I don't think Nintendo will wait as long as the others. The Wii does lack in hardware compared to the other two consoles and if Nintendo can market it correctly and offering great new features then Nintendo will remain king for now. Even more so if they make the console able to play Wii games as well.

There is little purpose to make another console. The Wii is still selling like hotcakes, and most of the people buying it don't care about game depth, complex AI or physics, beautiful presentation, or intricate story. It's not a game console, it's a novelty item.

When Wii sales slow down, then they should release another console. They could even do what they did with the Wii, and just reproduce the same hardware with a higher clock speed to keep perfect Backwards Compatibility.

I think that Microsoft is going to move even closer to a normal PC architecture with their next system. There are 2 major reasons why they should do this: 1) The cost of the hardware development / general hardware prices will be greatly reduced by sticking to close to normal PC components and 2) Even more important is that development would become even easier and companies would be able to develop a game that will also run, with minor modification, on a PC. This makes sense for M$ because if the game isn't sold for xbox, at least it will be sold to a Windows machine, which they also get money from (for the OS). So cheaper hardware and making game development even cheaper should keep costs down and quality/quantity of games up.

With Nintendo, I'm still convinced that their just selling a gimmick. The games aren't really that fun after the first couple of hours and the graphics are terrible. Don't get me wrong, there is enormous potential in casual gaming. But I don't think that the Wii is the answer. I'm betting that the Wii could be considered an entry level console to get new gamers into the market and once those newbies become real gamers they'll upgrade to a real console in the next generation.

As for Sony, the only reason that Sony has ever been a contender in the console war was because they always had the best games. Now they come out saying that they intentionally made the PS3 hard to develop games for. Without good games, Sony doesn't really have a chance. The only options I can see with them is to 1) try to copy M$ maybe with slightly better hardware and make sure to get game studios on board or 2) stick with high end home theater hardware and market the system as a HTPC that can also play games.

So in the next gen I could see us with a casual system, a real console, and a HTPC. So the market becomes more segmented and hopefully grows overall with the introductions of new gamers via the casual / home theater markets while the middle ground of real gamers continues to grow as the new users become gamers. This really could be a win-win-win if each company can differentiate itself enough.

You do know that the original Xbox was essentially a Pentium 3 PC, right? And that was the downside of the original Xbox, because it used PC parts, they ended up having to pay other companies to use the hardware. They lost large amounts of money on hardware, and ended up being in the hole.

And, to me, it seems rather silly to make it the same as a PC. The real limitation in power in PCs is the fact that they need to stick to certain norms. Intel couldn't replace all of it's x86 processors with something completely different, even if it was more efficient, and/or more powerful, because they need to keep compatibility, and that's what developers are used to.

The benefit of a console is there are no standards to follow. They can use new architectures and new technologies to benefit gameplay without being limited by current computing standards.

What you say is true, but, CPU power is not really an issue anymore. Also, they don't have to pay companies to use the hardware, they can make deals with them to buy in enormous quantities to get huge discounts on parts.

The main issue for the current generation has nothing to do with the amount of power a console has (CPU/GPU), its how well developers can take advantage of that power. Like this article states, "developers are still extracting more power out of the current platform shows that there isn’t yet a demand for more headroom". Consoles need to focus more on games and less on hardware.

I would agree, to a degree. Gameplay is limited by Hardware. Physics and AI are greatly improved by increases in processing power. How a character can interact with the environment, and with other characters is limited by the hardware.



Is that a joke? I don't quite understand what you mean about an 'issue'. I don't care all that much for graphics, and that's all the GPU does. The CPU does everything else. We haven't reached a perfect level of player interaction with the environment, so I don't know what you mean by "CPU power is not really an issue".



Do you think Microsoft didn't try that?

What do you think happens when they run out of the bulk parts? Not to mention that company could charge any price that wanted for their parts once it was part of the specification. If you want to make something similar, Microsoft should do what they did with ATI. Begin a joint venture that's mutually beneficial, that's why we have the R600 cards.



I believe that has less to do with the want of more, and more to do with the work involved. If you could easily develop for a machine with 50 times the power of the PS3, I bet almost every developer would use the machine to it's full capacity.

The amount of work needed to yield a small percentage increase seems rather worthless as there would be no threshold in gameplay technology to cross.

lets keep in mind the ps3 is the closest thing to an htpc as of now, and if people can afford it, it'd probably last them for a very very very long time... a ps3 is a good investment, of course assuming sony doesn't collapse

The next step for consoles would be to replace a 'generic' computer device. Something to do basic web surfing, email, Youtube, general movie/music player. It would/should be cheaper than a netbook, which I still really see as a waste, play HD games, and do virtually anything a 'computer' can do. It's just a matter of time. Come on, it's gonna be a few years before any new consoles are out, and by then, who knows what kind of technology advances there will be. I think the specs would match any quad core 3ghz system out there

sorry

actually the wii can surf the web and run stuff like youtude via WiFi. the problem is nintendo's OS is not compatible with adobe flash/shockwave Ect. so it's limited to what it can do on the web. also the wii only brodcasts in 480p while xbox and ps3 can go to 1080i (believe me, it's not so pretty). pointing at the screen with a remote instead of using a mouse is kinda cool though.

PS3's can browse the web, watch youtube vids, and run any Distro of your choice. So you could install OpenOffice and do office work on it if you wanted (you can use any USB keyboard and mouse).

It's already here, it's called a PS3.

The 360 and PS3 do full 1080p. I have both, and use 1080p on both. My 360 is the Elite version though, so I can't speak for all models of the 360.

All models of the Xbox360 do 1080p but if you have only component out then it depends on the TV to receive input as 1080p via component. (the number of tvs that do is very very very small). It is myth that component doesn't do 1080p but it is very rare.
The xbox 360 has the better titles, better multiplayer, and is cheaper so its beating the ps3. The wii doesn't have the titles or hardware but has the multiplay, its inovative, and is very fun for a wide audience.
Personally I think that we need to gets some factories open and these consoles on shelves. This whole tring to find one is for the birds. At this point microsoft or nintendo could gain more ground by getting a new console out next year. Sony's 10 year ps3 might be in trouble.