EA Asks: Do We Need Another Console Generation?
"What would a PlayStation 4 even do?" asks EA Labels president Frank Gibeau. Console gamers are already happy with the current generation.
Just months after EA chief executive officer John Riccitiello took the stage at E3 2011 and professed his love for the upcoming Nintendo Wii U console, EA Labels president Frank Gibeau is questioning whether the market will even need another wave of consoles any time soon.
In a recent interview with CVG, he claims that gamers are happy with what they currently have, and doesn't see how Microsoft and Sony can top their latest hardware. As it stands now, developers still haven't utilized the full potential of the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 – they haven't squeezed the last ounce of hardware horsepower from either platform.
"It's hard for me to conceive what you would do on a PlayStation 4," Gibeau said. "The displays are already 1080p, you're already connected to the internet... You could make it faster, you could have more polys and you could up the graphics a little bit... but at what cost? It'll be interesting to see how [Sony and Microsoft] think about it in terms of the next generation, but it seems to me that customers are happy, and we're happy to build games on [360 and PS3] right now."
The console sector has changed since the days of the original PlayStation and the PlayStation 2 – the jump from one generation to the next is taking longer with each upgrade. The PlayStation 2 platform itself is still pulling in revenue for Sony, but the latter third-generation product will likely stretch on longer than its predecessor simply because of its extra non-gaming features including movies, TV episodes and music. It, like the Xbox 360, has evolved into a multimedia center.
"The way the business used to run where you had these big console transitions just isn't happening anymore," he said. "They're much longer, the online capabilities are making the way customers interact within the audience very different from when we went from PSOne to PS2. I think that [the age of] big, abrupt change in consoles where we all pile in on top of each other and everything changes overnight is just gone."
Still, the Wii U seems to be ushering in the next-generation platform, and EA has publicly embraced its arrival. Perhaps EA sees the new Nintendo hardware as a "catch up" device – a console that should better compete with the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Yet as for the latter two, Gibeau said that he wants to see those last a little longer on the market.
"I don't see consumers right now banging on the walls for a new platform," he admitted. "They seem to be very happy with their PS3s and 360s. They love the online connectivity, they have great communities and great libraries. I like the fact that Nintendo's coming in with new hardware. That'll help really rev up their business for the HD side, which is where we're in a really good position."
- LG Turning Plasma HDTVs into Touchscreens
- Wacom's Sketch Pen Ditches the Digitizer Tablet
- HP is Planning an OTA Update for the TouchPad
- iOS-Controlled Network Camera Spies on Kids, Guests
- Samsung Announces Three New Bada Smartphones
- Solar Tower Project Powers 140,000 Homes
- Iran Suspected of Breach in Acquired Google SSL Cert.
- Report: Samsung Considering Buying WebOS
- Researchers Observe a Black Hole Shredding a Star
- Physicians Use Social Media To Recruit Study Particpants
- Government Files to Block AT&T's T-Mobile Acquisition
- NEC Adds New LifeTouch Android Cloud Communicators
- Pirate Bay Founders Launch "Legal" File-Sharing Site
- Sony Officially Intros 3D Head Mounted Display
- The Samsung Galaxy S2 Finally Lands in the U.S.
- Mozilla Previews Firefox for Tablets
- Details of Modern Warfare 3's 'Hardened Edition' Leaked
- Epi-Inject Concept Saves You From Allergic Reactions
- Sony Officially Launches Tablet S and Tablet P
Dumbest question ever, as the tech in all of these consoles is way outdated.
PC users get poor console ports cause of the consoles. PC's are capable of more, so why should they be hampered by console hardware?
Nope. Lets just stay stagnant in technology. Do we need AMDs Bulldozer? Do we need SSDs? Or the HD7000 series?
Hell we didn't even need Sandy Bridge or 22nm.
All we need is a 386 with 4KB of system RAM.
From one side, no. From the other side, if we are ever to hope that the game developers will get their heads out of their a$$es and start developing games with better graphics, gameplay and storyline than the current stuff we get, we need something more powerful than these obsolete garbages.
So maybe we do, after all. It is painful to see great games delayed to implement unnecessary console BS (Kinect in ME3) or being dumbed down graphically (again, ME series).
Consoles were great long time ago, when they could give any PC, save the most powerful, a run for their money. That era has come to an end and the next generation of consoles won't manage to keep up with desktop PCs anymore.
Then why the crappy graphics, lol? I was shocked to see MS say that "Xbox 360 is still in the middle of its working cycle and will be there till 2015" - that way even the console gamers will give up on it.
Considering how AWFUL Madden 12 is, I think EA needs a new console for an EXCUSE for their crappy developing skills for an NFL game that they have an exclusive license for...
The Consumers do not seem to want more as the "more" part of the equation has not been fulfilled.
Give a kid a Teddy bear, he wants it, he sticks with it,
but until he finds a bigger teddy bear, he won't know what he's missing out and won't feel the need for the said bigger teddy bear.
And that coming from a company wich need to cap one of their shooters game in consoles at 60fps lol
I guess I'll just throw away my Radeon HD 6870 and replace it with a GeForce 7000 series card now =/
His opinion is closed minded. Sony and Microsoft have been pushing the console wars using technological advances only. They're forgetting the entire point of the systems and that is to have fun.
Sure, we may be hitting a plateau in terms of number of polys, HD picture, and sheer hardware power and graphics.. but there's a HUGE potential in innovation, particularly the road that Nintendo has been taking the great part of the decade. There's a reason why the Wii is soundly inferior in terms of hardware and technology but still able to outsell both Sony and Microsoft hands down.
It's because Nintendo saw the forest through the trees. They realized that innovation and revolution wasn't going to come by following the beaten hardware improvement path.
The Wii remote and Kinect are only the beginning. To stay competitive, companies are going to have to devert from the easy hardware battles and start coming up with new ways for users to play games. To interact with their games with their friends.
Look at Apple. They didn't revolutionize the smartphone market with a 10GHz processor, 20MP camera did they? No. They did it with a new idea.
There's better ways to use this hardware... lets hope they can find them.
What an idiot, the displays are 1080p but how many games are actually rendered in 1080p on consoles? IMO compared to what PCs can do, even games ported to the PC from consoles look much better on PC...this guy has no idea what gamers want...
Isn't that pretty much what every console generation has done since the beginning? Sure, there have been other additions like internet, dvd players, etc., but those are secondary functions.
Consoles have always been (and always will be) slightly cheaper, proprietary computers that are a generation behind in tech.
His ulterior motive is that it will be more expensive to develop for new consoles with higher technical abilities.
In reality he has no say in this anyways. If a console is released that is twice as powerful as the previous generations, all manufacturers need an answer to that.
eg: Wii-U forces Sony and Microsoft to release new consoles.
Then why the crappy graphics, lol? I was shocked to see MS say that "Xbox 360 is still in the middle of its working cycle and will be there till 2015" - that way even the console gamers will give up on it.
The 360 does not have crappy graphics. It has outstanding DirectX 9 graphics. YOu can't compare a DX9 machine to current DX11 PC hardware.
So far as the Xbox 360 is concerned, and the PS3, neither of them have reached full potential. But that's because developers have mainly created games that can be ported across multiple systems, as as such, must hold back on delivering full-featured games.
First-party exclusive console games generally are amazing and beautiful on the consoles, because they are built for the specific consoles.
EA is a port-a-holic developer. They never cater to a specific console. They spread their crap across everything that has a circuit board in it and water it down like crazy.
EA has terrible insight, look at how they handled steam.
Don't read forward if you have no sense of humor/easily offended.
If everyone listened to guys like him, we'd all be playing Golden Eye 007 on N64 and our modern graphics cards would be the ATI Radeon 9800 Pro.
For example, I saw how COD:BO looks on console: low frames per second, poor excuse for graphics and the game play is an absolute joke compared to my sandy bridge setup. If he wants to hold on to old technology, have fun dinosaur.
boohoo! the obvious solution for moany PC users is to not compulsively buy every iteration of hardware.
don't spend thousands on a PC that you will never use!
Well something for sure:
we don't need EA origins, sell personal data....
I find this hard to believe when so many others like myself are making the move from console gaming to PC gaming due to better graphics, more capable hardware and an overall better experience
Yes please update the console generation, as uttered in previous comments the advancement of the PC gaming industry is hampered with the tech in consoles.
My first and last gaming console was a Terminator II box, an illegal chinese copy of Nintendo's console which plays NES. After it broke, I switched to PC gaming and never looked back. In my opinion gaming consoles should evolve into fully functional computers, supporting any operating system and computer parts/accessories.
Nope; he's right. SImply let all consoles die and let the PC do the rest! These white-shoe boys of EA aren't so stupid after all!
All I want is a new PS4 to work like a Google TV and to run android with access to the regular android market as well as a Playstation approved market.
"I don't see consumers right now banging on the walls for a new platform"
- EA chief executive officer John Riccitiello
Then you're not paying attention!!!!!!!!!!!!
If the EA chief executive officer John Riccitiello thinks that consoles have hit their peak and that people are "happy" with that, then, guess what games I will be staying away from ....... EA.
Part of the point is to PUSH newer technology and to have fun doing it by reaping the benefits of higher quality, more fun games, as well as more functionality such as Kinect and movies etc.
It sounds to me like John Riccitiello needs to go and find a different job as he has lost interest in gaming. Don't let the door hit you in the arse on the way out.
Consoles are in a bad position:
If they don't upgrade, developers might feel the pressure from pc gamers and develop games for PC first, and only then port it to consoles tuning it down. It will also degrade console's image as "gaming platform", because it is so old.
If they do, they might angry conservative developers and customers, which think a console is like a tv - you only upgrade it once every 10 years or so.
Sigh... there should be a requirement of at least a basic understanding of the differences between console and PC gaming before anyone posts a comparison. Yes, if you tried to run a PC game on the same grade of hardware that a PS3/360 has, it would suck. PS3 only has 256 MB of RAM! Try even running Windows with that. Consoles get away with it because they can develop the graphics to directly interface with the graphics cards, since they don't have to worry about everyone having a different card model. For PC gaming, they have to go through the DirectX interface for absolutely everything, which slows it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Not to say DirectX is bad, but it's the price paid for having the choice between hundreds of different graphics cards to choose from.
Summary: yes, the raw hardware in consoles is very old, but with the way console games can be developed, it's more than they'll ever need.
Obligatory car analogy:
Consoles are a 1990 Honda Accord. Still goes strong, gets you around as quickly as you need.
PCs are a Dodge Ram 3500, with 650 ft-lbs of torque, towing that 2-ton trailer we call an operating system.
They both get where they need to go, and each just as fast as the other. The difference is that one is high powered and the other is just-right powered. Yet their speed is the same.
The 360 does not have crappy graphics. It has outstanding DirectX 9 graphics. YOu can't compare a DX9 machine to current DX11 PC hardware.
First-party exclusive console games generally are amazing and beautiful on the consoles, because they are built for the specific consoles.
Load of BS. You think I never saw a console?
But that's not even the point... some games are great without edge-cutting graphics, yet consoles STILL slow down innovation: for example, instead of making the storyline and gameplay better, they add Kinect to squeeze out some more cash from the 360... this is garbage. What's worse is that there're people who justify this.
boohoo! the obvious solution for moany PC users is to not compulsively buy every iteration of hardware. don't spend thousands on a PC that you will never use!
Cool story bro. Normally, it's enough to upgrade once in 3-4 years. If you choose to do it more often, that's YOUR problem... don't assume all PC users are that stupid.
EA is a crap company.
A lot of consumers play console games because of:
a) Probably don't need to upgrade the hardware to play the latest and greatest (i.e. CPU / GPU intensive) PC game;
b) No individual driver updates to optimise performance of the hardware / operating system configuration;
c) Put disk in drive, click play....
Not every gamer has access to the kind of funds required to keep a gaming PC up to date
Sigh... there should be a requirement of at least a basic understanding of the differences between console and PC gaming before anyone posts a comparison. Yes, if you tried to run a PC game on the same grade of hardware that a PS3/360 has, it would suck. PS3 only has 256 MB of RAM! Try even running Windows with that. Consoles get away with it because they can develop the graphics to directly interface with the graphics cards, since they don't have to worry about everyone having a different card model. For PC gaming, they have to go through the DirectX interface for absolutely everything, which slows it waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down. Not to say DirectX is bad, but it's the price paid for having the choice between hundreds of different graphics cards to choose from.Summary: yes, the raw hardware in consoles is very old, but with the way console games can be developed, it's more than they'll ever need.
That's true; but explain one thing, then: Why do the graphics still suck and all games have to be in 720p to provide some playable fps? Why is that when I compare Mass Effect 2 for the PC and for the 360, the former looks like it's a totally different, far superior game? (Hell, it is!)
Because, despite the direct interaction with the hardware, the hardware limit HAS been reached, no matter what lies they spread. They can talk about how it has not been reached and keep providing crappy graphics, or they can supply us with a new generation of these pathetic excuses for a gaming platform and stop embarrassing themselves even more.
Yeah, forget consoles and improve PCs more.
Cheers!