The thing is, with this generation clearly set to be a lot longer than usual, any eventual set of new machines is going to be a complete unknown in terms of consumer uptake. No-one knows what the effect of such a long previous generation will have on the adoption of new machines, but my guess would be that it would make it slower than usual.
Above: Bring out unnecessary expensive stuff too soon, and this is what happens
With with the already known and loved current hardware already proven to be so strong and expandable, new hardware would arguablyjust bring better looks and bigger costs. Not hugely appealing, especially to the even bigger casual market we'll have by then.
If that’s true, then it means an even smaller market share for your new, more expensive games, and that means devs dropping out of the industry like rotten teeth out of a tramp’s mouth. Which ultimately leads to the fact that…
New consoles would kill innovation
New console generations used to be exciting because of the variety of brand new gameplay experiences and design ideas the new hardware would bring us. The Mode 7 of the SNES. The 3D of the PlayStation and N64. The online gaming of the Dreamcast. The HD and multimedia revolution of the 360 and PS3. And don’t pretend you didn’t whoop like a sugar-rushing eight-year-old the first time you played Wii Sports. But those days are over.
Above: We've come so far... Thanks technology!
We all complain that there’s not enough innovation in game design these days. We want brand new ideas and brain-melting new game mechanics, but we get Call of Duty 97, Dynasty Warriors 312 and Wagglefun Party 9000. The cool new ideas tend to be on the various download services, because they’re an affordable, lower-risk way of doing things. The blockbuster retail games that really should be pushing tech in thrilling new directions come bundled with the irony that they’re just too expensive to take those risks on.
And when inventive, unique triple-A games do slip through the net, they either tank or get turned into sequeltastic franchises immediately. Expect BioShock: Splicers vs. Daddies Beachball within a couple of years.
Above: Everyone else is sheltering in Activision's underground bunker
A new set of consoles with a new set of terrifying development budgets would only make that problem a million times worse. There are already far too few independent devs and publishers left, so many of them having gone under or been swallowed up by the big boys for mutual security. If innovation and artistic experimentation is becoming increasingly the remit of smaller scale games, that tells you everything you need to know about the relevance of showboating new hardware. Devs are speaking with their products.
As I said before, we already have more than we need in terms of hardware capability, and the expandable nature of our current consoles means that we don’t need new machines to bring us new experiences. Between the ever-increasing scope of downloadable games, the far-from maxed-out potential of horsepower-hungry blockbusters, online functionality that we’re really only just beginning to tap, peripheral expansions like Kinect, Move and Wii MotionPlus, firmware updates that are already bringing us 3D games, and Sweet Baby Jeezee only knows what else, these machines can evolve to bring us whatever we want.
Above: They're part of the solution, not the problem, honestly
The only improvement I can see that new consoles can bring now is improved graphics. Compared to everything above, that’s now a pretty small deal. And itcould come with one hell of a disproportionate price given whatwe mightlose.
But what do you think? Am I right? Are you happy to see your current machines expand, evolve, and realise new potentialover the coming years? Or will you accept nothing less than a total hardware upgrade, shiny new high-def textures, and a shedload more polygons? And how do you think either scenario would play out? As ever, let me know in the comments, or via our shimmering community portals onFacebookandTwitter.
