PS3 News: Sony: PlayStation 3 Will Go 10 Years And Beyond - PS3 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Sony: PlayStation 3 Will Go 10 Years And Beyond

When Sony said the PlayStation 3 had a 10-year lifespan, they meant it.

SCEE boss Andrew House has reasserted that claim, telling CVG that the 50 million units sold thus far is "just the start" for the company's flagship console. House says he always anticipated a lifespan of 10+ years and the only question is...how long is that "plus" part? In fact, 10 years is the minimum. Said House:

"What we've said many times before and we're confident about is we launched a device that is very, very powerful, that has a whole range of possibilities and that's at the very least a ten-year life-cycle. I know I'm guilty of repeating myself but I think it's always worth pointing out we're still selling PlayStation 2 in its millions around the world, 11 years after it was launched.

That's different markets and a different profile of consumers but there's still some vibrant demand. That for me bodes extremely well for where the potential of PS3 will go."

When asked if he thought Microsoft would soon release a console, House simply said- "I think that's a question for Microsoft to address rather than us." Most gamers will probably agree that the PS3 is just fine; we don't need the fourth PlayStation just yet, and most developers agree, too. But yeah, that's an interesting question: how far beyond 10 years might it go?

Tags: sony, ps3, playstation 3, ps3 lifespan

6/15/2011 8:49:42 PM John Shepard

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (64 posts)

gangan19
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 9:53:28 PM
Reply

Oh god yes!

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:07:44 PM
Reply

I figure that we'll hear about a new console and see a final product in time for Holiday 2013/2014, but the PS3 will continue 5+ years beyond that eventual launch giving it a life of 12-14 years. The eventual sell through of PS3 will be well in excess of 100 million units.


Agree with this comment 7 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:34:57 PM

5 years cycle simply isn't enough. To me PS2 is dead once PS3 is announced. Same theory, I don't want PS4 to be announced for another 3 years.

In the end, I think PS3 can sell 130 million, but by that time, I think gamers stopped caring that it outsold the Wii and Xbox.

Last edited by godsman on 6/15/2011 10:36:16 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:38:25 PM

Hold on, if a PS4 is announced in 2012, that's 6 years, and if it launches in 2013 that's 7 years. There's a limit to how long a system can stay current, and as good as everyone probably knows I think the PS3 is, it really can't stretch to 10 years and stay current.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

raiden213
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:10:48 PM
Reply

If only my ps3 can last that long i'll believe him, do they even know lots of them don't last long as mine got yold just last month on its 3 1/2 year.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:13:18 PM

Lucky, mine only made it two and half years.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:28:45 PM

Hehe that's actually a good point, I'm on my second PS3 now but unlike last time, next time it breaks it's not covered by the guarantee.

But one question is if it will keep going, another question is will there be released more games for it once the ps4 is out? There are no ps2 games released nowadays?

Last edited by Beamboom on 6/15/2011 10:30:29 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

godsman
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:30:31 PM

Three years for me and still going strong. I got the 40gig version.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:39:59 PM

My original 60GB launch system dies after about 4 and a half years, and will be replaced by a refurb. My other is still going strong. To be honest, 5 years or more from one of these seems like a pretty good deal, I don't expect a $1000 PC to last any longer.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:43:00 PM

The old 2008 fatty is still alive and kicking here. Just got to take care of her and not overplay.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:18:37 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:18:51 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:18:58 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:11 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:12 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:12 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:14 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:27 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:27 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:44 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:19:48 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:20:08 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:20:16 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:20:16 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:20:17 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 4:20:30 AM

haha, I remember seeing a New PS3 60gb on Ebay worth the $1000.
They probably have them for more.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:32:28 AM

Whoa... Alex. I know we can get away with blaming the scroll bar for a double post, but 16 is a bit excessive, don't ya think?

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:46:49 AM

It's not the record, though. Someone posted the same comment over 20 times a few months ago.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

BikerSaint
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:53:59 AM

With all the up-to-36 hour marathon gaming sessions I've done on my launch day 60 Phat Princess, I'm surprised that she lasted all the way to this past March.

And the fact that I had bought her used at in late 09 at GameStop, & have no idea how many before me had fondled or mistreated her, that's really saying a lot about her will to live & longevity.

It's just a shame that she only needed a minor procedure, but a f*cking careless USPS Orangutang Hitman located out of their Package-Bunglers union had to go smash the last gasp of breath out of her young life, before she could reach her golden years.

And mark my words, the USPS will pay out on my $500 insurance claim!!!!(and that includes my future engagement party & all related wedding costs to another of my 60gb Phat Princesses many sensual sisters)

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 9:45:44 AM

Sadly Biker, my dead phat princess remained dead as she was beyond resuscitation. So now, it's contact Sony and arrange a 'service request' AKA trade her in for a Sony refurb.

:(

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PANICinc
Friday, June 17, 2011 @ 6:51:25 PM

@Beamboom
Don't ring the death bell for the PS2 just yet!

New games continue to be released for the PS2! Majority are sports games like Madden. But there are also kids games that also launch for the Wii, DS, and PSP that are available for PS2.

It's not dead yet! It feels happy! Wants to go for a walk!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Claire C
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:31:41 PM
Reply

If Microsoft releases the new xbox in 2013 I hope Sony is on their a** with the PS4 right behind. I don't want the xbox to get a year lead again.

Last edited by Claire C on 6/15/2011 10:32:27 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Scarecrow
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 2:12:57 AM

price my friend, price.

If ps4 is only %50 more than the next xbox gamers will go for the better console.

ps3's price was steep.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 10:46:45 PM
Reply

I'm sure the PS3 will have the same long life as the PS2 but I don't think it will sell as many units because the PS2 was virtually unopposed. DC died on the table (God rest its soul) and Xbox came late and didn't do well.

If MS offers a new console then maybe multiplat games can be up to PS3 snuff finally. I say Sony should take their time.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

raiden213
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 11:05:45 PM
Reply

what sucks when my ps3 died i just got a new 3d plasma hdtv samsung(51pnd550)bundled w/ 2 pair of glasses and 1-4 shrek bluray movie, now the tv is just sitting there doing nothing since i had alot of expenses the past few weeks and don't have the extra $$ for a new system.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 1:08:00 AM

I'm terribly sorry to hear about that... nobody should ever have to watch Shrek 1-4.

Agree with this comment 8 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Eld
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 11:20:44 PM
Reply

Here we go again.

I really can't understand these unrealistic expectations about ps3 "going strong" for a decade without ps4. Lack of interest in hardware progression is rather disappointing.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 @ 11:36:08 PM

I believe it's called a smokescreen...Why tell the competition you're working on a new system if you can make them believe that it's years away?

Agree with this comment 5 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Scarecrow
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 2:15:22 AM
Reply

10 years doable, ps2 is still selling to this day.

ps3 will definitely follow that playstation legacy of selling many years into the next generation.

4+ years and still kicking! I expect another 2 good years with ps4 coming out in 2013 or 2014.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 2:31:44 AM
Reply

With rumours of MS popping the locks on the NeXtbox at E3 next year, Sony will need to play it smart. They either need to be right there alongside them, beating them in both release schedule and pricing, OR they need to wait a couple of years and offer a full generational leap over the neXtbox and the WiiU within only three years. I can believe ten years for the PS3. I mean, I won't believe that the system is done until every game looks as good as UC3 and GT5, and most games are a LOOOONG way from that.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Fane1024
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:49:53 AM

Wii U isn't next-generation. It's at best marginally more powerful than PS3.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 6:33:58 AM

They're now touting it to be 50% more powerful than the PS3, but I never said that it was next-gen, but the neXtbox should be. The PS4 needs to leapfrog it in a far more dramatic fashion than the PS3 did the 360.

Last edited by Lawless SXE on 6/16/2011 6:35:01 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 9:51:56 AM

If they wait two years beyond Microsoft (assuming Microsoft go next year), that will put their announcement squarely into 2014 which might be too long - even for the PS3. The PS3 arrived 6 years after the PS2 which was around 6 years beyond the PS1. with the economic recession and the fact that the PS3 was literally bleeding edge when it launched, I could see it going an extra year (7 years past launch) before the launch of the follow-up. But, the way technology has developed, 7 years is a lot longer today than 6 years was in 2006. I don't know if Sony can give it two years, and still have the PS3 remain relevant. That said, a two year gap between Microsoft and Sony would be preferable to a 1 year gap. Launching at the same time might be better still but each eventuality has it's own difficulties.

How about they do wait the extra year as you suggest, but get every major first party developer to commit to a launch exclusive for the new system so that even if 3rd party is patchy on day one, the console launches with a killer line-up, unmatched by the others?

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 1:31:57 PM

Not every first party developer, as that would then cripple their efforts for a couple of years, but a good portion of them at least. I do agree that waiting for so long could be a bad move, but it all depends on the way that it gets handled. It also depends on what sort of uptake the 'next-gen' consoles get out of the market. If they manage 50 million apiece, then there'd be real issues, but if both only manage 20-30 million each (as is likely IMO) then Sony would again have a very good chance to overtake them. But that depends on what kind of 3rd party support they can muster. But publishers like putting games on every system, even if it means neutering them, so perhaps there isn't so much to worry about.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 2:36:27 AM
Reply

they are dreaming. this is not the ps2. all i know is sony better be right there and have a new system to go when the next ms system is ready. i find the lack of interest in hardware progression disturbing as well. blah, blah. we built it for ten yrs yet gave it a tiny 512 mb of memory.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 4 down Disagree with this comment

Kiryu
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:28:43 AM

aren't u satisfied with the graphics of the uncharted series?
I want to see more games come from japan especially now with that potential.This generation is still not done sir.
HD is what ruined this generation's developers creativeness.

Last edited by Kiryu on 6/16/2011 5:29:16 AM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 6:31:45 AM

i just don't like the idea of a 10 yr console cycle. that's a long, long time as far as advancements in computer technology go. is this really even the true hd era? there are still a ton of games out there that run at sub hd resolutions, and slow frame rates. hardly any games at 60 fps. i would just like to see the promise of 1080p, and 60 fps fully realised.

how much more are developers going to be able to squeeze out of a system with only 512 mb of ram? only 256mb of vram is a problem. 10 yrs is really pushing it.

i imagine the ps3's got maybe a couple of years left in it. they might still make them after that, but it will be sold alongside the ps4. very few games, if any will be made for it.

i think sony should be ready to luanch the ps4 as soon as ms next system is ready. they can't afford to let ms get out in front again. sony already has uphill fight on their hands becuase of way things have turned out in na.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 6:43:02 AM

But Excelsior, it isn't really a ten year CONSOLE cycle that they're touting, it's a ten year LIFE cycle. Basically, repeating what the PS2 has managed to do. Thing is though, if Sony play it smart and somehow bump up the install base of the PS3 to 100 million (a tough ask, I admit but possible) before the release of their next console, developers are more likely to support it as software sales will stay strong while they acclimatise to the new development environment on the PS4.

Even if there is a two year overlap, that gives the PS4 eight years from the launch of the PS3, which is still three years away. That'll likely be two years out from the launch of both of their competitors systems, which according to Hobson's(?) Law, dictates that it should be twice as powerful at a similar launch price point. Admittedly, the others will be much cheaper by then, but do you not think that a lot of developers would migrate over to the more powerful hardware to test their mettle and creativity?

Taking this route could go either way, but it's up to Sony to either muscle their opposition that way, or beat MS to the punch with an earlier, cheaper and more powerful device, as I mentioned above.
Peace.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 10:06:36 AM

Lawless,

If the PS3 closes 2012 as the main Sony video game console, and if they drop the price again this year to $249.99 - which i honestly expect in the autumn - then they'll sell past 65 million units by the end of FY12, and possibly 80+ million by the end of FY13. If they announce a new console during FY13, and drop the PS3 to $200 (which I doubt, $249.99 seems to me to be about the low point, but you never know), then we could see 100 million PS3 units by the time the PS4 launched in FY14. By the time they stop making the PS3, I expect it will sell past 120 million - perhaps more.

If the PS4 is an evolution of the PS3, I could see the following happen.

1st party games get released in three versions. 1080p running on the PS4, 720p running on PS3 and the Vita version, on the Vita of course. The dev environment on the Vita is said to facilitate easy movement of assets and high level code from the PS3 dev environment. Home and PSN in general will remain as a consistent part of the Playstation Brand and environment. If the PS4 is a development of the PS3 technology, Sony might be able to set up their development environment to allow games to easily scale down from PS4 to the PS3 and Vita. That would let them pitch things in such a way that the PS3 represents the base level of PlayStation, PS Vita is the mobile element and PS4 is the premium gaming platform, all combined across PSN an Home both of which are platforms in their own right.

If such a scaleable development environment worked well enough, you might never see a new Playstation - as such, but rather you would simply have three PlayStation SKUS that could all play the same games, but scaled to their respective market segment. PS3 would represent the 720p and sub HD 'cost sensitive' market. PS3 would represent the full 1080p HD 'premium' market and the Vita of course has the handheld market - though the PSP might continue in more cost sensitive markets in the developing world as well.

In a sense you have this now with the PS2 representing the lower resolution cost sensitive market, the PS3 has the HD premium market, and PSP is PSP. If Sony managed to pull that trick off, you could see the PS3 eventually sell more than even the PS2 has.

Incidentally Microsoft is rumored to be bringing a new Xbox360 based on a System on a chip design, where the Xenon and Xenos CPU/GPU heart of the 360 are on a single piece of silicon along with their RAM. It would produce a very inexpensive 360 motherboard and increase reliability considerably. It may be that the big announcement from MS next year could be the introduction of that system.

Sony could pull a similar trick with the PS3, but with the memory probably kept off the same chip. Both would be much less expensive to make then the existing chipsets and would be easier to cool and more reliable. Such a system on a chip design might also pave the way for the system on a chip to become a service processor in a new console...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 11:16:35 AM

Moore's law.

The number of transistors that can be placed on an integrated circuit doubles roughly every two years.

The amount of computing power a given processor has depends on many factors, such as the efficiency of the design, the number of execution units, the number of cores and the clock speed (to name a few). If you double the number of transistors available each two years, a CPU can double the number of cores every two years, Just with design improvements and doubling the cores, you see more than a twofold increase in performance every two years. With shrinking transistor size and improved design/power efficiency, chips get faster and cooler as well. So that a mature processor design in it's third iteration might have two or four times as many cores, 50% better clock rate and use a fraction of the power of the original.

If you look at processor generations, the rate of acceleration of performance has increased at an even faster rate, perhaps doubling every 18 months. A lot of that has had to do with clock speeds. But clock speeds have hit an upper bound in the 3-4GHz range. You can go faster, but it produces a lot of heat, and requires very well made, components using extremely small geometry - such as 32nm or less manufacturing. So the practical limit is the 3-4GHz range. Now that the clock speed has effectively maxed out, we are left with improving designs, adding cores and processing elements and multi-processing. As we get closer to the physical limits of silicon, we are also having to recognize that we can't simply keep throwing more components at a single chip - they become very difficult to make with a good success rate, and very expensive.

In the last 10 years, performance of systems has doubled every 1-1.5 years. If you compare the benchmarks for a 1GHz Pentium III (2000) to a 6 core i7-990X running at more or less 3.5GHz today, just multiplying the number of cores and clock speeds you net a 21 fold increase in power. But the i7 cores are far, far more capable than the PIII ever was. Based on the available benchmarks, the i7990X of today (Intel's best) is 58 times faster in terms of integer operations, and a whopping 83 times faster for floating point operations. that's comparing the best i7 of today against the best PIII of 2000. If you normalize the clocks, that means that a 6 core i7 is clock for clock between 17 and 23 times faster than a PIII due to it's additional cores, execution units and design improvements. Doubling every 1.5 years you'd get about a 49 fold increase in power. So Intel, for example, is well ahead of that curve in both Integer and floating point.

What I'm trying to demonstrate is that a 10 year gap between systems has historically been a really, really long time.

All of that said, because we are hitting certain fundamental limits with the technology, that acceleration is starting to slow down. The industry is having to look to multi-processing, multiple cores, multiple execution units and parallelism to find performance improvements. The next generation processor used by Sony might - for instance, have two PowerPC cores and 16SPU cores. With performance gains due to design improvements, the number of cores doubling and perhaps a modest clock bump to 3.5GHz, you might see upwards of 4 times the overall performance, with better gains in the floating point math than in the general PowerPC performance. If the number of PowerPC cores went from 1 to 4 with 16 or more SPUs we'd see a 4-6 times increase in system performance - or rather computing power.

There are other factors in system performance and this doesn't even begin to touch on the work being done with GPU designs. But you can see that there are a lot of things to consider when thinking about the potential performance difference between a modern CPU and a Cell (or even Xenon) of 5-6 years ago.

I actually wrote a ton more, but realized this was becoming not just an essay, but a thesis. So I cut it shrt. I'm happy to continue the discussion on the forums though.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 1:41:40 PM

Whoa... tech-heavy. Let me try sift what I can out of this here before I head over to the forums, but feel free to post there, and rest assured that I'll get over there in due time.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 3:02:05 PM

LOL! well, when I felt I'd hit thesis length, I figured I should cut short and switch to the forum, there's more there now. I still have some more to add, but it will be there, not here.

I have to confess, this is the first day in about three weeks when I've had the correct ADD med again, and it's taking a little time to get used to it...>hyperfocus<

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 5:06:20 AM
Reply

dunno about 10 years.
been out for 5 now, and we should be seeing it in 2 years time max so thats 7 years.
developers are going to keep releasing games for it 3 years after the successor comes out?
i honestly cant see that happening!
most publishers stop developing on a system once its successor is released.
id say 8 years and it would be lucky, especially considering the shaky grounds it started on!
constantly delayed.
shrouded in secrecy.
no good exclusives for YEARS!
ridiculously overpriced!
inferior versions.
more expensive versions.
not to mention allot of 3rd party games released months later on the ps3 then they did on other systems, rainbow six and the darkness for example were out if i remember right 10 weeks earlier on the 360!
they have done pretty well turning a disaster into a profitable and reputable system.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Excelsior1
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 6:48:16 AM

you raise some interesting points. i think the ps2 was a unique situation. that system was immensely more popular than its competition thus allowing it to enjoy a super long lifespan. i just don't think the ps3 is in the same situation.

also, sony did do a good job in turning a disaster into a success. no easy task, but i wish they wouldn't have made it so hard on themselves by giving ms the oppurtunity to pick up the marketshare it has this gen. that's going to have consequences going into next gen for sony.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 10:15:46 AM

The PS3 will have sold past 80 million units when the PS4 is announced...(assuming a 2013 announcement), it will ultimately sell past 100 million units, perhaps many more. It will have a lifecycle longer than 10 years, the PS2 has been selling now for 11 years and still sells millions of units. The successor to the PS3 will likely arrive around the 7 or 8 year mark. I don't believe that they can stretch the console generation to 10 years with the PS3.

That said. Let's imagine a situation where MS launches a new console in a year's time and Sony does not. If the PS3 continues to sell solidly and game sales continue to be bouyant, would they *have* to announce a sucessor in 2013? Seriously, the way the PS2 continued to sell provides a clue that the long term market for a budget priced, and excellent console is rich. What if the PS3 did sell alone for 10 years without a successor. There could be a temptation to stretch another year or two if PS3 continues to see good sales through 2012 and beyond. You could make an argument for actually stretching to 10 years - if the sale in year 8 are strong enough. Such a timescale might allow Sony to mature the design and manufacture to an extent that was not possible with the PS3, producing a fast system with very good reliability, and a cost effective design.

If Sony were able to wait that long, might they even make a console that is consumer upgradeable (plug in processor and memory units to supplement the system) so that no new generation is required for as long as we stick to 1080p HDTV? Might they make their development environment in such a way that games can automatically scale themselves to whatever the hardware is capable of. So that a fully upgraded future console can run everything, but a base model can run the same game, but with less fancy graphics?

If Sony does somehow wait 10 full years, a lot of things we might discount now could be possible.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 11:40:51 AM

yes but as Excelsior1 said the ps2 was ridiculously popular.
the xbox really did not ever have a chance of competing, and the gamecube was miles behind!
the ps2 was so popular, the wii of its time.
i honestly cant see a system ever seeing that success ever again, let alone the ps3!
i honestly cant see publishers sticking around, especially how the industry has changed.
back in the ps2 days budgets were so small so you could afford to make a game for a older system.
now though it would not be feasible due to the much higher budgets and by the time the ps4 is out budgets will probably be even higher!
also games in general.
going from ps2 to ps3 was a massive jump, but now games look so freaking amazing i wont be surprised if next consoles get adopted much slower then previous generations.
were reaching a point where not limited by what we can do, but what we really need to do.

that totally depends on what next gen brings us.
if its just graphics enhancements and enhancements on what we have, then no i dont believe sony would have to.
but i dont think they could hold out several years.
though if new consoles brang new features, something new people feel they must have, then yes sony will either have to rush a system and get it out, or risk turning up to the war once its finished.

if M$ does not release a new system and the wiiU does not sell well then yea sony could wait easily another 4 or so years, but thats not going to happen, im positive M$ will be showing there new console next year and sony either sits back and lets M$ show off there cards and risk turning up to the war late like they did ps3.
or join the me too club and rush a system and risk it be like the 360.
in a ideal world id be best if they could sit back and perfect it, but no one wants to be the last horse to a race.

consoles will never take the upgradable route.
1 too expensive, might aswell get a PC.
2 developers will end up developing for the LCD all the time, thus never bringing the best out of the system.
sure they could scale it, but it will never be as good as the real deal.
as herman lust from GG said in a interview just after KZ2s release he was asked the same question and he said no, developers love working on consoles because they have 1 bit of metal and they can really work to bring the best out of that.
instead of starting at the bottom and trying to work your way up hoping every GPU, CPU, MB, RAM capable type and combination is catered for.
creating so much more work for yourself!
also allot of developers HATE working with APIs, one thing i keep hearing from devs is they wish we could get rid of APIs and just code on the metal like consoles.
john carmack did a detailed interview on this just a few days ago.

3 as you said the days of spending thousands on gaming PCs are almost over.
onlive and streaming services are starting to creep in, yes there not ready yet, theres a lot of work still to be done but thats where the future is.
definitely not next gen, but i wont be surprised if a onlive feature ends up being introduced to next gen consoles half way through there life cycle and helping extend there life as move and kinect have done this gen.


as allot of developers have said i doubt next gen will be all about enhanced graphics, about whats under the hood.
obviously thats going to be a part of the evolution, but the driver of it is going to be social networking and taking your game, your profile, your gaming life and make it accessible 24 hours a day 7 days a week 365 days a year.
were starting to see that with wiiU and psv, but next gen will take it that extra step.

to be honest i can see the next generation of consoles not actually being consoles, being consoles and handhelds built into one.
have a console for home, with all the features and multimedia features todays consoles offer, but with a fully integrated handheld.
say ps3 but replace the DS3 with say the psv, and when you go out you simply transfer your ps3 game across to the controller of said system and away you go.
then once your home you transfer it back and again away you go.

but what i see as next gen is a onlive styled feature.
depending how fast ISPs evolve over the next few years i dont think a onlive styled feature is that far out of reach.
i mean i was watching a few hours of foxtel today online and i could of swore i was running it off my box!
yea movies and games are 2 massively different kettle of fish, and i have not been able to try onlive, but its something thats really interested me.
i mean it brings the best of everything!
especially now that they brought it over to the ipad!
it brings DD, so no more leaving the house putting up with the traffic.
no more spending thousands on PCs, or hundreds on consoles.
no more worrying about consoles or PCs overheating and having to get them repaired.
just your micro console which is just a few circuit boards very little can go wrong with it!
just the micro console, your controller, and your internet.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Highlander
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 11:58:06 AM

Handhelds do not have the power to achieve that yet, and won't for a while. the next console generation will integrate well with handhelds, and as you cans ee from Vita, software development environments will encourage data and high level code commonality between platforms facilitating an easy scaling of a game to either platform. But they will still be separate.

Your next generation console will not emulate the Motorola Atrix - nor will the WiiU.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Friday, June 17, 2011 @ 10:37:52 AM

ive reached a point though where i dont really care about better graphics.
i mean yea theres so much further we can go but so what?
GT5, uncharted 3, RAGE are more then good enough for me!
id much rather developers spend there time and money investing in other areas.
exactly what david said in a interview with xplay, id rather see games get a 20% graphical reduction if that meant we could see new gameplay styles, or lower budgets so instead of a company only being able to afford 1 a year they can split the budget in half and do 2.
weve reached a point where graphics are so good i just dont see the point in more powerful hardware.
i dunno, maybe im getting old but i no longer am obsessed with getting the fastest hardware to get the best graphics possible.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gone
Thursday, June 16, 2011 @ 10:22:27 AM
Reply

I don't know if Sony is trying to phase out the 160GB PS3 Slim with all of these offers. Yesterday Amazon had the 160GB PS3 Slim for $199.99 and this week Best Buy is offering a $100 gift card with coupon.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

asanaya
Monday, June 20, 2011 @ 11:14:05 AM
Reply

I really don't see my ps3 lasting another month, we have the first model that came out on release the 60gb one back when they cost Like 600 and ours has the yellow light of death Idk how we have the external fan cooler on it, we hardly ever play it over 3hrs, its in a open space, and we don't even play it during the school year bc we are too busy, so wtf sony, I found out the solder points on the CPU ect, is lead free bc of that when it gets hot and cold over and over the solder isn't as flexible bc of no lead so it cracks , Sony put the lead back in the solder or your playstations isn't going to live more then a few years a piece. No mother or child is going to ever touch the solder in the enclosed ps3 with a special screw holding it shut from normal people, and get possible birth defects!!! We have every Sony playstation offered except the psp go , useless when you have two psp's with a whole library of umd's, we have 3 ps1, 2 ps2, 1 ps3, 2 psp 1001 so I'm not a playstations hater they just need to offer a better cheaper repair program for the yellow light of death on the ps3's

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Eliskor
Monday, June 20, 2011 @ 12:53:22 PM
Reply

I think they'll talk about PS4 when they see the WiiU curb-stomping the competition. Because they said the WiiU is "at least 2x as powerful as the PS3". I doubt Sony will sit idly by and let Nintendo hold the new generation in the palm of their hands uninterrupted like that. I think this may be like PS2 when PS3 came. They'll have both going same time (PS3 and PS4). I could see them doing that again.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ather
Monday, June 20, 2011 @ 4:01:47 PM
Reply

If they allowed Ps2 games support, Ps3 could last longer. I'd love to play some PS2 games, but I'm not buying another system. The games could open up a whole new niche (anybody who never had a Ps2). Instead, they'd rather us have 20 diff consules. Sheesh.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

SS4
Tuesday, June 21, 2011 @ 9:53:36 AM
Reply

This is wrong, GPU in all current gen console are lackluster. Paying as much as a PS3 you can get urself a new CPU+GPU that will outperform it by so much that its not even funny. Todays mainstream CPU and GPU are way ahead of the old hardware in all of todays console.

Am I the only one that wants to see new gaming console soon so we can get better graphics in games instead of staying almost in the same place like weve been doing for year?

Hardware becomes obsolete after just a few year. Keeping a system for more than 5 year you can feel how obsolete it is. 10 year....thats just plain ridiculous and just stops the improvement of lots of game aspects, especially graphics.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

beebs83
Wednesday, June 22, 2011 @ 7:49:52 AM
Reply

All I want is for the PS3 to last long enough for Uncharted 4 to be released. Maybe Fall 2013. I was hoping for vehicles to be able to drive around in Uncharted 3's multiplayer. I love the thought of big open environments and jumping and climbing on vehicles, pulling guys off etc in a multiplayer setting. I think Naughty Dog could've pulled this off with U3. Hopefully in 4.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

Got Madden NFL 25?
Yes, and it's great!
Yeah, but I'm a little disappointed.
No, but I plan to get it soon.
...they still make sports games?

Previous Poll Results