Power without innovation is nothing.... Nintendo is going to be just fine...

Ah, the processing power rumors. It begins in earnest.


I don't quite know what a 20% gap will look, sound, feel, or play like for the next generation. If anything, I'm guessing this means that Microsoft and Nintendo are looking for a sub $300-350 price for the next boxes.

But the NeXbox420 hasn't been finalized, has it? Remember how the Wii U kept evolving and getting better since we first heard about it? Maybe the NeXbox420 is still evolving and improving as well. As it exists now it may only be 20% more powerful, but perhaps a year from now when it gets finalized it might be like 50% more powerful or something?

Then there is also the PS4 left to worry about.

I said this onthe PS4 thread, but I think Sony will have the weakest of the three next gen consoles because they were always the most successful when they had the weakest console like the PS 1 and 2. This time around, Microsofot will have the most powerful of the three and Nintendo will be in a close second to Microsoft with the Wii U.

The PS1 and PS2 weren't the most successful because they were the weakest hardware. They were the most successful because they had the most 3rd party support, which they got by default in those respective generations because Nintendo and Sega dropped the ball. In fact, the PS1 and PS2 weren't even the weakest hardware. Remember the Dreamcast? The Dreamcast was the first console of the 6th generation and it was the weakest. So if being the weakest console had anything to do with a console's success then by that logic the Dreamcast should have been the number 1 console, but that wasn't the case.

And as for the PS1, I'm not sure it was the weakest system then either. The Sega Saturn might have been weaker in some respects, and there was also other consoles of that generation such as the 3DO and Jaguar which may have been weaker too, but I'm not certain on that. But the point is how weak or strong a console is isn't really the most important factor. Software support is probably the biggest thing.

Being first on the market and getting a head start is also an important factor. Since it looks like the PS4 is going to be the last one on the market there's a good chance they will too far behind to ever catch up to the Wii U or the NeXbox420. I do think they will be the most powerful though, which is the advantage they get by having an extra year to develop and finalize the technology of their system. Being the most powerful system probably won't be enough to overcome the disadvantage of being last to launch, but it is certainly better than suffering the double whammy of both being the last and the weakest.

Sony advertised, the PS3 as being twice the power of the XBOX360 (numbers
crunching wise) when they announced it.
We know sony lies about their hardware to build hype, but look at the difference.
really unless its side by side, you really see no difference.
the PS3 and 360 made such a leep last gen, there is only so far affordable hardware
will take you.
If they can avoid the problems of the gamecube
1. storage(disc) size was 1/5 the others
2. Ram was way less 24mb as compared to PS2 40mb and XBX 64mb
3. controler cant do what the others can
Then Nintendo will be fine.
Then they will be fine

Lets hope that Nintendo doesn't end up doing what the 360 did- spinning the disc at such a stupidly high speed that made it sound like it was preparing for liftoff.

You need an analogy for how idiotic it is? Imagine trying to suck a wheelbarrow full of molasses up through a common drinking straw.

Microsoft caught on though, the re-modeled systems are better and the Xbox 360 is not that loud anymore. The PlayStation 3 is still really loud though.

Wrong! It will be 21.24% more powerful ... also it will double as a floatation device.

In other words, I'll believe it when the side-by-side game videos come out and not until then.  That said, it would be wonderful if a Nintendo platform got fair effort from third parties again.

The funny thing is that the GameCube was arguably every bit as powerful as the Xbox (aside from no hard drive and no shaders), if not more than.

This part is wrong. GC had 24+16=40 and PS2 had 32. (Not including framebuffer).

He was also wrong about the controller. The only thing I can think of that the GC controller couldn't do was the clickable analog sticks, but that's not a huge deal.

The lack of L2 and diamond button configuration was a sticking point for some developers.

Also, in terms of graphics processors, the ol' Cube had the most powerful of that console generation. The only area the Xbox excelled at over the others was its CPU -- it was definitely much faster than the Cube's.

Not really, Xbox edged out GC in graphics too, but just barely.

Supposesdly the newer Xbox system is going to reject used games ad might use Blu Ray:

http://kotaku.com/5879202/sources-the-next-xbox-will-play-blu+ray-may-not-play-used-games-and-will-introduce-kinect-2

Microsft would shoot itself in the foot by adopting anti-used game measures for their next system. Also, I do not see them adopting Blu Ray because of Sony. They will simply opt for something propriatary instead, which would most likely be similar to what Nintendo is doing with the Wii U's game discs.

Sony doesn't own Bluray and Nintendo didn't go proprietary because Sony is involved with BRD, they did it because they don't want to pay the royalty for it's use when initially only a very small percentage of people would even use it if any at all. (Also because the CAV system they use for data reading from the disc doesn't work so well on the drive when trying to watch movies)

If MS wants the living box and thinks a Bluray player adds value to their sales pitch, then they will use Bluray, or maybe they will do like they did with the original Xbox (& like we are all hoping Nintendo will do for the Wii U) and put the license in the market so the user can purchase the ability to play Bluray should they choose to use it.

Sony is the major play in Blu-ray, and make money every time someone buys a Blu-ray Disc or player. So if Xbox 3 used BD-ROMS, then Sony would make money every times a game was bought on it.

Sony also makes laptops with Windows. Despite conflicting interests, most companies use the technology of competitors in their own products. If the next Xbox includes Blu Ray, Microsoft is probably just trying to match Sony feature for feature.

Sony has no real choice with Windows. What else would they use? Safari? Not likely. Chrome OS? Pretty much a failure. Linux? Not mainstream. They don't really have a choice but to use Windows. Microsoft could follow Nintendo's lead and make a proprietary version of Blu-ray.

What about Android? Is that mainstream enough for you? Plenty of devices do use it. But it should be noted Android is based on Linux and uses the Linux kernel. So technically it is Linux, and the funny thing is many people who whine about Linux are actually using it everyday and don't even realize it.

He meant in terms of PCs. Either way, that wasn't really the point...

So did I. Android is an operating system which Sony could preinstall on their PCs.

Android is a mobile OS for smartphones and tablets and is designed that way by Google, it is not designed to by used in PC's and would have to have a complete overhaul (which I don't see Google wanting to do) to work on them.

Out of the $10-$13 Licensing fee that it cost for a Bluray player, Sony probably makes $0.20 - $0.50 per license sold. (We've had this discussion before).

Sony is one of atleast a dozen or two companies on the Bluray Disc Association that all get a piece of the pie and Panasonic (and Toshiba or Sharp or someone) own lots of Bluray patents too, so I'm sure that not wanting to pay Sony for Bluray is far from a deciding factor for not directly putting the format in the Wii U or Xbox720.

Not really. An existing Linux desktop environment such as KDE or GNOME could easily be adapted to it, and probably already has.

While that doesn't seem like a lot, that would still amount to tens of millions of dollars going directly into Sony's coffers.

If it has, it's not official and wouldn't be considered Android.

I agree on the second statement you made. Assuming the royalty was only $0.50, that would still mean that Sony would get $10 million from Microsoft if they sold 20 million system. Not to mention how much money Sony would get from every game as well.

Sony's royalties:
Sony Electronics Essential BD Patent Royalties
(as of May 20, 2008)
Products
License Royalties

Blu-ray Disc ROM Disc
1.5% of net selling price or $0.03 U.S. (whichever is greater)

Blu-ray Disc R Disc
1.5% of net selling price or $0.06 U.S. (whichever is greater)

Blu-ray Disc RE Disc
1.5% of net selling price or $0.06 U.S. (whichever is greater)

Blu-ray Disc Player
1.5% of net selling price or $3 U.S. (whichever is greater)

Blu-ray Disc Recorder
1.5% of net selling price or $3 U.S. (whichever is greater)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
$3 per player and $.06 per disc.  Not much but when you figure there's 300-500 million discs being made (Sony collects regardless of disc selling) that's 18-30 million per year on the software side of things.  Add another 15 million or so on Blu-ray drives and that's not a bad chuck of change that's pretty much annual for the next 5+ years.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

And yet it still doesn't cover their losses from the last 5 years, even of they collected that for the next 30 or so years. But that's for a whole different topic.

Point being that Sony's involvement with Bluray is not as significant as we all used to believe back before this generation started. Sony does not own the format nor are they only company to produce or profit from it.

Nintendo has tight friendships with Panasonic & Sharp who are both on the board and likely own key patent in the BRD tech, so if they wanted it, they could make it happen and Sony is not even part of the equation.

Excellent point. Anyway this next generation is not one that power concerns me as much, the current generation of consoles (Well minus Wii) have some pretty amazing visuals though that haven't really hit too many major walls in presentation. Wii U will be more powerful then PS3 and 360 even if it is just "20% more powerful", the fact is that it will be HD and be able to output some great visuals. I do not think developers not run into any Wii esque walls when it comes to porting games, it will be (hopefully) minimal sacrifices like we seen with PS2/Xbox/GC.

But only time will tell, right now so much is rumor and speculation on all the consoles. 

I believe games would be ROM discs, not RE (which are re-writable). Also notice the "whichever is greater part"). 1.5% of a $60 game is $0.89, while a $300 game system with Blu-ray would get them about $4.50, so that does add up to quite a lot. Say the Wii U does as well as Wii did in software and sells over 800 million copies in it's lifetime, that is at LEAST $360 million Sony would make from Wii U games (and that is if every game is only $30) even if you don't factor in hardware patents.

So Sony would get $0.89 of every blu-ray game sold on the competition's systems? Since you are looking at hundreds of millions of units of software, that's a lot of money.

I think most likely Microsoft will do similar to what Nintendo is probably doing and not use Blu-ray directly, but instead create their own derivative based on blu-ray which will allow them to circumvent giving all that money to Sony while at the same time being able to have discs with 25/50GB capacity.

That money is a license fee for patents, I don't think it's easy to circumvent.

A videogame system probably wouldn't be considered a Blu-Ray Player in this case.  The licensing Fee would probably be accessed on the cost of the drive itself.  Take the case of a computer, buying a Blu-ray drive is a fixed price not 1.5% of the cost of you total rig.  Its just a component not the sole purpose.

Simply put someone else is manufacturing the Blu-Ray Drive and they would incur the licensing fee.  Now if Microsoft made all of the system from scratch then they would incur the licensing fee.

NERDS!!!!

:cool;

If your job isn't nerdy then it can likely be done better by a machine or an assembly line worker in China.

Not to mention that Android has a lot of problems with licensing.

My job is certainly specialized. It can not be done by a machine or assembly line worker in any country.
I suppose its nerdy in its own way.
(also, my post was a joke...you missed that I guess)