Next Game Console Ideas?

What do you think the Consoles after the 360, Wii, And PS3 going to be like?

It's way too early to tell. I think for Sony and Microsoft it'll greatly depend on the success and reception of their entries in the motion control craze. Nintendo will likely introduce another revolutionary feature to the industry while Sony and Microsoft will likely improve upon existing gaming technology.

Good Point it is to early to tell. and it just depends on what nintendo does anyway! Sony and Microsoft always copy Nintendo!

What do you think the Consoles after the 360, Wii, And PS3 going to be like?

Some 3D crap with magic goggles to give you the impression you're inside the game, and improved motion sensors to swing your imaginary sword.

Sony and Microsoft always copy Nintendo!

How to forget this year's E3.

How to forget this year's E3.

You mean the E3 where Sony and Microsoft were going on about their motion control accessories?

The Wii was initially codenamed the Revolution for a reason. It was destined to be a revolution, and it clearly has been, given the fact that the competition is following in Nintendo's footsteps.

The future of consoles isn't going to be the same as we're used to. With the advent of network gaming, multiple interface options, and heightened online play, it definitely won't be a 5-6 year cycle. Ken Levine and some other developers were asked what their feelings would be if Microsoft or Sony announced the dev-kits for their next consoles. Their response was basically, "Good luck with that." What I'm trying to say is that we're at an "uncanny valley" place, where graphic improvement is really negligible. Since this is what primarily drove past console updates, we're at a point where that doesn't matter, and interfacing will be the next driving factor.

You mean the E3 where Sony and Microsoft were going on about their motion control accessories?

Precisely.
I was so disappointed they decided to spend their money, time and effort in developing motion control accessories and whatnot.

But I am a bit biased, I'd never buy a game where I have to jump, run in place, slash things and move every single muscle I have.

honestly, I don't think there will be many more consoles out there anymore... I think 360, PS3 and Wii are pretty much it... I mean, they really are great, but I don't see any reason why they would need to be better... The PS3 has the best graphics (theoretically it should, at least, although I'm not sure...), Wii the best motion control thus far (is Kinect any good?) and 360 has one of the largest fanbases and several of the most popular games (I mean, Hell, they even have some FF titles now for RPG nerds, like myself!).

The only way we're getting a better system now is if they take all the best qualities of each and form one Supercompany...


Sonintendosoft! THE FUTURE OF GAMES!!!

honestly, I don't think there will be many more consoles out there anymore... I think 360, PS3 and Wii are pretty much it... I mean, they really are great, but I don't see any reason why they would need to be better... The PS3 has the best graphics (theoretically it should, at least, although I'm not sure...), Wii the best motion control thus far (is Kinect any good?) and 360 has one of the largest fanbases and several of the most popular games (I mean, Hell, they even have some FF titles now for RPG nerds, like myself!).

The only way we're getting a better system now is if they take all the best qualities of each and form one Supercompany...


Sonintendosoft! THE FUTURE OF GAMES!!!

...

Are you implying they've reached some sort of cap? Hardware isn't going to stop improving until the laws of physics prevent it from improving. Plus better hardware is and has been available to use; a ten year old can build a computer better than the current consoles.

There's also new tools for playing games that are constantly popping up. We saw Nintendo bring forward motion controls, and now they're bringing 3D into the industry with the DS.

Console sales will eventually decline to the point where a new generation of consoles makes sense and they'll release something better. This happens.

Virtual Reality must be realized. And I mean, like, nearly 100% immersive or w/e. Kinda like .hack 8D I always wished for a game like that.

so either they make game consoles till theres no room for improvement or games become reality?

Virtual Reality must be realized. And I mean, like, nearly 100% immersive or w/e. Kinda like .hack 8D I always wished for a game like that.

Do you honestly believe that VR will ever be made? It's a pipe dream. Too much work, not enough projected revenue. People wouldn't want to buy it because of how expensive it would be. Kinect costs 150, and it's almost universally (at least, as far as I can tell from local sources) accepted as pointless to buy. So, why would someone pay most likely more than four times that to have a kinect with picutres that come at you? You wouldn't, that's why. It's fun to think about (and boy have i thought about it) but it just isn't feasible...

And, of course, i am not implying that the games have capped, simply that, at this level, things don't have much further to go... All the rest of the "new consoles" will be simply .0's... That is, it won't be Xbox Unlimited, it will be Xbox 360 3.0 or PS3 Lite or something like that... It will be, at it's core, the same console, but it will just be enhanced slightly for speed or whatnot to make it more "complete." but it won't be a totally new console (like the change from xbox to 360, or gamecube to wii were)

Virtual Reality- while I wouldn't go so far as to claim it's a pipe dream, as we're making strides even today- is a long way off yet. However, this isn't to say we can't dabble with immersion. There are other senses to appeal to, touch, smell... Perhaps nintendo could pander to that if they want to lead the nose of the market around?

Imagine, you pick up a hot object in game and your control warms up a bit. You Enter a lush evergreen forest, and something on the console emits a bit of a piney scent. These are things that would be small, subliminal, but interesting, and they'd help to draw you in. That seems silly, superfluous, you might say, but you could argue the same thing of three dimensional televisions, the kinect, etc, and those things exist today. It's not about whether or not something seems necessary on its own, its about the potential for the way it's used. I think that if a developer was clever enough there are some interesting things that could come about from messing with the player's perception.

Pot: the videogame.

Do you honestly believe that VR will ever be made? It's a pipe dream. Too much work, not enough projected revenue. People wouldn't want to buy it because of how expensive it would be. Kinect costs 150, and it's almost universally (at least, as far as I can tell from local sources) accepted as pointless to buy. So, why would someone pay most likely more than four times that to have a kinect with picutres that come at you? You wouldn't, that's why. It's fun to think about (and boy have i thought about it) but it just isn't feasible...

People used to say the same thing about cars, then computers. Capitalism is magic!

I do believe that neural interfacing will be one of the ways it could evolve. That would make VR a much more believable dream. It would allow for all your senses to be used and would be completely immersive experience. Just my 2 cents.

Everyone probly already knows this but the Wii has a new accresory called the wii active or something.

The Wii is a Fisher-Price toy now. I love Nintendo, but the Wii section at GameStop is fucking sad. It's a bunch of cheap plastic shit that you glue on your controller.

Tell me about it.

Also, Kinect is stupid. I can't think of a single game idea that would make me want to buy one.

Why don't Sony and Microsoft try to outdo Nintendo instead of basically copying them?

Because that isn't how it works.

Someone is always ahead, and people try to catch up rather than trying to outrun...

That is, rather than thinking about winning the race, the competition is just barely hoping for a tie, because they see the alternative (winning) as a pipe dream. And maybe they are right...

If it was me, I'd go to outrun.

Neural Interface = terrible idea, I'm paranoid enough to never use one even if we develop them.  As soon as there's the possibility for a virus to get into someone's brain, there goes society \o/

Also, Kinect is stupid. I can't think of a single game idea that would make me want to buy one.

breast fondling kinect

 Never thought of that. :O

Neural Interface = terrible idea, I'm paranoid enough to never use one even if we develop them.  As soon as there's the possibility for a virus to get into someone's brain, there goes society \o/

Never thought of that, and as I said, its only a possibility.

If it was me, I'd go to outrun.

That's your long term goal, but your short term is only to catch up, seeing that as the first step to outrunning... Some people don't realize there is more than one path to the finish...

And now my metaphor gland hurts...

Virtual Reality- while I wouldn't go so far as to claim it's a pipe dream, as we're making strides even today- is a long way off yet. However, this isn't to say we can't dabble with immersion. There are other senses to appeal to, touch, smell... Perhaps nintendo could pander to that if they want to lead the nose of the market around?

Imagine, you pick up a hot object in game and your control warms up a bit. You Enter a lush evergreen forest, and something on the console emits a bit of a piney scent. These are things that would be small, subliminal, but interesting, and they'd help to draw you in. That seems silly, superfluous, you might say, but you could argue the same thing of three dimensional televisions, the kinect, etc, and those things exist today. It's not about whether or not something seems necessary on its own, its about the potential for the way it's used. I think that if a developer was clever enough there are some interesting things that could come about from messing with the player's perception.

Pot: the videogame.

An interesting idea, but it feels rather gimmicky, at least for the smell bit. Honestly, if I cared that much about smelling a pine forest, I'd buy a pine forest candle or something. The heat thing sounds cool though. The rumble feature that's been pretty much a staple since the first playstation seems to add a bit to the experience during play. Heat could do the same. I do remember a game with a flying sequence where I happened to have a fan lightly blowing on me at the time. It felt really awesome. If they put a fan or something in, that would be cool. I guess they could throw the scents in there too, if they really wanted.
 

Neural Interface = terrible idea, I'm paranoid enough to never use one even if we develop them.  As soon as there's the possibility for a virus to get into someone's brain, there goes society \o/

I don't think viruses work that way.

It's less the singular function of a given module and how they work as a collective. The smell on its own? Very silly and gimmicky. But combined with things that stimulate the other senses all at once? If you aren't focused on the fact that you're being manipulated by a tool, you might just be tricked into believing its real.

amBX technology already exists, so its just a matter of time.

Neural Interface = terrible idea, I'm paranoid enough to never use one even if we develop them.  As soon as there's the possibility for a virus to get into someone's brain, there goes society \o/

I don't think viruses work that way.

If a computer found a way to translate code into impulses that forced you to feel, smell, hear, and see things, I'm relatively sure we wouldn't be far off from subroutines that fuck up your mind.

Wouldn't it be a little dangerous to hear, feel, and smell the things that happen? It could end up killing you.

Are you implying that a combination of sensory perceptions could kill you? I'm talking about little 'displays' for your nose and hands, not the matrix.

Teledildonics

Neural Interface = terrible idea, I'm paranoid enough to never use one even if we develop them.  As soon as there's the possibility for a virus to get into someone's brain, there goes society \o/

I don't think viruses work that way.

If a computer found a way to translate code into impulses that forced you to feel, smell, hear, and see things, I'm relatively sure we wouldn't be far off from subroutines that fuck up your mind.

I suppose it's always a possibility, but I'm sure by that time we could develop certain fail-safe mechanisms for that sort of thing.

I suppose it's always a possibility, but I'm sure by that time we could develop certain fail-safe mechanisms for that sort of thing.

All the failsafes in the world won't stop a dedicated hacker.

I suppose it's always a possibility, but I'm sure by that time we could develop certain fail-safe mechanisms for that sort of thing.

All the failsafes in the world won't stop a dedicated hacker.

Ghost in the Shell? laughing man anyone?

AUGH! HE HACKED MY EYES! I CAN"T SEE!!! *BANG* *BANG* *BANG*

THEN STOP FIRING YOUR GUN!!!

NO!!! *BANG* *BANG*

same thing... only they are hacking the brain not a prosthetic body...

Even if there was fail safes, I'd still be hesitant to play it.

Well it's just a matter of not playing unofficial content then. If you didn't buy it from nintendo, don't put it in your W33.

Well by that time the Wii probably be obselite.

I was making a joke, sir. W33 being Wii version 33.

Also, *obsolete.

Oh, sorry typo. 

Well it's just a matter of not playing unofficial content then. If you didn't buy it from nintendo, don't put it in your W33.

Man I wouldn't trust Nintendo or any of their third party developers with a direct interface to my brain.

I doubt they'd risk their income over mind control. They already have that anyway.

I doubt they'd risk their income over mind control. They already have that anyway.

Risk?  It'd secure income and nobody would even know.

Because technology never malfunctions, and a single error wouldn't be a complete give away that not only would ruin a company forever but perhaps even spark military response.

Because technology never malfunctions, and a single error wouldn't be a complete give away that not only would ruin a company forever but perhaps even spark military response.

Which is even more proof for my stance.

I think you are alarmist and silly >:|

Because technology never malfunctions, and a single error wouldn't be a complete give away that not only would ruin a company forever but perhaps even spark military response.

Which is even more proof for my stance.

Nothing advances without risk. You may not want it, but some people do. So don't get it when the technology comes out.
I agree about the risk of viruses. However, since my friend is doing a research paper on the Singularity (who waits for it, excitedly), and he theorizes that all humanity will be converted. Will you stay out of that? Way bigger risk for viruses and the like.

what do you mean by the singularity?  I found an experimental operating system, and the theoretical point where we can no longer determine what the future will hold due to the pace of technological advance, but nothing that people would be "converted" to, and certainly nothing regarding viruses.

The Singularity is the point when humans will supposedly merge with technology. In the most basic form, think of the Borg from Star Strek

The Singularity is the point when humans will supposedly merge with technology. In the most basic form, think of the Borg from Star Strek

Yes, I will be wholeheartedly against that.

this would be a good start playing games without joysticks and stuff check it out xD


http://www.vrealities.com/x-ist.html

The Singularity is the point when humans will supposedly merge with technology. In the most basic form, think of the Borg from Star Strek

Yes, I will be wholeheartedly against that.

I'm not sure I like the sound of that either. If there's one thing I learned from Star Trek, it's that Borg suck.

I said in a basic form. What I meant was the fused with technology part, not so much the collective mind or determination to wipe out anything that isn't borg

When did this topic go insane?

Someone finally realises that you can't beat a good old hand controller.


Or something....

I said in a basic form. What I meant was the fused with technology part, not so much the collective mind or determination to wipe out anything that isn't borg

I'm not putting nanomachines in my brain, no matter how cool the technology is.

What if it gives you superpowers?

What if it gives you superpowers?

I am suddenly on the fence...

Depends on the power. <

The power to live in Mom's basement and subsist only on Cheetos and Mountain Dew.

I could live off Mt. Dew. But still, wouldn't want to be a bum.

What if it gives you superpowers?

Nope.  Not worth having computers that could influence my mind floating around my body.  I am not a tool for some corporation or entity to control, ergo I will not give them the chance to.

I am not a tool for some corporation or entity to control, ergo I will not give them the chance to.

So you don't watch TV? Because commercials might be subliminally controlling you. It's weaker, but it is still a chance.

I actually really don't watch much TV at all, believe it or not.  I tend to just watch whatever shows I want to see on my computer.  No commercials (commercials are lame, possible subliminal aside), don't need to wait days/weeks for the next episode, I can watch them on my own time...much more convenient.

 Commercials aren't lame. They tell you what's happening from video games to movies to Avon junk.

What if it gives you superpowers?

Nope.  Not worth having computers that could influence my mind floating around my body.  I am not a tool for some corporation or entity to control, ergo I will not give them the chance to.

But what if it's the government. You can trust the government!!

What if it gives you superpowers?

Nope.  Not worth having computers that could influence my mind floating around my body.  I am not a tool for some corporation or entity to control, ergo I will not give them the chance to.

But what if it's the government. You can trust the government!!

That made me lol

I actually really don't watch much TV at all, believe it or not.  I tend to just watch whatever shows I want to see on my computer.  No commercials (commercials are lame, possible subliminal aside), don't need to wait days/weeks for the next episode, I can watch them on my own time...much more convenient.

You do need to wait week(s) if you are watching the new season of some series.
Commercials are lame, but I used them for my point anyway.

I actually really don't watch much TV at all, believe it or not.  I tend to just watch whatever shows I want to see on my computer.  No commercials (commercials are lame, possible subliminal aside), don't need to wait days/weeks for the next episode, I can watch them on my own time...much more convenient.

WHAT IF YOU DESIGNED IT AND PUT IT IN YOURSELF?

If I had complete control of it, and there was no way that it could be hacked, AND that I could not become a cyborg, and after a test on a monkey, THEN I would. 8o

Just keep in mind that there's always a way to hack something.

Not if you killed every hacker virus and skull key on the face of the earth and cyber world.

Good luck.

Yeah. Anyone wanna help me?