Nintendo 360 console thread(GI rumor:possible final name...Nintendo)

[Rman]

Who would be surprised if this was actually just a Wii revision with some sort of upscaling function?

Wasn't the Gamecube decent hardware?  And the N64 was bilked as a powerhouse, although its pitiful v-ram and cartridge format hampered it immensely.  The SNES was also decent for its time.  Wii was a bit weird when you think about it. 

[Bebpo]

I don't really care about Nintendo systems anymore, but it would be kind of neat to play a Mario or Zelda game with Uncharted level of visuals.  Hard to even imagine how mind blowing crazy some of their real budget titles could look with non-shitty hardware.

[Great Rumbler]

I don't really care about Nintendo systems anymore, but it would be kind of neat to play a Mario or Zelda game with Uncharted level of visuals.  Hard to even imagine how mind blowing crazy some of their real budget titles could look with non-shitty hardware.

http://www.wiinintendo.net/2010/04/26/wii-emulator-gives-us-hd-wii-games-screens/

[EmCeeGrammar]

There will not be a fucking hd screen on the controller.   

[Bildi]

I hope it's kick ass.  I was just thinking yesterday I don't want to blow a heap on Nintendo's next system just to play fucking Zelda.  I'm already balking at presumably having to buy Motion Plus to play the next one.

Who would be surprised if this was actually just a Wii revision with some sort of upscaling function?

It's possible, but SURELY Nintendo realises the Wii is not a sustainable long-term strategy as the hardcore aren't interested and the casuals just buy the system plus one or two games.

[cool breeze]

Cool.  I hope this lights a fire under Sony and Microsoft's ass to release their next consoles, which will make the Wii 2 look like Wii poo.

I do throughly enjoy the 'IT'S MORE POWERFUL THAN CONSOLES FROM SIX YEARS AGO! GOOD LORD! IS THIS WHAT SEX IS LIKE?' talk.

nah, I'll be excited if this is true.  More powerful than an existing console is a notable step up for Nintendo.  Finally, HD graphics done right!

[EmCeeGrammar]

Oh god the rhetoric is exactly the same as it was 4 years ago.  No one has learned anything. Not a god damn thing.

If they are gonna do 1080p thang, I hope to god its powerful enough to do 1080p and 60 fps easy peasy.  Developers on the 'hd consoles' have a nasty habit of making games that run like shit.

[Bocsius]

Didn't the current round of consoles come out like a year or two ago? What's the rush?

[Trent Dole]

Yeah it's crazy how much the machines cost at this point in the cycle.

[naff]

ALSO REALLY EXPENSIVE STILL.

Yeah, unfortunately unlike back in the day they've kinda hit the ceiling with making tech smaller and cheaper to develop, you know that shit was sold at a loss when those consoles were released 5-6 years ago. and was for the next 3-4 years also, and compared to a gaming rig it's peanuts. Prices are plateauing, poors are complaining.

[Phoenix Dark]

i just want to keep everyones expectations in line

Nintendo on Wii : more powerful then xbox !!!
(Image removed from quote.)

Nintendo on DS: More powerful than Gamecube!
(Image removed from quote.)

Nintendo on 3DS: More powerful than wii!
(Image removed from quote.)

[Human Snorenado]

This thread is obviously a lie, Nintendo would have to enter the current gen before going next gen. 

[Eel O'Brian]

current HD consoles can't even do 1080p in 95% of the games

look forward to a bunch of 560p 30fps bullshit

[pilonv1]

Maybe Nintendo are making a PC?

There was that rumour that it was upgradeable.

[ferrarimanf355]

I didn't know Ridge Racer 64 was a 3DS game.

Methodis spreading his lies as usual I see.  Dotard probably still thinks Sony won their litigation with George "Giant-crusher" Hotz.

Technically, Ridge Racer 64 was ported to the original DS as a launch game.

[choco parfait]

I can see Nintendo going back to the hardcore next gen. They've successfully tapped out the casuals with the Wii, and they must know with a new console they're going to experience the same problem that the 3DS is currently having: convincing the casuals to upgrade and adopt a brand new console, which I bet is not as easy to do as it is for gamers. Next gen might as well put a hand in both pies so as to not leave any money out this time around.

I just hope this doesn't push Sony/MS' schedule, because I am not ready for a PS4/720 for at least another 3 or so years.  

[cool breeze]

yeah, but almost every Wii game is progressive scan / 480p, no?

at least on the PS2 and Gamecube, that wasn't the case for every game.  I feel like Xbox was in another league (and still one above the Wii).  I don't think it's crazy to think the Wii 2 can do 1080p games.  PS3 came out in 2006 (360 a year earlier) and the Wii 2 is probably 2012.  Then again, this is Nintendo.  Set expectations to 'oh...animal crossing wii2 is the big 2013 game'

The important thing is that, if Sony and (maybe) Microsoft roll out their new consoles, it will be another huge gap in visuals.  Most important is that multiplatform games will be for that gen and not last gen Wii2.

And Nintendo needs to unfuck its online strategy before it can pretend to be relevant with people who play games on the 360.

[Mrbob]

I really hope this doesn't force MS and Sony to rush out new consoles.

To each their own I guess.  I'm happy Nintendo is going to force their hand at the start of a new generation.  PS3 and 360 are old systems right now, and a year and a half from now border on being antiquated.  

[Stoney Mason]

I don't see the PS3 and 360 getting much support after their successors are on the market.

This is where I slighty disagree. Like I said my bet is you will see a longer transition period as these old consoles will keep selling and they haven't even hit mainstream prices yet in some cases. It's not a smart business move at all to immedately put all your eggs in new consoles with small install bases (especially for third parties) when you have very large install bases which are only going to keep getting larger with price drops.   

It was different in the past where you had one console just crushing everything like the Playstation 1 & 2. When they did move on it was truly time to move on because they were the indisputable market leader. But its different now.

[Damian79]

I am just hoping this thing will push the others into releasing their consoles earlier.  I am sick of this gen.

[Stoney Mason]

I am just hoping this thing will push the others into releasing their consoles earlier.  I am sick of this gen.

Based on your posts I'm not so sure why you are so eager for the next gen to start. It will be very similar to this one only with better graphics.

[Van Cruncheon]

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

[Jabberwocky]

sane gamers (ie: most of the bore's community)

[cool breeze]

That's the thing that annoyed me about the recent UE3 tech demo.  If that was a teaser for a real game, it would be fairly unique and cool.  I was more interested in the style than the graphical fidelity.

I'm wondering exactly what they can put out for 'next gen' that will set it apart design-wise.

[Rman]

It's just funny that surpassing 6 year old hardware is considered some huge technological feat.  I guess when you look at the Wii/DS generation, Nfans seemed starved for decent hardware, even though self deluded.

[Stoney Mason]

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

Damian79 strikes me as a nostalgia guy. So if you don't like this gen its not like next gen is going back in time or something. Although if somebody is purely a Nintendo fan then maybe I see it since their console was mostly out of step with a lot of gaming trends.

[Oblivion]

It's just funny that surpassing 6 year old hardware is considered some huge technological feat.  I guess when you look at the Wii/DS generation, Nfans seemed starved for decent hardware, even though self deluded.

Well, my expectations were pretty low. Judging by the success of the Wii early on, I thought even doubling the amount of RAM would be too much of a stretch. So I'm pleasantly surprised Nintendo went with a generational leap, even though they're still a generation behind.

Iwata or whoever it was that talked about diminishing returns was right, but Nintendo was just one generation too early.

[maxy]

I wonder if devs will give a fuck,outside the likes of Ubisoft.It could get few 360 ports i guess,but without good online structure people won't be thrilled.

Late 2012...plenty of time left,upstaging highly possible(see 3DS,PSP2)

[Eel O'Brian]

the "high-res screen built into the controller" rumor is pretty interesting, i could see the use in that

[Madrun Badrun]

ya and I know the use in that; a port of crystal chronicals now with HD textures (and nothing else).

[Damian79]

Based on your posts I'm not so sure why you are so eager for the next gen to start. It will be very similar to this one only with better graphics.

I very much doubt that.  I believe that the era of graphics being able to sell that well is over.  It is about content and controls next gen imo.  MS further advancing their controller less technology and Sony making a motion controller that doesnt feel "happy".  Nintnedo will be the first to do so next gen unlike last gen.

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

WTF COMPLETELY disagree.  Dual analog is antiquated now.

[Trent Dole]

I thought the consensus was that the Move and Kinecto each tacked on 2-3 years of extra lifespans onto their respective consoles thus making this gen last a little longer than usual. If that ends up the case N's new machine could be next gen's version of the Dreamcast. Probably minus all the fuckin cool weird games though.

[Stoney Mason]

Based on your posts I'm not so sure why you are so eager for the next gen to start. It will be very similar to this one only with better graphics.

I very much doubt that.  I believe that the era of graphics being able to sell that well is over.  It is about content and controls next gen imo.  MS further advancing their controller less technology and Sony making a motion controller that doesnt feel "happy".  Nintnedo will be the first to do so next gen unlike last gen.

So you want this gen to end so you can have a lot more motion controlled games for next gen? Teams and cost and size will only increase for next gen. How big a team do you think its going to take from Nintendo to pump out a HD level Zelda versus the Gamecube level graphics ones they've been making for the last 2 generations. Which makes publishers less likely to try crazy new stuff in game conent. (Outside of XBLA/PSN/Indie content)

[Damian79]

I just want the hardware makers to try and make the experience better than just by content and graphcs.

[Great Rumbler]

So far they've yet to show that motion controls accomplish that.

[Stoney Mason]

So far they've yet to show that motion controls accomplish that.

This. I bought into all Nintendo's talk at the launch of the Wii about how graphics don't matter. How they were going to revolutionize things with the Wii. How it was all going to change. They were preaching to the choir and I bought one first day.

And it was the worst console I've ever owned in my life. (Just my personal take. For those of you that love your Wii more power to you)

I think the Wii promised what Damian79 seems to want from the next gen this gen. I just think it turned out that wasn't  actually what I wanted in retrospect despite all the original hype. 

[Damian79]

So far they've yet to show that motion controls accomplish that.

That is because motion controllers are in their infancy.  I wish nintendo try something similar to the power glove again.  But much with a much lighter cloth like material etc.

So you want this gen to end so you can have a lot more motion controlled games for next gen? Teams and cost and size will only increase for next gen. How big a team do you think its going to take from Nintendo to pump out a HD level Zelda versus the Gamecube level graphics ones they've been making for the last 2 generations. Which makes publishers less likely to try crazy new stuff in game conent. (Outside of XBLA/PSN/Indie content)

For "crazy" content i will stick to the pc.  :p

[Damian79]

So far they've yet to show that motion controls accomplish that.

This. I bought into all Nintendo's talk at the launch of the Wii about how graphics don't matter. How they were going to revolutionize things with the Wii. How it was all going to change. They were preaching to the choir and I bought one first day.

And it was the worst console I've ever owned in my life. (Just my personal take. For those of you that love your Wii more power to you)

I think the Wii promised what Damian79 seems to want from the next gen this gen. I just think it turned out that wasn't  actually what I wanted in retrospect despite all the original hype. 

Completely agree with thsi.

[Great Rumbler]

The more I see of motion controls, the more I'd rather just have a regular controller with buttons.

[Stoney Mason]

The more I see of motion controls, the more I'd rather just have a regular controller with buttons.

I think nearly all consoles in the future will offer both. Casuals do seem to like motion controls so I think a portion of that is here to stay.

What I would like to see is the next step in evolution of the actual controller with buttons beyond just adding more buttons to it. I'm not sure exactly what that is, but that's more interesting to me as a stereotypical "hardcore" gamer than any new motion control scheme they can come up with. Like dual analog was the last revolutionary thing done to controllers. What's next? Because I don't want to play hardcore games with motion control because they suck for them.

[Damian79]

I think both options should be mandatory.  I can see why people like dual analog, because motion controls are tiring even when used correctly.  But it is much less immersive.  I mean you never feel like you are shooting a gun or using a sword with dual analog.

[naff]

I agree with Damian here partially. Gameplay is first and foremost the most important part of gaming. I'm interested to see how the nex gen consoles move to further standardise and improve their take on new control schemes, as nothing so far has really sold me on the idea. Because of this I'm happy with this gen lasting a while longer, I don't hold much faith in new control schemes being good enough to make me feel it was worth the investment to upgrade things I'm perfectly happy with. And if I have the need I can get better than 'next gen' graphics on PC.

If I was a nintard I would be gagging for something to replace the current mess and enter the 'next generation'. PS360 is A-ok with me.

[D3RANG3D]

  Real Controls

  Motion Controls

[Himu]

I think both options should be mandatory.  I can see why people like dual analog, because motion controls are tiring even when used correctly.  But it is much less immersive.  I mean you never feel like you are shooting a gun or using a sword with dual analog.

You never feel like you're shooting a gun or using a sword with motion controls either.  In either case, my game immersion is never so high that I even WANT to feel like I'm doing it for real. Why would I want to actually feel like I'm shooting up 1000 people or cutting a hundred guys in two? Games are not reality. Buttons allow me to keep such aspects submerged and let them stay in the realm of fiction. I don't want to feel like I'm killing a thousand guys. I do within the limitations of gaming, but not within the confines of reality.

Fuck that. I'm no soldier.

[Stoney Mason]

I can't say I feel like I am shooting a gun or using a sword with motion control as it stands right now either.  I don't think anyone who has ever fired a gun would say so.  The gun problem could be mostly fixed with strong enough force feedback but the lack of feasible methods of resistance means swinging a sword is always going to be nothing like the real thing.

I will say when I first played Wii Sports that did seem like a revolution I could get behind. It sort of felt like VR which I always had a boner for. And for awhile that was able to satisfy me and I still think Wii sports is a revoluntionary game in many ways. But after while what I realized was unless I'm actually in a holodeck or something motion controls were always going to fall short in nearly all ways. The illusion is broken so easily with current tech for a myriad of reasons. And for most actual traditional games that we gamers have been weened on they are actually terrible to use them for. So when somebody actually builds the real VR holodeck in 100 years and I can hop in my total body control suit, I'm totally down with motion control. But until then swinging a little remote or standing in front of a Kinect and flailing my arms is not remotely cool like swinging a sword or shooting a gun. There is simply too little there for my immersion to be sustained.

[Damian79]

I can't say I feel like I am shooting a gun or using a sword with motion control as it stands right now either.  I don't think anyone who has ever fired a gun would say so.  The gun problem could be mostly fixed with strong enough force feedback but the lack of feasible methods of resistance means swinging a sword is always going to be nothing like the real thing.

I also agree with this but shouldnt games to try and be more immersive?  Even if it is half way there?

As for the ps360 i agee that they dotn really need upgrades ratehr they just need ot upgade the control scheme, however it seems that higher ups wont be happy with just selling the ps360 and allowing Nintnedo to seem to have the most powerful console.  So i think if MS or Sony are going to release a new control scheme they will do it via a new console.

[Mrbob]

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

I never understood the argument against better hardware.  Like I'm supposed to feel bad I want a game to look great and run at a smooth frame rate at 1080P alongside it playing well.  Look at Crysis 2.  Sub 20 frame rate and sub 720P resolution on consoles when I'm playing it at 60fps at 1080P on PC.  The smoother frame rate gives me a better experience and I want my consoles to give me this type of experience as well.

[Trent Dole]

As for the ps360 i agee that they dotn really need upgrades ratehr they just need ot upgade the control scheme, however it seems that higher ups wont be happy with just selling the ps360 and allowing Nintnedo to seem to have the most powerful console.  So i think if MS or Sony are going to release a new control scheme they will do it via a new console.

But they just did this past holiday.  

[Himu]

So far they've yet to show that motion controls accomplish that.

The thing about wii is that it's a console made of potential for a lot of specific genres. Lightgun games have benefited, but what about rail shooters? Outside of Sin and Punishment 2 there are none for the wii. What about quirky games like Wario Ware Smooth Moves? Usually it's just forced controls like the ones seen in SSX Blur. Games like Mario use the motion controls in a conservtive manner and rarely use the motion controls because they mostly get in the way of the game.

It seems motion controls are mostly good for pointing and little else. I can think of only a few genres that would benefit from motion controls and yet wii didn't take advantage of any of them barring lightgun shooters.

Nintendo didn't prove anything.

And yeah, I too bought a wii at launch due to Nintendo's flowery words.

[Damian79]

I can't say I feel like I am shooting a gun or using a sword with motion control as it stands right now either.  I don't think anyone who has ever fired a gun would say so.  The gun problem could be mostly fixed with strong enough force feedback but the lack of feasible methods of resistance means swinging a sword is always going to be nothing like the real thing.

I will say when I first played Wii Sports that did seem like a revolution I could get behind. It sort of felt like VR which I always had a boner for. And for awhile that was able to satisfy me and I still think Wii sports is a revoluntionary game in many ways. But after while what I realized was unless I'm actually in a holodeck or something motion controls were always going to fall short in nearly all ways. The illusion is broken so easily with current tech for a myriad of reasons. And for most actual traditional games that we gamers have been weened on they are actually terrible to use them for. So when somebody actually builds the real VR holodeck in 100 years and I can hop in my total body control suit, I'm totally down with motion control. But until then swinging a little remote or standing in front of a Kinect and flailing my arms is not remotely cool like swinging a sword or shooting a gun. There is simply too little there for my immersion to be sustained.

I think that it is impossible to get what you are looking for on the first try because there will always be mistakes, also i dont think the full body suit is the way to go since you have to get into it every time.  I just fully support hardware manufacturers trying to get the experinece more immersive.

[Himu]

Immersion is both the most overestimated and misused word in gaming culture.

[Eel O'Brian]

ya and I know the use in that; a port of crystal chronicals now with HD textures (and nothing else).

fallout 4, pip boy right in the controller

rpg inventory screens in general

sports playbooks

maps, gps in open world games

lots of stuff that can be done with a secondary screen

[Damian79]

As for the ps360 i agee that they dotn really need upgrades ratehr they just need ot upgade the control scheme, however it seems that higher ups wont be happy with just selling the ps360 and allowing Nintnedo to seem to have the most powerful console.  So i think if MS or Sony are going to release a new control scheme they will do it via a new console.

But they just did this past holiday.  

I said they would do it because they dont want people to think that their console was weaker.

[Stoney Mason]

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

I never understood the argument against better hardware.  Like I'm supposed to feel bad I want a game to look great and run at a smooth frame rate at 1080P alongside it playing well.  Look at Crysis 2.  Sub 20 frame rate and sub 720P resolution on consoles when I'm playing it at 60fps at 1080P on PC.  The smoother frame rate gives me a better experience and I want my consoles to give me this type of experience as well.

I have nothing against better graphics. I think in a world with no trade-offs better graphics are great (although in the real word there are some tradeoffs both in budget size to produce those graphics and often on the focus on what is important about a game). That being said consoles are closed boxes. And there will always be a point where the trade-off becomes where do you stop pushing the graphics on these machines. If graphics were the only thing that mattered I would only game on PC. Graphics are important up to a point in the sense of there is a point where I'm not willing to spend a certain amount of money to get a relative level of increase in graphical fidelity that I don't feel is more immersive. It's the reason why some of us game on consoles mostly in the sense that I'm fine with that tradeoff for the stability it brings.

[Mrbob]

I think using the PC is a bad argument, because the pc has a broader range of games than consoles do.  Not all games push hardware to the limit.  Look at the Potato Sack pack on steam.  13 great indie games and none of them need the latest and greatest hardware to run.  Somehow PC developers have been able to find a balance over the last couple years while having access to more powerful hardware than what is offered on consoles.   If a company wants to push the hardware to the max, let them.  It doesn't mean all developers have to do so.  Nintendo making a underpowered system like the Wii does them no favors.  They can go create their simple looking games and let the rest of the industry push their system.

I also believe the stability argument is iffy at best.  It is not like the 360 is the bastion of problem free gaming.  Constantly being patched and a ton of hardware malfunctions.  PC hardware is so far ahead of console hardware auto detect in modern games do a great job of getting you up and running with little to no problems.

[Himu]

better graphics is the ONLY reason to give a fuck about new consoles, controls have been perfect since dual analogs took over

I never understood the argument against better hardware.  Like I'm supposed to feel bad I want a game to look great and run at a smooth frame rate at 1080P alongside it playing well.  Look at Crysis 2.  Sub 20 frame rate and sub 720P resolution on consoles when I'm playing it at 60fps at 1080P on PC.  The smoother frame rate gives me a better experience and I want my consoles to give me this type of experience as well.

New tech is fine so long as it's done so in an intelligent manner. I can say for a fact that the ps3, for example was a horrible idea. It feels like as more technology comes into play, developers have to make sacrifices and since I'm consumer, that sucks ass for me. Many high budget games on the longer side of length have suffered. Final Fantasy XIII took 4-5 years to develop but has shit all for game content. It took multiple tries and getting used to the technology for Rockstar to learn from their mistakes with GTAIV and put out Red Dead Redemption, which came out years after GTAIV's release, finally making a game that rivals their past efforts in previous generations. Metal Gear Solid 4 is a cutscene fest, taking advantage of new tech while losing itself in its own shitty priorities.

Maybe it's just coincidental, but I find that new tech makes developers lose sight of what's important and often ruins shit that I personally enjoy. It takes Square Enix 4-5 years now to make a Final Fantasy. Maybe it's their development process. Maybe it's because they're fucking off their rocker. But the point is, with the amount of voice work, animations, textures, and locations it takes them 4-5 years to put out ONE hd Final Fantasy with gimped content.

That tells me that a. new technology is not always good and b. developer priorities shift with new technology due to a raise in production values resulting in less risk and more desire to get paid.

New technlogy is a wonderful, beautiful thing. But it can also be a curse. The amount of developers dying in the past five years is a testament of this.

We are just now getting into this generation after what, 5 years, and things are FINALLY getting good. If we had another generation start this year, we'd be back at square one, and who the hell wants that? I really think that there's a huge trade off here like Stoney said, but ultimately, it seems that if gaming continues to pursue the new tech approach it always has been deep in, gaming will turn into Hollywood where only a few strong, big studios control everything. Except there would likely be less experimentation than even Hollywood. And as a gamer, I really don't want that.

[maxy]

New Nintendo console,new gimmick.

Ninthings dreaming.

Sfags already worrying that Nintendo will steal PSP2 "thunder" at E3,payback for PSP2 reveal they say.

Some things never change.

We are just now getting into this generation after what, 5 years, and things are FINALLY getting good.

himu

Stick to handhelds please.

[Stoney Mason]

I think using the PC is a bad argument, because the pc has a broader range of games than consoles do.  Not all games push hardware to the limit.  Look at the Potato Sack pack on steam.  13 great indie games and none of them need the latest and greatest hardware to run.  Somehow PC developers have been able to find a balance over the last couple years while having access to more powerful hardware than what is offered on consoles.   If a company wants to push the hardware to the max, let them.  It doesn't mean all developers have to do so.  Nintendo making a underpowered system like the Wii does them no favors.  They can go create their simple looking games and let the rest of the industry push their system.

I also believe the stability argument is iffy at best.  It is not like the 360 is the bastion of problem free gaming.  Constantly being patched and a ton of hardware malfunctions.  PC hardware is so far ahead of console hardware auto detect in modern games do a great job of getting you up and running with little to no problems.

While console games are much buggier than they use to be it still never approaches the myriad of problems I often have running PC games. Despite many leaps forward on that front on the PC it is still often a pain in the ass and is one of the bigger reasons why more casual people aren't into PC gaming. I just can't guarantee that I can go buy something off the shelf and it's going to work perfectly on my system 99% of the time like I can on consoles.

The PC has a broader range of games because it has a broader range of users and use and broader range of power and a broader range of input. Which is a good thing. Console have their strengths. PC's have their own strengths. I think services like XBLA/PSN do a nice job of broadening out what is available on consoles.

I do agree that Nintendo not putting better hardware in the Wii was a bogus argument. They did it to save money. Not because of some true philsophical belief. I'll be happy when all the next consoles get graphical upgrades. It's certainly been 6 or 7 years which is time for an upgrade on that front. That being said once that is done I'm also fine with those level of graphics for the next 6 or 7 years despite whatever occurs in the PC video card scene. What I'm saying is that my graphics don't need to be on the cutting edge. They just need to be upgraded every so often to keep my immersion level high enough.

[Himu]

I'm sorry. Technlogy is great, but abuse of technlogy ruins shit.

It has gotten to the point where Sega isn't willing to put out Virtua Fighter 5's latest iterations to home consoles. Bigger production values, bigger need to recoup costs resulting in less risk, higher development times, more expensive games that usually aren't worth $60; bigger need to recoup costs means takeing longer for a price drop and more.

On almost every single area from gameplay quality, to amount of content, to accessability and dumbing games down, to sticking to ONE genre (for the most part) because it's the most popular to the point of overexposure...

I don't see any advantage to the game fan, personally, and not the technlogy whore, if console gaming continues down this road.

Thankfully psn/xbla exist. DD is the single greatest innovation this generation.

[Mrbob]

PS3 is just a poorly designed system and Square Enix is a shit developer so you put the two together and you get a crap sandwich.  Some of Sony's first party are doing great things with the Cell chip now but Sony was too arrogant to try and force development alongside a different path than what most developers are used too.  PSP2 is rectifying a lot of mistakes because it is an easy to develop platform.  I expect PS4 to go the same route.

Software tools for development are getting better each year and it looks like all hardware companies are recognizing the need for ease of use for developing games.  Development should be easier with these next batch of systems so I don't buy all the arguments that costs will rise significantly.   If it takes less time to make a game on better designed hardware it will help drop cost of development.  Higher quality assets are already being created with the PC version of multi platform games.