles to your machine when it is working hard and vice-versa therby increasing power exponentially.
Of course, this was all conjecture. I could probably dig up the article if someone requests that I do.
So does that mean that you won’t be able to use the PS3 if it’s off-line? Or it won’t be as powerful? I am not sure that is such a good move.
Of course if it delivers that claimed 1000-fold increase in power it may be worth it. But I don’t know what that number means in terms of graphics or whether the software that can take advantage of such a powerful and complicated machine will be easy to write.
I think you miss the point of the console interface. I don’t want to move my whole body around to play these games. I can’t do a split jump like Sam Fisher, and I don’t want to put my knees to the test of his sneaking posture. I certainly don’t want to run around as much, or get beat up as much as the guy in the Getaway.
The holodeck is best used as a way of dressing up a room, just like putting up pictures and curtains, but with people and different architecture and stuff. Also, it would be good for sex fantasies. Let’s not forget sex fantasies.
If they can create an interface that requires less effort than the current interfaces, I’d be really happy. The neural interface thing is right up that alley!
Oh, and the article I read stated 200X the power of the PS2 and not 1000. I’ll go look for the article in a moment.
I’m sure it would have it’s own on-board processor or else how would it lend it’s cycles to someone else? I think Sony is expecting the broadband market to be firmly in place by 2005 which is the expected release date.
I guess what it would be capable of is immersive worlds like Lobsang was suggesting. That way, Sony wouldn’t have to create servers to handle the flow of people. The machines online could do the work themselves.
It’s games like GTA:VC that will see the most improvement: massive environments that require alot of processor power to manage all the elements at play. Everything has low-rez graphics, it’s all kinda ugly up close, but seen on the wider scale it looks fine. Man, there’s some ugly-ass storefronts in that game…
Also, increasingly powerful consoles will be able to build convicingly realistic natural environments. I refer mainly to rock formations, which in today’s games, still have too many straight edges, unlike reality.
As long as 2D never dies, I’ll be happy. It’s truly has it’s own style.
Perhaps the distributed computing will be used for online games. However I would imagine that you would be able to play SP games offline.
I have definitely read the 1000 number in a couple of places but even a 200-fold increase over the PS2 would be tremendous and more powerful than any PC is likely to achieve even by 2010. So I am rather skeptical.
Nagleator has it right about holodecks. If I wanted to personally run around and jump over stuff, I’d go <shudder. outside.
No, the console of the future will plug directly into a surgically implanted socket at the base of your skull. It’s all about the neural interface, baby. No controls, no memory cards, no television set. It’s all in your head.
Ensure that development schedules and costs are escalated to such a degree that nothing truly ‘innovative’ will be created - because no-one will be willling to risk the cash…
Thus it will be licences and sequels and formula games to the fore - they will look fabulous but you’ll have played the game 100 times already - and possibly enjoyed it a lot more
Just take a look at GT3 and tell me how much better graphics really NEED to get? OK - more power means more cars on track - which is lovely - but we’re WELL into the realm of seriously-decreasing returns otherwise - IMHO…
Online capabilities are cool - more storage space (no stupid and expensive memory cards - thank you XBOX) would be cool - but we (almost) have that anyway.
Yamauchi-san (Mr GT) recently says that he feels GT3/4 only cover about 10% of the ‘driving experience’ and he looks to more powerful systems to be able to eat into the remaining 90% - but how on earth he’s going to address the ‘tactile’ aspect I have NO idea - CPU speed and more polygons won’t do that - and it’s a LOT of that percentage…
I’m a great believer in ‘finite technology’ - when a machine has limits you can make things which ‘fit it’ - when those limits become too wide people start to ‘noodle’ and that’s never a good thing…
IANA console programmer either, but this isn’t necessarily true. The PS1 was easier to program than, say, the Saturn, because you could program it in C, while you had to program the Saturn in assembly (and write code for multiple processors).
The PS2, on the other hand, is much harder to program than the PS1, for the same reason the Saturn was: you have to use assembly for the most significant tasks, and you have to program several processors.
I believe the Xbox uses C++ and DirectX, so it’s easy for anyone with PC game experience. Whether it’s easier or harder than the PS1, I can’t say… I’d guess it’s easier, because DirectX is an abstract layer between the game and the hardware.
Conclusion: The ease of programming depends more on the design of the console and API, not the level of technology inside the box.
