With the Wii U gaining steam after E3 and rumored XBOX 720 specs spreading around, next generation consoles keep getting closer and closer to a reality. In a two-part series, we’ll write about what the next generation consoles need to keep up with the phones, tablets, and small gaming devices flooding the market—along with the things that would be detrimental to a gaming console and entirely unnecessary. Starting with the latter, here are the five things next generation consoles don’t need!
5. AR Glasses
This was obviously pulled from the rumored XBOX 720 specs that could at any moment be proven wrong. But the glasses seem like an unnecessary medium between a gaming console and a computer, or the console and a gamer. With the Kinect already available for the XBOX 360, it should be easy to implement individual experiences without resorting to glasses. While it might have a few advantages, such as showing individual players different things during gameplay, it would raise the price of the system and likely go unused by major developers.
4. High Price
The new consoles will likely be expensive machines, but let’s be honest—there’s a limit to how much you can price consoles in this economy. A repeat of the PS3’s $600 launch price would be disastrous to any console who attempts it. As it is, $300 was enough to make people shy away from the 3DS—anything that costs over $400 would likely get snubbed by consumers, even if it’s worth every penny.
3. Mediocre Specs
Unfortunately the worst historical culprit of this has probably already finalized their console’s specifications. Yep, I’m talking about Nintendo. While the Wii U’s graphics are pretty good and gives the Nintendo brand a very necessary boost into HD visuals, the PS3 and XBOX 360 already have that technology and processing power. When they upgrade to new systems, they will likely push the boundary of what can be done and leave Nintendo in the dust…again.
2. Emphasis on Alternative Controls
The last thing we need is a Kinect 2 or PS4 Move. Touch screen support for a console game becomes very silly when you realize you can’t see the screen you are controlling and the screen you are touching at the same time. The Wii U has solved this with two screens, but I can’t imagine anyone comfortably or accurately shooting shurikens out of that remote and into the TV, despite what their commercial promises. Nintendo may have pulled off a console based entirely around a gimmick with their Wii, but even they decided to include a regular gaming controller with their new console. If Sony and Microsoft decide to leave regular gaming behind them and move forward with their gimmicks, they will probably lose the fan base they worked so hard to create this generation.
1. Cable Alternative
The rumored XBOX 720 information also contained an emphasis on converting the gaming console into a TV hub—the console would be responsible for games, movies, and cable streaming, effectively replacing whatever cable box a family would have with their own system. While it’s an interesting idea, this moves the focus from gaming to cable and making a profit from the 4G subscription that TV streaming would require. I highly doubt this cable alternative would be compatible with other machines (unless, of course, those machines were using Windows 8). This leads me to put cable alternative as the worst possibility for the next generation—while plausible, gamers just want to game.
Check back tomorrow afternoon for the five things the next generation could actually use. Are you dreading any features the next generation might have? Let us know in the comments!
The worst historical culprit is Nintendo? Didn’t even bother checking that fact, did you? Until the Wii, Nintendo was never the weakest system. The NES was more powerful than Sega, the SNES was more powerful than the Genesis, the N64 was more powerful than the PS1, Gamecube was more powerful than the PS2. Technically, it’s the Playstation that has historically released a weaker system, as both the PS1 and PS2 were the weakest in their generations, with the Dreamcast and Xbox, respectively, being the most powerful.
Other than that point, I agree with you completely, though I do like some of the things I’ve seen done on the WiiU with the GamePad. Microsoft and Sony trying to make their systems some all-in-one entertainment center is going to cost them huge if they keep pursuing it. You brought up the supposed 720 leaks at the beginning of your article. If what those leaks said was true, there is no way that Microsoft can sell the 720 at that price without losing huge amounts of cash per Xbox sold.
Nintendo is the historical culprit
sega genisis > NES
PS1 iirc > N64
xbox and ps2> gamecube
PSP> w.e nintendo hand held that was at the time.
the difference between those consoles though weren’t much, the wii was 5 years behind 360 at launch and it looks like they will be 5 years behind again.
Dude you aren’t even comparing the proper machines of each generation….I.e. FAIL!!!!!
Your shortcomings in imagination of the precision of shuriken throwing is debased by example and experience. You should come up with a different example.
Wintercoat I agree with everything you’re saying up until the gamecube is more powerful than PS2 part… That’s just not true, the PS2 pushed graphical boundaries with its console, see Shadow of the Colossus for example.
Winter coat is correct, the NGC was the most powerful system of its gen. Resident Evil 4 on NGC can still stand up to games on today’s consoles.
In reading this article, is is obvious the author is more of a gamer and Nintendo fanboy than an all around educated entertainment person on technology and its every changing face within society. Is the use or AR glasses, Kinect v2,and a tv hub needed in the next generation of gaming? Probably not, but if they make it in the next gen XBOX they will keep it competitive and allow it to draw bigger family and friends units together. This will translate into more units of hardware and games being sold for the system.
A few other notes.
1- you are crazy for even entertaining they idea of Sony and Microsoft leaving traditional gaming behind. if you think that could even happen then you need to pay better attention to the market. these alternate controls are used when developers want something a little different in gaming, and they always are actions that have traditional controller counterparts. eaxmple being the gunsmith sections of Ghost Recon: Future Soldier
2- and i do think the Kinect v2 will be everything that was promised in the Wii that wasnt. If you paid attention to the leaked Microsoft documents you would have noticed the Kinect v2 had two camera units mounted near the upper corners of the television. Multiple angels mean better tracking and accuracy.
3- Pricing really? the reason people shunned the 3DS at 300 is because of two reasons. one being is was a handheld, and two being it was gimmicky. the tech just wasnt worth it. i will bet both my trigger finger than if the next XBOX or PS4 comes with all or similar features listed in the leaked Microsoft documents plus Kinect v2 and Move respectively, people wouldnt mind paying 400 or move for the system. In your head you say i am crazy, but youd be wrong. the tech is worth it and the value is there.
If the next Xbox doesn’t have a super fast maximum high end cpu and gpu then I’m not bothering as my PC has both so why would I play on a inferior console when my PC kicks it’s greedy capitalist arse.
pcfag.
Your PC also relies on an overly casual, office-productivity interface (mouse/kb) for many of its games, particularly in MP. Nothing wrong with that, but for those wanting a less casual interface (noting that it’s far easier to be accurate and fast with a mouse/kb, beyond the point of anything realistically, and generally easier = more casual) for their online shooters then the console is the place to be. Can’t beat mouse/kb for strat games though, and even for top-down action titles like Starcraft 2 and the like :).
You can add Sony and PlayStation to that list. Ripoff lying company that gimps everything it makes and then lies about it deserves to die!
Dear PC fanboys,
i have played console games through the Nes era, the SNES/Genesis era, PSX era, XBOX/PS2 era, and now the 360/PS3. through that time on consoles and online play alone i have shelled out only a little under $1,400 to play video games. how much have you spent to have spent just to have better graphics?