The Generation Isn't "Over" When New Consoles Launch

I have said this before, but I am not ready for the PS4. My PS3 is doing just fine, thank you very much!

3 up, 0 down

Well said! Totally agree!

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

1 up, 0 down

yep, no problems with my PS3 yet.

0 up, 0 down

But we do know that Microsoft will probably dump their 360 console support the moment their new system comes out. It won't matter if the PS3 can easily handle the early multiplat games because there will be huge pressure on Sony to move on too.

3 up, 2 down

I think the only pressure Sony is under right now is to make a profit, and historically, their gaming division makes by FAR the most profit on an "old" generation. When many millions have the system, the hardware is cheap, and there's a ton of software.

I don't think they'd launch the PS4 and just try to push forward with that while ditching the PS3 fast. That could be financial suicide.

---

Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 6/25/2012 10:51:51 PM

7 up, 2 down

Right I think PS3 will still have support like the PS2 did, however the rabid gaming public this gen could shift the sands enough that PS3 isn't supported quite as long as the PS2 was. I'm no expert, it's just a feeling I get. 3rd party devs might want to work solely on PS4 very early to stay cutting edge.

0 up, 0 down

I think quite the opposite will happen infact, as soon as the ps4 is out, I dont think we'll see much in the way of support for the ps3. Just look back at every console when a newer version comes out, the old doesnt get much, if anything, in the way of support from 3rd party devs, or in house dev teams either, it has happened with every playstation console and handheld, and I've no doubt it'll happen again.


Yea, some might argue that games still come out for the old consoles when the new ones launch, but really, take a good look at said games, and tell me if they are really worth bringing up. Another point to bring up, is that this new gen of gamers just want the newest thing constantly, which will put a lot of presure on sony to focus on the ps4 rather then on the ps3.

2 up, 2 down

I think the biggest reason for the prolonged support on the PS2 well after the PS3's release was the troubled launch Sony had with the PS3.

The PS3 was too expensive, had very few games and had poor performance with multiplats. Many back in 2006 and 2007 jumped ship to 360, what with great exclusives like Gears of War, Halo 3 and Mass Effect. Xbox Live was greatly superior to PSN in 2006 and 2007, and with social gaming and online play with friends on the rise, the change was inevitable.

From 2008 onwards, Sony balanced the scales a bit with more games, a vastly improved PSN (that still remains free) and offering developers a chance to lead with PS3 hardware for optimum performance of their games. Sadly, by that time, the damage had been done.

PS2 sales were still high well up to 2009 because of its cheap price and library of games, AND DVD playback. The PS3 was still pricey, still gaining many exclusives and the multiplats were only JUST starting to become as good, if not better, than 360.

The PS4 will have an easier transition, and much quicker transtion, if it does the following:

1. PS4 is cheap, below $399

2. PS4 has a large library of games on launch and several big AAA releases each month right after release, not 8 months after.

3. Is backwards compatible with existing PSN and PS3 software and (if possible) hardware like Dual Shocks and Move controllers.

4. Keeps Blu-ray. No need for a larger optical storage disc for now. Many games rarely hit above 20GB in size.

5. Massive increase in GPU and CPU RAM. That's really all the PS3 needed to make it MORE than next-gen.

6. Finally, keep the core gamers as the TARGET audience for the first 3-4 years of the PS4's life. Casual gamers might go WiiU or Kinect for the gimmick, but core gamers are in it for the long haul.


If PS4 can meet all the criteria listed above, I swear I will buy one on launch. I doubt I'd be the only one too. :)

9 up, 0 down

DanceM I have to agree... biggest bottle neck has been GPU and RAM... if we had more of these two, the current system would be just fine.

Games would run at 1080p and really, there would be no need for a "PS4" in some respects...

Q!

"play.experience.enjoy"

---

Last edited by Qubex on 6/26/2012 4:14:55 AM

0 up, 0 down

I didn't think the PS3 even had a traditional GPU?

0 up, 0 down

Underdog:
The PS3 has nvidia geforce 7800 GTX GPUs. I remember that cause I had two 7800GT cards in my old gaming PC before I got me a PS3.
Nvidia is a widely used and highly recognized manufacturer of graphics chipsets for all modern computers. Simply put it's either Nvidia or ATI. x360 use ATI chipsets.

---

Last edited by Beamboom on 6/26/2012 12:49:53 PM

0 up, 0 down

Yeah, I'm familiar and prefer NVidia cards myself (have a GTX460 on my PC). For some reason I thought the engineering in a PS3 was really weird and used SPU's for much of it's graphical computing. I just remember it not being something you would normally expect.

0 up, 0 down

Dancemachine

You are 100% correct. Your second paragraph sums the exact reasons many Sony fans jumped ship to 360 at a significant rate those first two years. That's been proven by the way and is a flat out fact. I watched many of my so called Playstation loving friends run out to buy a 360 for Gears of War. "Jamie, you have to see this game...it looks unbelievable." Well, it sure did and you're talking to a guy who was largely unimpresed with the initial graphics of 360 games. A lot of those 360 launch games were upgraded ports/versions of Xbox1/PS2 games but not Gears. The texture detail was great plus when you zoomed in the textures were still amazing. Being PS fans my friends really didn't care about Halo at first but they later got sucked in by their Xbox Live friends that infested college dorms. Again one thing my former PS fan friends and family at home cared about were the better looking and playing multiplats. So did my college friends. That probably had a bigger impoact than any single exclusive overall.

Games looked better on the 360 early on despite Sony's claims true HD gaming arrived when Sony said it did plus the PS3 was getting hammered by developers, the gaming media, and worst of all...actual gamers on the ground who judged games the old fashioned way...with their eyeballs.

Your comments on Social gaming are very interesting. I know that sucked in younger gamers and I even seen it extend to my college and workplace after classes were over when I was around 21-22. Live became a virtual hangout for gamers after school and was also a a hangout for workers when their day was over. When I managed to buy so many cheap PS2 games from my coworkers and video rental strores that were clearing out PS2 games to make room for 360 games(not PS3 games) I knew their was a huge shift going on when it came to console market. You are spot on when you said in 2008 "Sadly, by that time, the damage had been done." I really do believe that as well. Again, I think those multiplats looking and playing better on the 360 at first influenced gamers judging systems with their eyes really, really hurt the PS3's image which was already in a precarious spot to say the least.

I don't think next gen will play out like this gen at all. No system dominating except for MS in NA. All console makers gained a lot of marketshare except Sony. The PS brand isn't nearly as dominant as it once was. There aren't as many PS fans around for Sony to transition to the PS4. So I think that means MS is in much better position this time. They will probably ditch the 360 and MS fans will upgrade baring a huge mistake on Microsoft's part. We know MS will market the hell out of the system and really only needs a couple of exclusives and COD and they will be fine.

Microsoft's strengths come from Live and Social/Multiplayer Gaming. Those hardcore MP gamers don't need a ton of games to get them by at first and are proven early adopters. Another thing they do is put a ton of peer pressure on their friends who naturally want to game with their friends as well.

I see no problem if Sony also attempts to take advantage of Social/Multiplayer gaming in a more aggressive way. That means adding cross game chat and packing in a headset with each PS4. That's called matching the competition feature for feature and will improve the quality of online play. I dare you to fire up ME3 and go into a random game and tell me how many are using a Mic. 0 to 1 out 4? 2 out 4 if your lucky? What's up with that? I thought it wasn't 2006 anymore and most use MIC's today. I'll tell you why MIC usage is so low. Becasue 1 didn't come with the PS3. Online play is important these days. It needs to be as clean as possible with a lively fanbase that communicates with their team members.

Keys to sucess for Sony are right there laid out for Sony mainly learned from the painful events they went through this generation. First is a proper launch that doesn't alienate the Sony fanbase tempting them to jump ship. Gaming fans have demonstrated they will bail on any console maker if enough mistakes are made no matter how successful the companies system was in the past. The PS2 at the start of this generation was the most sucessful system of all time outselling the Gamecube and Xbox combined by a wide margin in all regions last gen. Yes, even NA for my European friends. That success did not translate at all at the start of this gen due to Sony doing a decent job of alienating the PS fanbase in a complicated slowburn type of way.

Secondly make sure multiplats look just as good on Sony's systems and make sure it's developer friendly. So be it if first party developers have to relearn a more developer friendly system. Multiplats make up the vast majority of games anyways.

Beamboom told me has 100 plus multiplats and even though he knows better PS3 multiplats are out there he hasn't owned a single one. I told him it only takes one to leave a bad taste in your mouth and he said he had plenty. The most recent example being Skyrim. He just wanted to say at the end of this gen how fed up he is with inferior PS3 multiplats.

Thirdly is price. A higher price point might work if there are actual games that show Sony's superiority but the price can't be much higher unless it's clear the PS4 is a better system that has games that justify the higher price. It's risky because of Sony's financial situation but I like the idea of making a clearly superior system because I think Sony will lose if their power is similar to MS's and engage MS in a marketing war where they clearly are going to be outspent by a significant margin.

Fourthly. Games, games, games. Games drive sustained sales. I'm not just tallking about first party Sony exclusives either unless it's almost perfectly executed and marketed extensively. They tried that this generation but are still in last place probably due to poor marketing and losing so much ground to MS early on before exclusives kicked in. Even when the exclusives kicked it didn't do much to shake up the landscape of the console market. Maybe with better timing and some of the prestige Sony earned with their exclusives this gen will translate into better console sales. Is it possible to rely too much on exclusives? Without proper marketing and timing absolutely. Maybe Sony should go after some timed DLC with major console selling games like MS has with COD and Rockstar's games. Don't rely on exclusives alone.

Number 5. Address the sales inbalance in the NA market. It can be done. MS is not immune to good and oppurtunistic marketing. Tough to do because of Sony's finincials and Microsoft's deep pockets but Sony has to put up a better fight in NA next time. It's an uphill fight for Sony if MS controls the largest gaming market by a considerable margin like they have this gen. I'm so sick of reading MS's NPD press release where they state they accounted for 49% of console sales that month. Sony won't even give out their numbers. Afraid some investors might read them.

Oh, I know it's a global business but MS has even made strides globally. I'm told it's more popular in the UK and a lot the European markets are pretty well contested by MS. Some are prettyu darn close to a 50-50 split if my PSn Euopean friends are telling the truth. I've see some data that backs some of that up on Wiki so don't diismiss the gains made by MS even in Europe. Sony still enjoys an overall advantage over there but MS is way more competitive over there than the were in the past.

Yeah, this gen isn't over the instant mext gen starts but it won't take log for next gen systems to take off. Developers have sat through a long gen and console sales have been decling for awhile now. That himnts consumers are waiting for next gen and developers have been wanting more power. They will welcome a new console cycle. If developers want these long life cycles don't skimp on the ram. The future proof PS3 is sporting 256 MB of Vram partitoned away from the equal amount of system memory. The way the PS3 handled its memory allocation is why we have no cross game chat by the way. Not enough memory. Interesting ME3 trivia. Guess why the holster weapon option was removed in all versions of the game. There wasn't enough memory left on the PS3 so Bioware ditched it mfor all versions.

---

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 6/26/2012 3:38:34 PM

1 up, 0 down

Holy Crap, I thought I was wordy! Dude... BREATHE!!

I don't use a Mic, I don't want to. I don't want to listen to people chattering in my ear all game long. In the online games I play I use text. There are a significant number of gamers for whom Text is necessary since they have hearing difficulties. Not to mention that there are so many crap headsets out there you're lucky if you can understand the others chattering away incessantly. Using a Mic in a game does not equate to modern gaming. If anything, *that* is a very 2006 point of view.

BTW, you're told wrong about Europe. The UK and Ireland (English speaking markets) are fertile for Xbox, the rest of Europe is strong for PS.

Once again, the English speaking market deviates from the global norm....wonder if that has anything to do with the horribly skewed English speaking US gaming and tech media?

Oh, and as for your disparaging remarks about having the video memory partitioned off from system memory, I am once again reminded of how little so very many people know about system design and programming. Oh, BTW, your typical PC with a discrete GPU similarly features a separate memory pool. A unified memory architecture is cheaper to implement, but not in any way inherently better. Having a hard partition creates a line in the sand which developers cannot easily cross in terms of the memory use. It forces you to think in terms of what can be done with the resource available. If the unified memory of the 360 is so great, and the GPU it sports is so fantastic, where are it's 1080p games? Comparing exclusive for exclusive (the games that best utilize the systems) PS3 overwhelms 360. You could say that was partly the talent of the developers, but the fundamental truth is that it's the strength of the hardware.

Lastly, gaming is a global business. The North Ameican market is not the be all, end all of gaming. Nor is Japan. So looking at the NPD numbers or the equivalent numbers from Japan does not tell you how things are going globally, you must look at the whole picture. If Sony stock holders are stupid enough to focus their attention on numbers that account for a minority of the market being evaluated, that's their problem.

Oh, BTW, your anti-Sony bias could not be more evident if you tried.

---

Last edited by Highlander on 6/26/2012 4:25:01 PM

1 up, 2 down

Yes, Highlander you can be wordy but that's okay I'm used to it and do read every word of even your longest posts. One does not really have to breathe to type. If one runs out of breath typing then wow they are out of shape. I rarely type long posts because it's just not my style most of the time. Forgive me for agreeing with Dancemachine who has a pretty accurate view of what exactly happened this generation.

What got me going was responding to Dancemachine who I thought nailed a couple of points. Sony losing some fans early on and by time they responded in 2008 it was too late. Dancemachine's exact words. The other point was MS nailing the appeal of social gaming/multiplayer. That's a lot different experience if your talking with your fellow gamers.

I said gaming is a global business. It's not just the NPD numbers. There is a a tactical reason Sony does not provide them anymore. Nintendo used to this gen when they were doing so well but they stopped too. You are correct that your sophisticated investor knows exactly where Sony stands globally now and where they stood in the past. MS has made gains in Europe as well. It's well documented on Wiki and many Europoean countries are pretty evenly split. Not all of them but some. Sometimes they are seperated by a few million consoles. MS has a small lead in the UK. Sony leads in France. I said Sony has an advantage in Europe but it's by no means a huge accross the board adavantage. MS has made gains not just in NA but globally.

I'm anti-Sony because I want them to be more competitive and laid out some ideas I think would help them. Dancemachine hit on the poor first two years of Sony's console and said by the time Sony responded in 2008 it was too late. He must have anti-Sony bias too. That's ridiculous. He's only pointing out what Sony fans know. Mistakes were made early on by Sony. I suppose Ultima below me who states he will hold off on a Sony console because he was turned off by the PS3's "awful" launch could be accussed of anti-Sony bias.

I basically said I want Sony to have a good/proper launch. do a better job marketing, make a superior system that is developer friendly so bad multiplats won't hurt them again, and be more competitive in NA. I also want them to add features like cross game chat and include a headset to match the competition feature for feature and to put them in a better position to take advantage of social or online gaming. Those ideas aren't thrown out there to hurt Sony. I think some of them would actually help Sony. Pointing out past mistakes does nothing to hurt Sony today. Those mistakes were real and cost Sony a lot of marketshare. History is taught to us so we can avoid past mistakes. When I point those mistakes out I hope Sony avoids every past mistake they have made and even does better.

I will expose myself to some claims of anti-MS bias. I hope they make every mistake they made this generation combined with every mistake Sony made earlier too. They can throw in some bad hardware again and then make a ton of promises and whacky comments to alienate their fanbase about next gen. MS can claim their system will have Avatar graphics...then deliver muliplats and first party games that look worse and ditch the hardcore gaming market for Kinect only based games. No physical media either. MS switches to cloud based Kinect gaming only. I know crazy stuff. One can dream though.

Now I will admit I have a lot of contempt for Sony's launch and like Ultima I was turned off by that awful episode that let a company like MS make so many gains mostly at Sony's expense. MS didn't even have to earn it by spending a billion dollars marketing like they should have had to do to overtake a two gen market leader. It was nicely packaged for them by Sony by flubbing the first year or two and just like Dancemachine said by 2008 it was too damn late. I'd call out any company whether I am a fan or not when they gift a competitor so much material to work with that loses that company fans and marketshare. I would feel very differently if MS went out there and earned it with great bussiness model.

---

Last edited by Excelsior1 on 6/26/2012 7:55:01 PM

1 up, 1 down

I agree... ps3 came out in 2006... I was still buying and playing PS2 ga,mes until at least 2008... then got a PS3 in 2010

0 up, 0 down

It was weird when certain titles were coming out for both PS2 and PS3, somehow it didn't seem right.

4 up, 0 down

well, Sony had a ten year life cycle that ended in 2010, which means pretty much, not producing games after that.

0 up, 0 down

I mean like Spiderman 3 and Tomb Raider Underworld, multiplat across two gens of the same brand seems like a ripoff.

1 up, 0 down

I'm the person that always wants the latest tech so I'll be getting the newest Playstation on Day1 like I've done with PS1-PS3. But I'll admit I often spend that first year playing a ton of older generation games since new hardware usually doesn't have enough games to keep me busy.

1 up, 0 down

Persona 4 was a post PS3 game, let's hope Persona 5 makes it in time.

0 up, 0 down

That should be one hell of a tech demo at the press conference to make me buy a PS4.

0 up, 1 down

One thing that struck me hard at the end of the prior gen is that I transitioned too fast. I remember distinctly walking into GAMESTOP and seeing bargain bins of GREAT PS2 games that I had always wanted to get to but just never had the time or focus as I was all ready to move onto the newest hardware. These games, like Xenosaga 2 and 3, were among them. They were like less than $10. A number of others were there, equally good and equally cheap. I remember thinking, "man, is it really wise to race into a drought of expensive games, when inevitably the lower prices and options will come about soon enough if I just excerise some patience for the then next gen ?" Anyway, this is one of the reasons why I look forward to the next-gen starting. Starting so I know that when I can move over to the next-gen, presumably within the next 3 years, or so, I'll have a healthy selection of software, you know? not just the PS3.5 stuff, that sort of looks better, but not quite A LOT better because the devs haven't quite gotten a handle over the new tech?

Anyway, I'm really blown away be the kind of entertainment we're now. I don't want to race out of it all just as I did years past.But I do want the next-gen for sure. There's a number of things I'd like to see improve, visually, and memory wise, going forward.

1 up, 0 down

But the bad thing about waiting is that you will watch videos on youtube and ruin the experience for youself (I did it with GTAIV; I was already a pro at it before I even got it :P). And I don't think I have the patience to not watch any videos before getting the PS4 - I would just get the feeling that I'm 'missing out' constantly.

It's a bit of a rock and a hard place...that's for sure xD

0 up, 0 down

I was pretty much close to spoil myself on youtube.

---

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 6/26/2012 11:41:34 AM

0 up, 0 down

I'll get the PS4 on day one unless something unexpectedly negative about it pops up between now and launch.

It's not that there's anything wrong with the games these days, not per say, but I'm just... I'm just to *tired* of my PS3 now. After staring on the screen for this many years I feel like I know every single pixel from before.
It has served me well, but it's getting old now.

... And it's starting to get real noisy too.

0 up, 0 down

Did you ever try LittleBiGPlanet 2? It really is so much different from the norm, and -once you get into it - I'd say it's one of the top 3 games of the generation. Plus there's plently of co-op (& no linearity...).

0 up, 0 down

LBP2 is great, we've played it quite some when we got visitors. Great local coop. We are laughing our socks off while playing. That's always a good sign.

I don't really see how that has anything to do with this though, but still. At least you didn't mention Uncharted so I guess all is fine. :D

---

Last edited by Beamboom on 6/26/2012 7:18:56 AM

0 up, 0 down

Oh it's just (Uncharted) you were talking about how bored you were, and I thought LBP2 is just...not possible to be bored of. We should play it sometime! :P

...Well, that, and the fact that I still can't figure out the forums.

0 up, 0 down

Like I said, it's nothing wrong with the games these days. I'd just like to move on and see the next great games on great new hardware.

Currently enjoying Infamous 2. Very fun game indeed.

0 up, 0 down

I usually wait about a year after the launch of a new console. Seems like the right amount of time.

There's a decent number of new games launched within that time. The price might have dropped slightly, or there'll be a great bundle. Any kinks in the hardware are usually ironed out somewhat by then.

I don't think I'll bother with the PS4 until end of 2014 or early 2015. Uncharted 3's graphics, Portal 2's gameplay, LBP 2's neverending supply of content, GTA V's huge world to play in, the PS Move, the Vita and touch screen tech... thinking of all this stuff makes the need for a new console less and less necessary.

... the 360? In desperate need of Blu-ray and exclusive games. PS3 and WiiU will satisfy me for some time. Don't plan on getting the WiiU at launch, but sometime in late 2013 / early 2014. I love me some party games involving getting friends around. Online play can shove it!!

0 up, 0 down

I like to jump in after the first price cut, unless I find myself rolling in money for some reason.

0 up, 0 down

I usually wait too -- game companies RARELY have their best stuff available at launch since almost no one owns the system yet. A big exception to that used to be Nintendo -- Mario 64 was a launch title, Twilight Princess (Wii version) was too. Right now, though, I'm not seeing anything on the Wii U that would make me shell out full retail, pre-price cut cost for a system.

0 up, 0 down

What if Sony keeps the cost down on the new system if you look at the Xbox to Xbox 360 jump it was immediate I believe. I was quite young but remember When NES,SNES and eventually to N64 were released Nintendo only let developers make games for their newest platform. Luckily I went from NES to Sega Genesis to Sony PSX. Thank goodness Sony didnt end up partnering with Nintendo for that super disc attachement for the SNES. I would hate to think of having Just M$ and Nintendo in the console market. But then again I guess Sega would still be around if not for the PS2's amazing launch ending Sega's 19 run in the console market

0 up, 1 down

Aye, but don't forget MS consciously killed off the original Xbox, much like Ninty do with their consoles after the next ones launch. Sony's always taken a different approach, and one I'm a big fan of :).

1 up, 1 down

Apparently in Japan there are still 1 or 2 PS2 games still being released like Fifa. But lets be honest here, when the new console hits the old console is finished. Most developers plan early for the new console. You will get a few games on the old console in the first year of a new generation. But beyond that all the titles released are not worth anyone's time.

Saying that, I can't see myself getting a new console until at least a year after the initial release. I guess I was put of by the PS3's awful launch (Come on... you cannot deny it was bad for a year until Uncharted hit the console.)

---

Last edited by Ultimadream on 6/26/2012 4:11:31 AM

0 up, 0 down

Madden 12 is on PS2 as was NBA2K12

0 up, 0 down

This gen is already 7 years old... it's over next year if new systems release... Sony is on it's 6 year release and next year their PS3 offering will look more like MS's did this year... people tend to forget the life cycle of the 360 will be at 8 years come next holiday. That's a life cycle and more then a half. I wonder what Sony will do for a last Hurrah for the PS3 next year?

0 up, 0 down

obvious current systems wont be being dropped just before their successors are out!
hell, theres still a game or 2 releasing on ps2 this year!
a little late, but when something is as popular as it is you dont kill it off!
i wouldent be surprised if we see allot of games next gen also releasing on current systems for a while.
look at watch dogs, a game that is confirmed for ps3 and 360 but has been hinted many times as a next gen title as well.
i wouldent be surprised to see instead of games being "current" or "next" gen but both.
instead of games being for a specific platform developers will release the games for the first few years on both new and old systems simply because you want to take advantage of new systems, yet not many would of transitioned.
just too costly.

0 up, 0 down

Ben's points are certainly valid, but I can't help but wonder if Sony might do things a little differently with PS4. The PS2's lineup of games continued to be so awesome after PS3 came out that many hardcore Sony fans, including me, were happy to stick with PS2 until the PS3 price went down. And look at the Vita/PSP situation -- in Japan, Sony is still supporting both platforms, Vita sales are really lagging as a result.

Of course PS3 is going to have some games coming out for it after PS4 comes out, for at least a year or two. But I suspect Sony is going to be a little more eager to nudge us towards PS4 so it has a better run out of the gate.

0 up, 0 down

Like I've said before, the worldwide recession has extended this console generation by at least 1 year. If new consoles arrive in 2013 or spring 2014, that will make this generation 1-2 years longer than the previous one. But PS3 will continue selling well into the life of the next Sony console. Based on the projections I did myself about 3 years ago, I still think PS3 is well on course to finish north of 110 million units in lifetime sales.

I agree with Telly that the emphasis on supporting the older console will probably be less than has been the case with PS2 and PSP simply to avoid the situation where consumers delay the choice to move up to the next system. But I don't think that Sony is going to drop the PS3 like a hot brick once the PS4 arrives, that would be very out of character for them.

I'd guess that once PS4 is in the pipeline for actual retail release, we will see no more games in the key franchises on PS3.

---

Last edited by Highlander on 6/26/2012 11:56:36 AM

2 up, 0 down

Also it costs so much to begin to profit on current consoles and takes so long for 3rd party devs to grasp that I think console cycles have to be extended.

0 up, 0 down