Microsoft And Sony Targeting 2014 For New Consoles, Leaving Nintendo In The Clear
Options
By StephenTotilo, Apr 20, 2011 11:00 AM
The next Xbox and the next PlayStation won't be released until 2014, if Microsoft and Sony have their way, industry sources tell Kotaku.
Both companies are hoping to wait out the current generation, and extending an already elongated console life-cycle despite clear signs that Nintendo will launch its next machine by the end of 2012.
"Both MS and Sony are telegraphing to each other that they're delaying, to milk the current [generation] and fill in previous craters better," one insider who has worked with the first-party companies like Sony and Microsoft told us.
Other sources with access to first-party companies, speaking to Kotaku anonymously because they aren't authorized to be talking about Microsoft and Sony's plans, said that they too are hearing that 2014 is the target date, though some believe 2013 could happen if either company feels pushed.
Our insider believes that any new Xbox in 2013 would only be a Kinect-upgraded 360, not the next-gen console that would come in 2014. That source says that Microsoft doesn't even know what parts will be in the next Xbox. They say the company's board "is wrestling with whether to be profitable on day one," as Nintendo's Wii was presumed to be, or to once again launch a new console at a loss, which is what Sony and Microsoft usually do.
A wait for a new Xbox or PlayStation until 2014 would make the Xbox 360 the lead Microsoft gaming console for nine years and the PlayStation 3 Sony's chief console for eight. That would be an unusually long time for successful game consoles to retain their importance.
Microsoft launched the original Xbox in 2001 but quickly replaced the machine, which was expensive for the company to make, with the Xbox 360 in 2005. A more traditional console life-cycle would have positioned the Xbox 360 as Microsoft's newest machine for five years, the length of time between the first two PlayStations, or six years, the gap between the Super Nintendo and the Nintendo 64.
"I think we'll see a game of chicken between Sony and Microsoft," industry analyst Billy Pidgeon of the firm M2 Research told Kotaku. "Sony definitely isn't launching a successor before 2014 and could stand to benefit by having Microsoft launch first as PS3 builds in to North America and builds a strong position in Europe. Microsoft claims there's a lot more room in Xbox 360 for developers to max out, but here PS3 could have a strong advantage."
Pigeon believes Sony, in particular, has every reason to keep this generation going, to capitalize on the slow-launching PS3 and to maximize the "headroom" still available to developers on the powerful system.
Saying his company is "laser-focused' on its current machines and next handheld, Sony PlayStation spokesperson Patrick Seybold declined to "comment on rumors or speculation" about the company's future platforms.
Microsoft did not comment for this story by press time.
The continued prominence of the current Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 through 2013 squares with plans from publisher THQ to launch the game Devil's Third as well as a title made in collaboration with movie director Guillermo Del Toro for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 in 2013. It would also make likely that expected but unannounced games from other publishers, the next Grand Theft Auto, for example,
Former Xbox executive Shane Kim told the press in 2009 that Microsoft would support the Xbox 360 through 2015, and the launch late last year of the Kinect sensor compelled Microsoft officials to say that the new peripheral will help expand the 360's relevance for years to come.
The slow recovery of the North American economy will also continue to discourage Microsoft and Sony from releasing new machines. "I don't think either Sony or Microsoft are interested in a new console till they can advance the technology, and they certainly don't want to launch at a $600 price point," analyst Michael Pachter of Wedbush Securities told Kotaku. "It may take till 2014 to get 2TB hard drives, uber fast CPUs and state-of-the art graphics and sell at $400."
The upshot of this is that it allows Nintendo to show its Wii successor to external game developers, as it is doing now, and to press, as it plans to do this June, according to industry sources familiar with the project, without worrying that it'll be trumped by other consoles when it launches in 2012.
While the Wii has lagged behind the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 in terms of graphical horsepower, its next machine should bring it at least up to the level of technical muscle as its competitors. Should be a hit, then, according to Pidgeon, all this dawdling could end. "If Nintendo does very well with the next console," he said, "Microsoft and Sony will quickly get a lot more serious about next generation."
http://m.kotaku.com/5794000/microsoft-and-sony-targeting-2014-for-new-consoles-leaving-nintendo-in-the-clear
The next Xbox and the next PlayStation won't be released until 2014, if Microsoft and Sony have their way, industry sources tell Kotaku.
Both companies are hoping to wait out the current generation, and extending an already elongated console life-cycle despite clear signs that Nintendo will launch its next machine by the end of 2012.
"Both MS and Sony are telegraphing to each other that they're delaying, to milk the current [generation] and fill in previous craters better," one insider who has worked with the first-party companies like Sony and Microsoft told us.
Other sources with access to first-party companies, speaking to Kotaku anonymously because they aren't authorized to be talking about Microsoft and Sony's plans, said that they too are hearing that 2014 is the target date, though some believe 2013 could happen if either company feels pushed.
Our insider believes that any new Xbox in 2013 would only be a Kinect-upgraded 360, not the next-gen console that would come in 2014. That source says that Microsoft doesn't even know what parts will be in the next Xbox. They say the company's board "is wrestling with whether to be profitable on day one," as Nintendo's Wii was presumed to be, or to once again launch a new console at a loss, which is what Sony and Microsoft usually do.
A wait for a new Xbox or PlayStation until 2014 would make the Xbox 360 the lead Microsoft gaming console for nine years and the PlayStation 3 Sony's chief console for eight. That would be an unusually long time for successful game consoles to retain their importance.
Microsoft launched the original Xbox in 2001 but quickly replaced the machine, which was expensive for the company to make, with the Xbox 360 in 2005. A more traditional console life-cycle would have positioned the Xbox 360 as Microsoft's newest machine for five years, the length of time between the first two PlayStations, or six years, the gap between the Super Nintendo and the Nintendo 64.
"I think we'll see a game of chicken between Sony and Microsoft," industry analyst Billy Pidgeon of the firm M2 Research told Kotaku. "Sony definitely isn't launching a successor before 2014 and could stand to benefit by having Microsoft launch first as PS3 builds in to North America and builds a strong position in Europe. Microsoft claims there's a lot more room in Xbox 360 for developers to max out, but here PS3 could have a strong advantage."
Pigeon believes Sony, in particular, has every reason to keep this generation going, to capitalize on the slow-launching PS3 and to maximize the "headroom" still available to developers on the powerful system.
Saying his company is "laser-focused' on its current machines and next handheld, Sony PlayStation spokesperson Patrick Seybold declined to "comment on rumors or speculation" about the company's future platforms.
Microsoft did not comment for this story by press time.
The continued prominence of the current Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 through 2013 squares with plans from publisher THQ to launch the game Devil's Third as well as a title made in collaboration with movie director Guillermo Del Toro for PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 in 2013. It would also make likely that expected but unannounced games from other publishers, the next Grand Theft Auto, for example,
Former Xbox executive Shane Kim told the press in 2009 that Microsoft would support the Xbox 360 through 2015, and the launch late last year of the Kinect sensor compelled Microsoft officials to say that the new peripheral will help expand the 360's relevance for years to come.
The slow recovery of the North American economy will also continue to discourage Microsoft and Sony from releasing new machines. "I don't think either Sony or Microsoft are interested in a new console till they can advance the technology, and they certainly don't want to launch at a $600 price point," analyst Michael Pachter of Wedbush Securities told Kotaku. "It may take till 2014 to get 2TB hard drives, uber fast CPUs and state-of-the art graphics and sell at $400."
The upshot of this is that it allows Nintendo to show its Wii successor to external game developers, as it is doing now, and to press, as it plans to do this June, according to industry sources familiar with the project, without worrying that it'll be trumped by other consoles when it launches in 2012.
While the Wii has lagged behind the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 in terms of graphical horsepower, its next machine should bring it at least up to the level of technical muscle as its competitors. Should be a hit, then, according to Pidgeon, all this dawdling could end. "If Nintendo does very well with the next console," he said, "Microsoft and Sony will quickly get a lot more serious about next generation."
http://m.kotaku.com/5794000/microsoft-and-sony-targeting-2014-for-new-consoles-leaving-nintendo-in-the-clear
Comments
-
I just read somewhere that Nintendo might actually make an announcement for a new console at this year's E3. So if Sony and Microsoft stick to their 2014 release, that will give Nintendo a 2 year head start on the competition. They'll need it because once the new Playstation or Xbox is finally announced, it will be insane.
-
2014 is cool with me
-
Sounds good with me, plenty of life in current gen.I just read somewhere that Nintendo might actually make an announcement for a new console at this year's E3. So if Sony and Microsoft stick to their 2014 release, that will give Nintendo a 2 year head start on the competition. They'll need it because once the new Playstation or Xbox is finally announced, it will be insane.
Ehhh, it's not that clear cut. Nintendo is essentially playing by their own rules which is fine. Their new console is purportedly on the same level as ps360(even stronger actually) but time will tell. So in essence they aren't getting a head start on anything other than whatever new technology they are introducing be it their controller or whatever. I suppose Nintendo will get some real ports now, and not the downgraded ? that devs are pushing alongside their ps360 'equivalents'. Nintendo at this point doesn't really adhere to the 'next gen' rule set that sony and ms are playing, if they were then 'technically' they're barely just catching up. -
The only way Nintendo can really capitalize on this is buy getting third party support in their 2 yr head start. Even if their system is more powerful than 360/PS3, the first generation games won't blow anyone away in terms of graphics (no system shows a huge leap in graphics during first gen. games). If they get good third party support and keep at it with the casual games for the casual market, they could really be on beast mode.
-
Sounds good with me, plenty of life in current gen.
Ehhh, it's not that clear cut. Nintendo is essentially playing by their own rules which is fine. Their new console is purportedly on the same level as ps360(even stronger actually) but time will tell. So in essence they aren't getting a head start on anything other than whatever new technology they are introducing be it their controller or whatever. I suppose Nintendo will get some real ports now, and not the downgraded ? that devs are pushing alongside their ps360 'equivalents'. Nintendo at this point doesn't really adhere to the 'next gen' rule set that sony and ms are playing, if they were then 'technically' they're barely just catching up.
What I meant by head start is in regards to early adopters of the new console and overall sales especially during the holiday. Nintendo would be wise to release a console earlier then Sony or Microsoft, and get that jump on today's consumers who has proven to like to buy the newest thing on the shelf. Now if Nintendo was to release a console around the same time as Sony or Microsoft, changes are, they might get swallowed up by the competition. -
What I meant by head start is in regards to early adopters of the new console and overall sales especially during the holiday. Nintendo would be wise to release a console earlier then Sony or Microsoft, and get that jump on today's consumers who has proven to like to buy the newest thing on the shelf. Now if Nintendo was to release a console around the same time as Sony or Microsoft, changes are, they might get swallowed up by the competition.
I understand what you are saying, that that isn't necessarily true. Nintendo's audience isn't the same as the PS3/360's. Like someone said earlier, they move at their own speed. Wii dropped around the same time as PS3 (I think like a week after) and it ended up selling more than both ps3/360.
Nintendo has a ? fanbase (not the same as ? gamers) that will stick with them on whatever they make because let's be honest, the Gamecube and Wii's release time between great games is horrible and both of them were shoveled with a lot of bs games. They are good with the casual market, but if they can dip into the ? market (lol) they will be double set (They're already gonna make a shitload of money anyway) -
The thing is, we are reaching a point where consoles can only get so much more powerful. Nintendo could launch in 2012 with a console slightly more powerful than the PS3 (as reported) for $349.99. Still be profitable from day one, and still make it affordable to develop for. And this is what they would have to do because if they try to "double the power" or something the thing would be way too expensive all around...nor would it provide THAT much of a difference to be worth it.
Thats where we find M$ and Sony. If they try to out do Nintendo's next console by too much, they will have to launch at some ridiculous price, still take a loss, and the games would be too expensive to develop for third parties. -
The next Nintendo console will not be anymore powerful than the 360 or PS3 as Nintendo does not have the resources or understanding of high tech to deliver a beast of a console.The Wii is behind both consoles this generation and it takes progression to improve and understanding of what you can actually develop for the next generation.Even if they did manage to deliver a super computer type console,they do not have the software (games) to sell it and the price will be expensive.Either way,I will still be playing my PS3 while waiting for the next Sony console and I am sure that many who have a 360 and PS3 will do the same.So it does not matter because the core gamers and masses will not be interested.A new console does not equal success.
-
If we remember the PS2's cycle, and look at the games that came out towards the end, GOW2 and a few others and compare them to the games that came out early in its cycle we see how they advanced. GOW2 looked better than early PS360 games. Look at how more recent games look now compared to earlier titles.
What Nintendo could be aiming for in 2012 might only be where the PS360 advances to by that time. -
The next Nintendo console will not be anymore powerful than the 360 or PS3 as Nintendo does not have the resources or understanding of high tech to deliver a beast of a console.The Wii is behind both consoles this generation and it takes progression to improve and understanding of what you can actually develop for the next generation.Even if they did manage to deliver a super computer type console,they do not have the software (games) to sell it and the price will be expensive.Either way,I will still be playing my PS3 while waiting for the next Sony console and I am sure that many who have a 360 and PS3 will do the same.So it does not matter because the core gamers and masses will not be interested.A new console does not equal success.
COOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEE OOOOOONNNNNNNNNNNNN SOOOOOOOONNNNN! Just....just stop jack -
The next Nintendo console will not be anymore powerful than the 360 or PS3 as Nintendo does not have the resources or understanding of high tech to deliver a beast of a console.The Wii is behind both consoles this generation and it takes progression to improve and understanding of what you can actually develop for the next generation.Even if they did manage to deliver a super computer type console,they do not have the software (games) to sell it and the price will be expensive.Either way,I will still be playing my PS3 while waiting for the next Sony console and I am sure that many who have a 360 and PS3 will do the same.So it does not matter because the core gamers and masses will not be interested.A new console does not equal success.
smh at this post
Tech wise
snes>genesis
n64>ps1
gc>ps2
Nintendo coming in this gen said they didnt want to focus on power but instead focus on new way to play games (wiimote) which worked out for them since they won this gen and left 360 and ps3 in the dust. The software may not appeal to you but nintendo brands sells million. I know you a sony dickrider but damn -
Agreed on all point except for the bold.The thing is, we are reaching a point where consoles can only get so much more powerful. Nintendo could launch in 2012 with a console slightly more powerful than the PS3 (as reported) for $349.99. Still be profitable from day one, and still make it affordable to develop for. And this is what they would have to do because if they try to "double the power" or something the thing would be way too expensive all around...nor would it provide THAT much of a difference to be worth it.
Thats where we find M$ and Sony. If they try to out do Nintendo's next console by too much, they will have to launch at some ridiculous price, still take a loss, and the games would be too expensive to develop for third parties.
While I agree they don't have the resources that sony or ms is, Nintendo is still really competitive from a tech standpoint. I believe if they wanted to go for an HD console instead of the wii then they could have, but fact of the matter is that Nintendo doesn't compete with sony and ms in terms of technology is because they would lose.The next Nintendo console will not be anymore powerful than the 360 or PS3 as Nintendo does not have the resources or understanding of high tech to deliver a beast of a console.The Wii is behind both consoles this generation and it takes progression to improve and understanding of what you can actually develop for the next generation.Even if they did manage to deliver a super computer type console,they do not have the software (games) to sell it and the price will be expensive.Either way,I will still be playing my PS3 while waiting for the next Sony console and I am sure that many who have a 360 and PS3 will do the same.So it does not matter because the core gamers and masses will not be interested.A new console does not equal success.vagrant-718 wrote: »smh at this post
Tech wise
snes>genesis
n64>ps1
gc>ps2
Nintendo coming in this gen said they didnt want to focus on power but instead focus on new way to play games (wiimote) which worked out for them since they won this gen and left 360 and ps3 in the dust. The software may not appeal to you but nintendo brands sells million. I know you a sony dickrider but damn
Not a good comparison , the now defunct sega isn't on the same level as sony or ms. N64 came out 2 years after ps1, and it was still a cartridge base format. GC came out a year and a half after ps2 in japan, that's enough time to make a difference(negligible). -
funkdocdamc wrote: »I understand what you are saying, that that isn't necessarily true. Nintendo's audience isn't the same as the PS3/360's. Like someone said earlier, they move at their own speed. Wii dropped around the same time as PS3 (I think like a week after) and it ended up selling more than both ps3/360.
Nintendo has a ? fanbase (not the same as ? gamers) that will stick with them on whatever they make because let's be honest, the Gamecube and Wii's release time between great games is horrible and both of them were shoveled with a lot of bs games. They are good with the casual market, but if they can dip into the ? market (lol) they will be double set (They're already gonna make a shitload of money anyway)
True. Good points. Now that you mentioned it with the Gamecube, they really did just became a console for ? fans of Nintendo and not ? gamers. -
Agreed on all point except for the bold.
While I agree they don't have the resources that sony or ms is, Nintendo is still really competitive from a tech standpoint. I believe if they wanted to go for an HD console instead of the wii then they could have, but fact of the matter is that Nintendo doesn't compete with sony and ms in terms of technology is because they would lose.
Not a good comparison , the now defunct sega isn't on the same level as sony or ms. N64 came out 2 years after ps1, and it was still a cartridge base format. GC came out a year and a half after ps2 in japan, that's enough time to make a difference(negligible).
How is that not a good comparison? This the first gen nintendo wasnt up to par tech wise. Sega back then wasnt no tech slouch. The saturn was a beast of a machine and sega handhelds were technically superior to nintendo. N64 may have been cartridge base but it was still the more powerful of the 3, and may have went that route because they didnt want to pay any royalties to sony w/ the CDs. You make it sound like nintendo just up and announce ? . When sony, ms, or nintendo announce a new hardware, that's something that been in development for years. As far as graphic goes, they just call up ATI or NVidia w/ a price. They need a cpu they call up IBM. Nintendo made mad money off the wii and ds to go ? out if they wanted to -
Im sick of the disc based content...I mean really the ps4 needs to be compact and efficient.
-
Nintendo is a bigger company than Sony. They could make any kind of machine they wanted.
-
I typed up why it wasn't a good comparison to name those older Nintendo consoles that came out after their competition and were more powerful. Am I supposed to be impressed with the fact that xbox was more powerful than the ps2? Of course not.vagrant-718 wrote: »How is that not a good comparison? This the first gen nintendo wasnt up to par tech wise. Sega back then wasnt no tech slouch. The saturn was a beast of a machine and sega handhelds were technically superior to nintendo. N64 may have been cartridge base but it was still the more powerful of the 3, and may have went that route because they didnt want to pay any royalties to sony w/ the CDs. You make it sound like nintendo just up and announce ? . When sony, ms, or nintendo announce a new hardware, that's something that been in development for years. As far as graphic goes, they just call up ATI or NVidia w/ a price. They need a cpu they call up IBM. Nintendo made mad money off the wii and ds to go ? out if they wanted to
And yea you're right, Nintendo has scrooge mcduck money and they could throw the money out and compete on the same playing field as Sony and MS at the risk of losing.....again. You see Nintendo had the better graphics those other generations, but they always came short. Nintendo effectively moved the goal post when it came to the wii which is why they're at the top, rolls are reversed and they had a compelling feature/gimmick to alleviate their lack of graphic fidelity. -
Nintendo is a bigger company than Sony. They could make any kind of machine they wanted.
how come ps2 isn't on that chart??????? hmmmmmmmmmmm lol smh and that ? is still selling to this day and i agree nintendo is the bigger company gaming wise but definitely not overall sony has their hands in so many other markets ...........Did you know playstation was supposed to be a nintendo & sony console ??? Miyamoto didnt like disc so sony said ? him -
how come ps2 isn't on that chart??????? hmmmmmmmmmmm lol smh and that ? is still selling to this day and i agree nintendo is the bigger company gaming wise but definitely not overall sony has their hands in so many other markets ...........Did you know playstation was supposed to be a nintendo & sony console ??? Miyamoto didnt like disc so sony said ? him
For obvious reasons haha, why would you want to undermine your own point by including the highest selling console of all time? It's propoganda. Not saying that it's filled with falsehoods, but it's intellectually dishonest at best and grossly misleading at worst. -
For obvious reasons haha, why would you want to undermine your own point by including the highest selling console of all time? It's propoganda. Not saying that it's filled with falsehoods, but it's intellectually dishonest at best and grossly misleading at worst.
you could not have said it any better ! lol -
I typed up why it wasn't a good comparison to name those older Nintendo consoles that came out after their competition and were more powerful. Am I supposed to be impressed with the fact that xbox was more powerful than the ps2? Of course not.
And yea you're right, Nintendo has scrooge mcduck money and they could throw the money out and compete on the same playing field as Sony and MS at the risk of losing.....again. You see Nintendo had the better graphics those other generations, but they always came short. Nintendo effectively moved the goal post when it came to the wii which is why they're at the top, rolls are reversed and they had a compelling feature/gimmick to alleviate their lack of graphic fidelity.
Nintendo may look like they were losing them other gen but they were making profit on their system b4 sony was and ms basically took an L on the original xbox. Sony went tech savy on the psp and lost to the ds. They went tech savy on the ps3 and is currently 3rd place. The strongest system historically never wins the gen -
vagrant-718 wrote: »Nintendo may look like they were losing them other gen but they were making profit on their system b4 sony was and ms basically took an L on the original xbox. Sony went tech savy on the psp and lost to the ds. They went tech savy on the ps3 and is currently 3rd place. The strongest system historically never wins the gen
If by losing you mean, not in first place, just like ps3 and 360 are losing right now, then yea Nintendo lost those generations. Ps2 did sell at a loss at one point, so what? The first xbox was an L on ms part, a massive sinkhole, but they've since turned things around with the 360, so I'm not quite sure what you're driving at. If you're saying that Nintendo didn't lose because they made a profit, then I have to ask again, so what? Nintendo MS and Sony have all generated a profit this generation, though. Nintendo, moreso than the others this time around. *shrug -
If by losing you mean, not in first place, just like ps3 and 360 are losing right now, then yea Nintendo lost those generations. Ps2 did sell at a loss at one point, so what? The first xbox was an L on ms part, a massive sinkhole, but they've since turned things around with the 360, so I'm not quite sure what you're driving at. If you're saying that Nintendo didn't lose because they made a profit, then I have to ask again, so what? Nintendo MS and Sony have all generated a profit this generation, though. Nintendo, moreso than the others this time around. *shrug
You said nintendo could go on the same playing field as ms and sony and still lose. I thought you was equating losing as in not being in first place or losing as in not being profitable. Thats why i bought up those facts -
vagrant-718 wrote: »You said nintendo could go on the same playing field as ms and sony and still lose. I thought you was equating losing as in not being in first place or losing as in not being profitable. Thats why i bought up those facts
Nah, Nintendo isn't in the business to lose money. Sony and MS don't mind throwing money at a problem, and believe people are wiling to spend exorbitant amounts of money for a high end experience. Nintendo's philosophy is totally different from the others. I do believe they would not be first place(as far as sales are concerned), quite honestly even Nintendo knows this, that's why their model has never been indicative of what their competition is doing. DVD's? Who needs that ? ? Purely gaming .
I do not believe the two ideas of being at the top of the NPD charts and being profitable are mutually exclusive, although there is a direct correlation. But I never put profit into the equation, I'm talking about what everyone is playing. GC did respectable numbers, but lost to both xbox and ps2 for example. -
Nah, Nintendo isn't in the business to lose money. Sony and MS don't mind throwing money at a problem, and believe people are wiling to spend exorbitant amounts of money for a high end experience. Nintendo's philosophy is totally different from the others. I do believe they would not be first place(as far as sales are concerned), quite honestly even Nintendo knows this, that's why their model has never been indicative of what their competition is doing. DVD's? Who needs that ? ? Purely gaming .
I do not believe the two ideas of being at the top of the NPD charts and being profitable are mutually exclusive, although there is a direct correlation. But I never put profit into the equation, I'm talking about what everyone is playing. GC did respectable numbers, but lost to both xbox and ps2 for example.
True, cant count nintendo out tho. I didnt think the DS would be as successful as it was w/ the psp being technically superior and I wasn't expecting Wii to blow up either but Nintendo got the hot hand right now. MS and Sony especially Sony will go tech savy and have mad next gen stuff but like i said b4 the most powerful system never win the console generation
