Moore: New home consoles years away

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 14 September, 2010

"We're nowhere near mass market pricing."

EA Sports president Peter Moore doubts Microsoft and Sony will invest in new consoles for at least three years.

The ex-Microsoft and SEGA executive described the launch of Kinect and PlayStation Move as "tantamount to new platform launches", and insisted "we're nowhere near mass market pricing".

"If you look at the history of the pricing, we're in mid-cycle," Moore told Eurogamer in a new interview published today.

"Chronologically, this is the last few years of previous cycles, but when you look at pricing, we're mid-cycle.

"Over the years, $199 and below has been where 75 to 80 per cent of business is done. With the exception of 360 and the Wii, PlayStation 3, which seems to have a lot of momentum, is not even close to that.

"So we're still to reach a price point across all three consoles where historically 75 to 80 per cent of business is done. Yeah, I think we're in mid-cycle."

Microsoft has said Kinect, which allows gamers to play games without a controller, will extend the life of the Xbox 360 by five years.

And Sony has repeated its belief that this generation will last significantly longer than previous ones.

Moore said the current pricing of the consoles, in particular the PlayStation 3, suggests it'll be years before we see new hardware hit store shelves.

"When you've got things like Move and Kinect, these are tantamount to new platform launches for both Sony and Microsoft respectively.

"I don't think they are going to be investing in new hardware 12 months, 24 months, 36 months after investing I'm sure a considerable amount of money in getting both of these platforms out.

"I'm sure if you ask them is this a tactic and a strategy to extend the current life cycle, they'll say absolutely. You add Kinect to the average price of an Xbox 360, you're back up to that $400 again. That's not the end of the cycle. We're nowhere near mass market pricing. Maybe with the Wii – and you've seen a little bit of a downturn in that business. But they've sold a considerable amount of consoles."

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (44) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • woodnotes #1 2 years ago

    Consoles aren't $199 or less until Sony says so.

    I mean, with the "exception" of 2 out of the 3 consoles, that's pretty much what Peter is implying.
    Edited by woodnotes at 14/09/10 @ 11:40

  • GamesProgrammer Verified Games Team Programmer, Eutechnyx Ltd. #2 2 years ago

    Good i am no where near ready for a new gen yet, a new PSP would be nice but home consoles still feels fresh to me and ive had them all since launch.

  • Ignatius_Cheese #3 2 years ago

    New handhelds yes, new home consoles no.

  • J0rdan_KZ #4 2 years ago

    In 5 years time, the current games consoles (the Wii especially) will be showing their age.

    I think it's likely that if the motion stuff really doesn't take off the way people are expecting that the next generation of consoles will come a lot faster than most people think.

    The PS3 still has very long legs. Being a year younger than the 360 it's GPU (although being more complicated to use apparently) is quite a bit more powerful. Which is why games like Kill zone 2 and Uncharted 2 look better than anything than the 360 can push out.

    Bare in mind, by the time the 3DS hits we'll have had the DS for nearly 7 years though. Pretty damn insane by any ones account.

    (By the way, the above opinions come from someone who isn't a fanboy. I love all three of the current consoles all the same :p)

  • supermaniacs #5 2 years ago

    I wish Sony/Microsoft dont repeat the same mistake they made last gen!! Towards the end of last gen some mind boggling games came out and it would have carried on, had they not been so rushed to release the 360/PS3!!

  • Dolly #6 2 years ago

    I totally agree that new handhelds are fine, but leave the consoles alone for your own sakes. People are on their arse as it is!!
    I am loving my PSP at present due to Remote Play. Watching all the stuff I've taped on PlayTV in bed/on the loo is great, as well as playing PS1 games picked up from charity shops for £1. I think they need to tap this connectivity more with the current gen home consoles, and would love a PSP2 that allowed me to play PS3 games on the go in the same way.

  • Caimbeul #7 2 years ago

    "Microsoft has said Kinect, which allows gamers to play games without a controller, will extend the life of the Xbox 360 by five years."

    You've gotta be kidding! the PS3 & X360 will look like ZX Stectrums next to my PC by then. There has to be something in the works. I am hungry for next gen!

  • CaptainKid #8 2 years ago

    I think the PS3 and Xbox360 are getting a bit outdated graphics wise, I think a new console in a year maybe two would be in order.

  • Kami #9 2 years ago

    Well, it's likely that Sony aren't going to push the next generation of consoles (and to be frankly honest, I find it hilariously hypcritical of Sony to say this - how much did you want initially?!). When someone else does, however, they will have to follow suit - the PSP really needs something new to combat the 3DS as well, which is another issue.

    Sony ballsed up this generation and still refuse to admit how badly wrong they got it. It's also painful to see how developers have treated the Wii (Why can Capcom, Sega, Tecmo and Nintendo get oomph out of the Wii and no-one else can? Anybody?)and it's annoying to see Microsoft push Kinect - a few more years my arse, I sense some delusions going on at the big MS. We'll be reaching the breaking point sooner rather than later - you can't fight it really.

    Historically, generations last six to seven years at the most before technology moves on - we've been in this gen for four years, next year will be the magic five year marker and it may be hard to convince Nintendo of all companies not to kick-start something off, the 3DS will be out by then and they're likely to insist on getting a new home console done.

    But on the issue of pricing, just because Sony aren't there doesn't mean Nintendo and Microsoft haven't been there for ages waiting for Sony. It's not their fault Sony made a bit of a meal of it, with technology that was almost purposely extravagant. Why should they hold back on a new generation if they want to kick one off? I think this does go back to the delusions at the start of this generation, when Sony were convinced they were the most important force in the industry (and then the Wii and 360 happened). This is a remnant of a time when Sony were at the top, and they could call the shots, but in truth regardless of the price of their machine they're not at the top anymore and if Nintendo next year wants to show off a new home console, I think, after the generation they've had, they're in a stronger position to call the shots.

    Or it could be the start of a new era when we don't follow set patterns anymore, and Nintendo and MS and Sony can push out different consoles with differing power at different times hahaha no I couldn't keep a straight face there either.

  • JahB #10 2 years ago

    I am hungry for next gen!

    I second this. Mass market pricing or not, the gap between what your average LCD TV and your average console can do needs to go. Give me a simple tech upgrade, I'll shell out 400-500 if the thing plays games 1080p@60.

  • mainaman #11 2 years ago

    Nonsense,they are already showing their age.Yes,trick antialiasing(already on GOW3 and Crytec has made an even better one),framerate upscalers(lucas Arts) and other clever features that don't tax the hardware too much have been developed recently,but come on:even the cheap flatscreens are FullHD already and let's not get started on the PC situation!

    If they don't push new ones in two years time the multiformat Face-Offs WILL HAVE THE CELL PHONE VERSION LOOKING BETTER THAN THE CONSOLE VERSIONS and the PC version will be excluded for having too many advantages!

  • Dizzy #12 2 years ago

    TBH I am gaming more and more on my PC now. The 360 and PS3 are seriously starting to age in many ways. Luckily XBLA is making sure I still spend quite a bit of time/money on my consoles. But I am down to one full priced game every 2-3 months or so now.

  • butler` #13 2 years ago

    Same as me Dizzy. XBLA has been the only thing pulling me to my 360 lately (except the odd bout of MW2).

    Moore's right about all this with respect to the PS3, but I feel he's trying too hard to extrapolate the trends of last generation. A generation that is a huge shift from this one for so many reasons. The market has changed.

    tl;dr: Moore, look out your fackin' window.

  • Rev.StuartCampbell #14 2 years ago

    "I think the PS3 and Xbox360 are getting a bit outdated graphics wise, I think a new console in a year maybe two would be in order. "

    You really badly need to be killed, for humanity's sake.

  • toy_brain #15 2 years ago

    Can't resist throwing my opinion in.

    This generation has seen the one non-HD console lead in unit sales, a lot of Japan's software development retreat into portable gaming, and it all started with an achingly slow crawl until, after at least 3 years, we were finally in 'full swing' in terms of software quality and quantity.
    I don't want to put up with another 3 years (possibly more) of developers slowly grappling with new hardware, putting out games that could really be done on last-gen tech. Not yet anyway.

    And besides, even though cutting-edge PC tech is clearly more advanced than what the PS3 and 360 are capable of, its not far enough ahead to justify a new console.
    Think of the leap from PS1 to PS2, or PS2 to PS3. Massive difference in what they could do. Now think PS3/360 to high-spec PC. Slightly better resolution? Bit of nicer texturing and lighting here and there? Better framerate? Yes sure, but that isnt even close to justifying a new games console.

  • rickimalone #16 2 years ago

    Bizarrely (given the tech is what 7 years old) I think that I’m happy with this generation of consoles until at least Christmas 2012. I’ve had my 360 2005 & PS3 2007 both since launch (well that’s a lie it’s my 5th 360 although I’m sure that you know what I mean) and to be honest the latest crop of games, Uncharted 2 – GOW3 – Mass Effect 2, have all blown me away.

    Furthermore, I’m still incredibly excited about playing upcoming games Gears of War 3, Kill Zone 3, Halo Reach and Crysis 2 - but to name a few. I’m admittedly graphics mad (It takes me generally 4 hours longer than most to complete games as I like to admire the artwork and texture quality – sad I know), although I genuinely feel that the current consoles have reached a level of graphically fidelity that will satisfy the majority of gamers, including me, for a good couple of years yet.

    For sure, PC gamers can enjoy significantly better quality visuals, although, I suggest that the difference is not significant enough to attract anywhere near enough interest to warrant the investment to take a new console to market. Absolutely there is always a new market for a home games console, although the early adaptor market and types that wish they could run 3DMark on their phones are not great enough in numbers to force any response from Microsoft or Sony to make an early leap just yet. And that’s not necessarily a bad thing. It means that when the next generation of home console hits the market, in whatever form that may be, we’ll be sure to enjoy significantly more capable machines and no doubt new gaming experiences.

    I know that it seems like it’s a long time coming, but I’m sure it will be worth the wait. And until then we have the 3DS, and possibly PSP2, to wet our appetites as let’s be honest is there anything outside of winning the Euro lottery more exciting than a new console launch? I think not.
    Edited by rickimalone at 14/09/10 @ 12:55

  • Gromit #17 2 years ago

    I think 2 years max.

    Nothing has given my the "WOW" factor since Uncharted 2. Surely this gen has hit the ceiling.

  • Colin8703 #18 2 years ago

    I'm more than happy with this generation carrying on for however much longer but like to ask that due to the extensive life cycles these machines are having, proper backwards compatibility on future hardware should be essential.

    I own all current generation consoles and have extensive libraries for all and although would happily adopt new hardware early, i'd still like to go back to the classics on those machines while the new ones find their feet.

  • Luckyjim #19 2 years ago

    I agree with Moore. The development cost of this gen, and that global recession thing I keep reading about, will add few more years to this console gen. Although, I do expect a Wii2 in the next year or so.

  • Darren #20 2 years ago

    I play the vast majority of games on the PC now, have been doing for the last eighteen months actually, as I've felt the consoles have been showing their age for a while now: 30 fps, screen tearing, sub-HD rendering... and that's only going to get worse with the push for demanding 3D which doesn't come without a performance penalty. I'd be happier knowing that the next generation is less than two years away to be honest if only because the consoles still have superb exclusives. I can't play God of War III, Uncharted 2 or Red Dead Redemption on the PC for example.

    Despite the dated hardware, the consoles still manage to churn out great games and that is what really matters. I mean Red Dead Redemption is by far my favourite game of this year and I doubt anything else will top it until next year... L.A. Noire maybe?

  • t8yman #21 2 years ago

    call me when hologram BJ's are on the horizon. Then I'm in - until then - I'm happy with current gen.

  • Luckyjim #22 2 years ago

    @Gromit

    C'mon, let's be sensible here, Uncharted 2 only came out 10 months ago. Also, I don't know about you, but I found GoW3 a bit jaw dropping at times (and RDD and Heavy Rain in parts).

    Anyway, why all this clamouring for new consoles? Do people forget how barren the first 12-16 months of a new life cycle are. Sometimes I think gamers are more interested in the novelty of new technology that the quality of actual games.
    Edited by Luckyjim at 14/09/10 @ 13:38

  • uknortherner2000 #23 2 years ago

    @Gromit "Surely this gen has hit the ceiling. "

    I don't think so. This gen has seen some pretty powerful hardware saddled with crappy sequels and bland, by-the-numbers generic "realistic" first-person shooters. It's not the consoles that are aging (well, they are but I digress), but the attitude of publishers and developers who only have to churn out minor updates to established franchises every year and slap a £10 premium on it. The result is a lot of bland, dull, boring games with crappy overpriced DLC and shoehorned multiplayer with little or no imagination at all.
    Edited by uknortherner2000 at 14/09/10 @ 13:40

  • Emmit_Assassin #24 2 years ago

    I completely agree. Graphically we're at the top of what we can do with consoles. Its now about size and quality of games. That needs to improve, as well as the mass idea that publishers and platform holders can rip us off at any time and get away with it. Once they realise we won't pay for project $10's anymore, and after everyone starts charging us for demo's (and then quickly stops again) they'll look at fleecing us for the next gen.
    Whilst I'm dissapointed with Kinect and Move, and will not buy whatever Nintendo come up with next, I'm happy with the current gen, and will be for some time to come.

  • dingo75 #25 2 years ago

    Console gaming is d0med.

  • phAge #26 2 years ago

    "Over the years, $199 and below has been where 75 to 80 per cent of business is done. With the exception of 360 and the Wii, PlayStation 3, which seems to have a lot of momentum, is not even close to that".

    So with the exception of 2 consoles, 1 console is not even close to $199? razor-sharp reasoning by Mr. Moore there.

  • Smoped #27 2 years ago

    Surely inflation should be affecting that $199 over decades? Just look at console game prices. Around the time of the Super Nintendo, Megadrive et al. console games were freaking expensive but now console games cost basically the same but thanks to inflation that price isn't that bad anymore.

  • witchdrash #28 2 years ago

    Quite happy with what my ps3 and 360 push out graphics wise, I'd be quite happy to wait 3/4 years then get a monumental power upgrade, which allows developers to be very sloppy but still push the graphical envelope and game scale upwards, rather than 12 to 18 months have to pay £300 for a moderate improvement and a lot of early releases that could be done on the current gen because developers hit the wall because they aren't used to optimising for the new consoles.

  • TitusCrow #29 2 years ago

    A lot of people here have been saying that top end pc's cannot significantly improve on the visuals of a 360 or ps3? Well I think we might be looking at this the wrong way. I mean what would happen if a engine was made on pc and took that to the edge of its capabilities, It maybe would not run on console at all, no matter the reductions, or if it did it would not look anything like the pc version.

    What we get instead is the engines being made to run on all three and the pc's extra horse power ( and that is quite substantial sometimes ) is only being used to give extra resolution or fps. So instead of the industry forging ahead to the new changing upgrades of the pc like it used to do, its now being held back engine wise by the lowest common denominator - that being the fact that it must scale onto consoles as well.

    I have both 360 and ps3 and I have not been amazed on console since I saw killzone 3 on ps3. I think that was the end of graphical fidelity on the consoles and have never seen this topped as yet ( maybe gt5.. ) I would like to see some new engines come out and new consoles getting talked about tbh.

  • holloguts #30 2 years ago

    A lot of people happy with another 5 or so years for the consoles on here. New technology! Whats wrong with the old stuff? nothing wrong with valves glowing red from the back of the tv and radio why change?

    Good god a lot of people on here sound like old grandads.

    Get some new technology now!!! More processing power for the consoles. The 360 and PS3 are as old as stonehenge and too many grandads on here are happy to remain that way.

  • tossum #31 2 years ago

    Balls. I'm through with this gen, I want MOAR GRIFFICSS.
    Now whilst I can get MOAR GRAFFICSS with my pc, wife (TM) will not permit it in the living room. something to do with wires and ugliness and things that blokes dont understand.
    Also, the pc often gets the sloppy seconds when it comes to games. So come on the big three, put away your wavey dildo things and bring me my skynet!!

  • toy_brain #32 2 years ago

    "I have both 360 and ps3 and I have not been amazed on console since I saw killzone 3 on ps3. I think that was the end of graphical fidelity on the consoles and have never seen this topped as yet"

    Right, so the last time you were amazed, was a game that was only recently shown, and isnt even out yet!
    Bit early to be complaining that nobody has betterd a game that has yet to be released, dontcha think?

  • mAc062 #33 2 years ago

    @J0rdan_KZ

    I'm no fan boy I've got both consoles and a decent I7 rig i put together myself and really enjoy playing games on all three but the xbox GPU is a little bit more powerful than the ps3, just saying is all
    Edited by mAc062 at 14/09/10 @ 15:29

  • JimmyHart84 #34 2 years ago

    I don't really understand the people who say they are desperate for a new gen now cause consoles are showing their age. How are they? How many PC games are there that make the consoles look crap? Not many. When Crysis 2 and Battlefield 3 come out, I suspect they'll look far better on PC, but until devs start using DX11 in a big way, what's the point?

  • tossum #35 2 years ago

    Because the vast majority of pc games are multiformat, so effectively the pc versions are being hampered by the engines crossplatform origins. An engine designed from the ground up to run on todays top end pc GPUs (quite possibly what may be in the next gen consoles) will have you spunking uncontrollably non-stop for a fortnight. truefax.

  • JimmyHart84 #36 2 years ago

    But Tossum, what games are there on PC that show that DX11 is as good as you're making out compared to DX9 on the consoles? Crysis was DX9 and we haven't even seen that kinda detail on consoles yet, so what makes you think they have been maxed out? Even if they made new consoles right now with the current highest PC spec, wheres the garantee that all devs will produce amazing looking games straight away? Only now Crytek are going onto consoles, and they are one of the leading devs in terms of using new graphics tech, so what makes you think devs of mass market games like Call of Duty are gonna suddenly persue quality over quantity?

  • captain-future #37 2 years ago

    If you hear big execs say something like "no comment" or "that's years away" you can be sure that the next console generation arrives 2011/2012.

    They're really that transparent.

  • electrolite #38 2 years ago

    Waiting another couple of years would be the best thing the industry could possibly do.

    - There's a recession on
    - Development costs are up hugely this generation and the vast majority of games companies won't be able to cope with another exponential increase
    - The last gen of consoles was killed off way too early, they were just finding their stride in 2005. Give 360/PS3 the chance to be exploited fully
    - Time for MS and Sony to get their online infrastructures fully up-and-running worldwide
    - Time for MS and Sony to get Move/Kinect properly up-and-running, both technically and in terms of market position
    - Time for MS and Sony to make some proper money out of this gen
    - Time for software companies to make some proper money this gen
    - Time for HDTV uptake to catch up

    It just makes sense

  • makeamazing #39 2 years ago

    I think its pretty apparent that the first company to make the move will be Nintendo, and i really do think they will be looking at doing something next year. Sony and MS will be taking a little more time, and we are looking at 2012 at the earliest but not later than 2013.

    If you think about 2012, which is another 2 years away, even though it doesnt seem that far away, add it to your age and suddenly you start to think, wow 2 years is a long way away. I cannot imagine another 5 years before another HD console from Sony or MS to be honest, 3 years max, unless the world recession goes totally in the toilet between now and then.

  • SlapLaB #40 2 years ago

    So that's Moore's Law then?

  • Nephirion #41 2 years ago

    Crysis easily beats anything that the console can produce graphically and that was 2007.

  • Sunworship #42 2 years ago

    As others have said, rising dev costs and recession are powerful forces against a new gen. Some of the dev cost problems are being addressed by third party software but this will take time to mature just for this gen.

    The other point is that ms and sony havent decided whether or how to include motion control as standard in the next gen. They will learn alot from the journeys of Move and Kinect over the next couple of years.

    Then there's also the problem of diminishing returns in gfx technology. The pc no longer serves as a dev industry for gfx implementation on anything like the scale it did, so the issues and costs for this will land more on Sony and MS.

    Hence Ninty (which follows a software/experience led strategy) has been able to innovate while the others have been burdened by the issues around a hardware led strategy.

    It only takes one mistake in control, gfx, storage format, engineering or networking strategy to doom a console to struggle, so waiting for the mists to clear while gathering intel is the name of the game for Sony and MS.

  • darth_paul #43 2 years ago

    sure hope hes right. would hate to see a new console out in the next couple of years. what we have now is enough (for now). stop the graphics race. what we have is ok for at least 3 years :p ...imo

  • Grayvern #44 2 years ago

    After a 10 year Lifecycle even with only a modest increase in power the increase in development costs would be stratospheric.
    I would get behind another 3 years but not 5.

    Never mind the cost of console production and profit, I would be far more interested in hearing that microsoft was using an internal studio to develop an engine to put out at cost to developers for its next console ditto for sony.

    Also Nephirion is right about Crysis. Most 360 and PS3 games that are ported without enhancements onto the PC have framerates measured in the hundreds with everything on high. The Direct X9/ 10/ 11 thing being irrelevant given that crysis running in DX9 looks better than anything on console. The problem with Crysis is that in spite of it's impressiveness the art direction gives it far less initial impact than the Uncharted or Gears series.

    Also in terms of pc graphics people in europe have a skewed vision on pricing because conputer hardware in america really is replace £ with $ sighns.
    Edited by Grayvern at 15/09/10 @ 02:09