Next Xbox, PS4 will be 10x as powerful

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 16 June, 2011

Here in "a couple of years," says Carmack.

The next-generation of home consoles – the next Xbox and the PlayStation 4 – will be ten times as powerful as the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3.

That's according to programming legend John Carmack, who told Eurogamer that Microsoft and Sony's new consoles will "be here in a couple of years".

This week a new report suggested Microsoft will reveal its next Xbox at E3 2012. A 2013 launch is rumoured to be in the works.

In March new job listings suggested Microsoft was ramping up development of its next generation Xbox console. The evidence seemed to suggest that the system is so early in development that the graphics hardware at the very least hadn't been locked down.

Sony, however, continues to push its ten-year lifecycle prediction for the PlayStation 3.

In fact Sony Computer Entertainment Europe boss Andrew House told Eurogamer at E3 last week that it's a case of "ten years plus".

"From a Sony perspective, we're very comfortable with PS3 and the way that market's developing," he said. "We're highly focused on launching Vita as a next-generation portable now some seven years after PSP was launched. We're really not looking at anything beyond that at this stage."

"The next-generation will be here soon, a couple of years," Carmack told Eurogamer in a new Rage interview.

"It'll be another ten times as powerful as this [PS3, Xbox 360]. I'd be surprised if that doesn't last over a decade before people wind up saying, well, we've really tapped out everything you could possibly do on there."

Carmack said that the next-generation will present game creators with a tough challenge: how do you make game graphics stand out?

"The better games get the harder you have to go to give a delta people care about. That's going to be a challenge for the next-generation of consoles, to show what pack-in title is going to look so much more awesome than what you get on the current ones that people want to go spend $300 on a new console.

"They'll be able to do it on the next generation, but it's going to be much harder."

Crysis 2 creator Crytek is thought to be making Timesplitters 4 for the next Xbox, using DirectX 11 in development.

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 (107) Latest comment 11 months ago

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

  • sfp_noodle #1 11 months ago

    Will probably cost 10x as much too.

  • sport #2 11 months ago

    My delta has never been satisfied.

  • stegabba #3 11 months ago

    nintendo shoulda known this would happen

  • Master09 #4 11 months ago

    Just a question for the IT expects, won;t there come a graphics saturation point! A time when graphics can;t get any better technically?

  • StooMonster #5 11 months ago

    Carmack recently said that a current PC is ten times more powerful than Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 -- therefore he's saying that next-gen Sony and Microsoft consoles will be as powerful as a PC today.

  • MaFlippinHeadHurts #6 11 months ago

    I’m happy with the 360 I currently have at the minute but I suppose a few years down the line is ok.

    Don’t understand how Sony can squeeze 10 years out of the PS3 though

  • Vistrix #7 11 months ago

    @Master09 When that happens, virtual reality will be the next big thing.

  • djhsecondnature #8 11 months ago

    @4 - Well, technically yes, but then it'll be smaller, quicker, bigger res/new display types. Until we reach it, we won't really know where it'll go but for now there's still a lot of growth.

  • sheldipez #9 11 months ago

    "ten yeas plus".

    yeah yeah yeah !

  • slippysloppy #10 11 months ago

    10 times? Aren't comments like that kind of meaningless.

    Sony and MS are in a difficult position, many people are happy with their current batch of consoles so sales could be slow but if they don't release something soon they're in danger of losing their business to cloud gaming.

  • des #11 11 months ago

    Crytek thing is fake,EG posting crap as usual.

    As for Carmack,he is outdated legend,not a single game from Id yet.People will finish Rage in day or two and then--bargain bin

    Looking forward to his next game(released in 2020).

  • HyperTails #12 11 months ago

    I'm looking forward to the next gen, and TBH, even though this gen is still having good games, the signs are there that the new powerhouse consoles are coming.

    Once Vita's out, I wouldn't be suprised if Sony go into PS4 mode, and Microsoft Xbox 720 mode too.

  • Darren #13 11 months ago

    10X times more powerful sounds impressive but that doesn't equate to games being 10X better. With 3D gaming being pushed by the likes of Sony, which requires twice the processing power of 2D games to render, I suspect that 1080p @ 30p with 2xAA (720p @ 60p with 4xAA) will be the minimum standard most next-gen PS/Xbox developers will aim for.

    An 8X 50 GB Blu-ray drive, 1 TB SATA III hard drive for storage, 2-3 GB of RAM for system and graphics use and a quad-core CPU with an AMD HD 5850/NVIDIA GTX 460 quality DX11 graphics chip is my guess for hardware specs. Unlike PCs, consoles don't have to run resource-hungry Windows so it'll deliver better quality games, bearing in mind developers can optimise for fixed hardware, than the equivalent PC spec.

    I'm not expecting a huge leap in the visual quality of games personally, just a refinement of what we have now toward a more PC-like quality. We already have 720p and 1080p games on the PS3 and 360 and current HDTVs cannot go above that so games will likely look crisper, have better textures/framerates and hopefully run with less ugly screen tearing than we see on the current crop of machines.

    And I bet the PS4 will still be a bitch to code for... ;)

  • Stardusted #14 11 months ago

    I have inside info coming in that I will exclusively share with all of you.
    They are going to be at least 12.5x as powerful and no more than 13.7x.

  • varsas #15 11 months ago

    @Master09: There is still huge scope for graphical improvements but I think we will reach a point where the cost to create games beyond a certain limit will be too high. This is why some developers are happy that no new hardware is coming because they are able to leverage the existing technology to their maximum without too much cost.

  • CamberGreber #16 11 months ago

    Uh OH!

    The last generational leap was 16x the power.

    I guess things are already slowing down.

  • SaintDaveUK #17 11 months ago

    There seems to be some confusion about Sony's "10 year cycle" for the PS3. That doesn't mean they won't have released a PS4 for 10 years. It just means that they will continue to support the console at least until the 10 years is up.

    The PS2 followed exactly the same "10 year cycle", that doesn't mean they waited 10 years to release the PS3. It's just a way of wording it so people don't think "well the PS4 is coming out next year so there's no point bothering with this generation".

  • TexMurphy01 #18 11 months ago

    $300 on a new console eh?

  • Doctor_What #19 11 months ago

    Personally I think it will be 9x as powerful. Possibly 11x. Anyone want to interview me?

  • Sonic_D #20 11 months ago

    Look all they need to be able to do is be powerful enough for games to run at 1080p 60fps. New higher res HD sets are not going to prevalent for a long while, so just maximise with what we currently have.

  • effinjamie #21 11 months ago

    EG blowing things out of proportion.
    If you read the full interview with him, it was said as an off the cuff remark. It certainly didn't need turning into a story of it's own.

  • SaintDaveUK #22 11 months ago

    "Look all they need to be able to do is be powerful enough for games to run at 1080p 60fps."

    This is easily possible on current gen if you get rid of other visual enhancements. There is much more to making a picture look good other than the framerate and resolution. Draw distance, anti-aliasing, textures, particles, lighting, bump-mapping, spec-mapping, more characters on screen at once. These are the major things that will be improved, the resolution will be a minor difference.

  • Kami #23 11 months ago

    Couple of years? The man said a while back that his next game would take that, so I look forward to my PS4 in 2016. (We can all make off the cuff remarks, eh Carmack?)

    As for the next-gen, if they pushed it out in two years at 10x the power, not only would they make crippling losses on the tech (pretty sure you're talking above the region of even a half-decent Alienware PC) but they'd have to price it at a point which would make it inaccessible to the general public.

    The fact is, most of us are happy with what we have now. Wii U will come and last a few years to boot. We're in no rush for a next gen, and I think Sony, Microsoft and Carmack himself ignore that at their peril. The consumer has always historically chosen the cheaper, less powerful machines in the console market - if they haven't yet learned their lessons from this, then really we should all start again, because clearly - the big three are too stupid to learn.

    Tech isn't important. It's what is DONE with it that matters - and I think Carmack himself has completely forgotten this.
    Edited by Kami at 16/06/11 @ 12:12

  • IronCladChicken #24 11 months ago

    @effinjamie
    Eurogamer, taking a published interview and stringing it out into as many news stories as possible? - Never!

  • Lunastra78 #25 11 months ago

    As we all know how worthless the usual launch titles are, let's consider buying new consoles for 2014.

  • flaming.carrot #26 11 months ago

    "Sony, however, continues to push its ten-year lifecycle prediction for the PlayStation 3."

    Sony have already stated a couple of weeks they are working on PS4 development.

  • Reedo #27 11 months ago

    10x as powerful, not that anybody would be able to tell the difference....

  • neonxaos #28 11 months ago

    I think Nintendo is being strategically clever here. Their console will be the cheapest to develop for by far, and it will be the first next-gen console on the market for quite some time. Rumour has it that MS will present their next console at next year's E3, and that means a release no earlier than 2013 for sure, if not 2014. By then, interest in the current generation will most certainly have waned, and the Wii U will have a strong head start. The PS3+Vita combo may do something akin to Nintendo's vision, but the jury is still out on that one, not least when it comes to the combo price, and they are already behind on the development curve.

    Perhaps it will be a great idea for Nintendo to release asymetrically from the others going forward. It will be interesting to see!

  • mooseti #29 11 months ago

    When these new consoles are announced, I always wonder if they will be able to produce animation on a par with, say Toy Story/Avatar etc.

    Will it ever happen?

  • Murton #30 11 months ago

    "Just a question for the IT expects, won;t there come a graphics saturation point! A time when graphics can;t get any better technically?"

    Technically yes, but then the playing field will change and a new direction will open up. Stereoscopic 3D is one direction, photo-real is another, eventually these paths will meet and we'll have photo-real in 3D, we'll hang on that for a bit while improving the hardware, reducing power requirements and whatnot until eventually the hardware is refined to the point where we can open up another direction, such as VR and the process will continue.

    Since someone will mention it sooner or later, The Holodeck from Star Trek (or direct neural stimulation a'la The Matrix) is going to be the saturation point, where you're actually an active participant in the game world rather than simply looking at it on a screen.

  • Kami #31 11 months ago

    @flaming.carrot; Working on it, yes. But R&D of a new console is expensive and time-consuming - their ten-year cycle ends in about 5 years, and usually R&D on new consoles starts as one is pushed out, so you could argue Sony don't see them releasing a new machine until 2015...

    Still, again - the consoles that sell the most are historically the cheaper and technically less-powerful ones. Couple that with people happy with what they have now and you'd be crazy if not insane to push a next-gen in two years... and no-one has that kind of money to bur... oh, right, Microsoft, gotcha...

  • PixelPirate #32 11 months ago

    I'd be surprised if that doesn't last over a decade before people wind up saying, well, we've really tapped out everything you could possibly do on there."

    gameplay doesnt require mammoth horse power. Just because you hit the graphical peak, does not mean you are done with the console as a platform.

    Given the global recession and the quality of the systems currently available, most people are happy with what they have.

  • Cryotek #33 11 months ago

    My biggest problem with next gen gaming is that developers are already going out of business this gen because they can't cover costs. Next gen is going to kill several development companies so quickly, unless they make an instant success. Even then, would need to probably sell over 2-3 million copies of a high profile game to break even.

    I am genuinely worried about that...

  • Adi-C #34 11 months ago

    @StooMonster
    Carmack recently said that a current PC is ten times more powerful than Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 -- therefore he's saying that next-gen Sony and Microsoft consoles will be as powerful as a PC today.
    ===============================================
    And that could be true. Just take a look at the wattage of todays pc components. A setup with a top intel cpu made on 32nm like i7 2600k, gpu like nvidia gtx580 on 40nm takes about 400W. Just the graphics card alone can use 230W...! That's a whole launch-model console power usage!
    You won't have a console that takes 400W. It will take about 200W (because a small box will run just too hot), just like current gen consoles used 200W, launch models. So in 22nm cpu and 28nm gpu a setup like this would use about 300W. Maybe on 16-22nm cpu, 22-28nm gpu it could use about 200W. And only then can you pack TODAYS PC power into a small box.
    So yes, it can be possible than next gen consoles will be just as powerful as todays top pcs. Which is good enough, by the way.
    Edited by Adi-C at 16/06/11 @ 13:57

  • PinktotheLast #35 11 months ago

    I posted this elsewhere, but it's relevant here:

    I am sure not that many will agree with me here, but do we really want the next generation in 2013? Really?
    The fact that Team ICO are still working on their first game for this generation, there has only been one proper GTA game, there is yet to be a really good game built entirely for Move, we are about to see a new Elder Scrolls engine, Konami have their new Fox engine, etc.

    Do we really need a new generation? Why cant this one last ten years at least, say to 2015?

  • coolbritannia #36 11 months ago

    "I think Nintendo is being strategically clever here. Their console will be the cheapest to develop for by far, and it will be the first next-gen console on the market for quite some time."

    You mean last, by at least 6 years right?

  • Kami #37 11 months ago

    "You mean last, by at least 6 years right?"

    I think you mean laughing all the way to the bank at the millions and millions they made from the Wii...

  • Softie2k #38 11 months ago

    A legend but is he that relevant today?

  • dsmx #39 11 months ago

    Visions of the frinkiac 7 come to mind for some reason.

  • RawNinjaKid #40 11 months ago

    Hardware power is overwheming developers. It's only gonna be a few developers (and even fewer titles) that will be able to maximize the next gen platforms.

    But if you think about, the hardware has to move on, because in a couple of years Smartphones will be pushing the PS3/X360. Also all indications are that the Wii U is more powerful that PS3/X360, and we can't have that!

    But there is a potential that developers just get fed up with development costs and focus for the Wii U or least small online DD titles instead!
    Edited by RawNinjaKid at 16/06/11 @ 13:04

  • homerramone #41 11 months ago

    Pah what does he know...Why dont they ask the analysts !?


  • homerramone #42 11 months ago

    Pah what does he know...Why dont they ask the analysts !?


  • Geowolf #43 11 months ago

    Carmack talks bull?

  • Beano #44 11 months ago

    My (naive) hope for the next-gen: platform holders require publishers to only release games in native 1080p 60fps (both 2D and 3D) and fully v-synced with 4xAA.

    (will never happen though)
    Edited by Beano at 16/06/11 @ 12:58

  • Schmoke-n-a-pancake #45 11 months ago

    One of the biggest piles of bull I've heard in a long time. He's talking about a next gen within 24 months that is 10 times more powerful and will come to retail for $300? What planet is he on?

  • Anciegher #46 11 months ago

    10x? That would be an utter fail. Previous generations have always been 10x as powerful, but they have also only lasted 5 years. If the current generation lasts until 2014-15 then it will be 8-9 years old....which should bring the power of the next consoles closer to 50x.

  • Beano #47 11 months ago

    "Pah what does he know...Why dont they ask the analysts !?"

    Like Michael "Wii HD in 2008" Pachter ?

  • Beano #48 11 months ago

    "I think Nintendo is being strategically clever here. Their console will be the cheapest to develop for by far, and it will be the first next-gen console on the market for quite some time."

    Not really. Wii U is a current-gen console and will be outdated again when the next Xbox and PS is announced. I don't think the WiiPad gimmick will save the platform.

  • Mr.Spo #49 11 months ago

    Why invest billions in machines that push development costs even higher, when neither Sony or Microsoft haven't recouped the costs of r&d on 360 and PS3? Granted, they are large corporations that make money through other divisions, but I doubt executives will want to pump that hard earned cash into their videogames divisions. I wouldn't be surprised if there's only a small graphical step up to Xbox 3 and PS4, and MS and Sony seek to differentiate their machines through other means. Nintendo trounced them this generation with a souped up GameCube, and Nintendo appear to be confident enough to bring Wii U to market, which is on par or slightly above the current HD machines. If Nintendo prove again that a massive technological leap isn't necessary, then will Sony and Microsoft invest billions into cutting-edge machines?

    I don't doubt for a second planning and games development for a new Xbox/PS is underway, but I do doubt that MS or Sony have decided which way to go with their new machines. Their current machines are growing in profitability, Kinect is pushing the 360 and PS3 has gathered more momentum as time has gone on. Granted they could both peak in sales this year... But I just don't see the business sense in investing in incredibly powerful machines right now. They'll release machines more powerful than Wii U, for sure, but only in 2013 or 2014, when they've really gained some profit from their current machines.

    I can't help but think Nintendo have out-maneuvered the competition again, especially if Wii U is something of a step up from PS3/360. While their rivals scrambled to create Wii-like add ons, investing yet more cash (adding onto the billions already spent) into this generation, Nintendo have made several billion dollars in profit, and invested that into another machine that could have one or two years on the market with no other new machine as competition. Plus, it's a machine developers can make the transition to easily, and if Wii U is more powerful than PS3, developers and publishers still have room to experiment and push their game engines, without incurring the costs associated with moving onto much more powerful machines. If Nintendo build a decent install base and build significant third party support, I think publishers will think twice before investing massively into graphically intensive, high-cost systems from Microsoft and Sony. I'm not saying they won't support these new machines, I'm just saying they would be slow to support them, which causes problems for MS and Sony as they try to establish their devices onto the market against Nintendo.

    A lot of ifs and buts... though I bet MS and Sony are watching Nintendo very closely right now, before they make any decision on what to bring to market next. A souped up 360 with better Kinect integration isn't outside the realm of possibility, at this point.

  • dfooster #50 11 months ago

    It's all well and good people saying they are happy with their current consoles, but the next generation won't be here for another two years. Will gamers still be as excited by their 360 and ps3 then?

  • IronCladChicken #51 11 months ago

    Beano
    But by then they could release the Wii3... Nintendo do likes to play their own way, it's possible their are working to their own console release timelines and not syncing with Sony/MS?

  • BonzoBanana #52 11 months ago

    I miss the days when consoles were small, cool running and reliable. The next generation will probably be bigger again. More fans etc. I'd like the PS4 to be a stylish little console perhaps using low power portable technology like arm chips and powervr. As a home based console they could probably achieve 4-5x the performance of vita but in a tiny cool running console that would be cheap to make and easy to develop for. It wouldn't have to be any bigger than ps2.

  • RawNinjaKid #53 11 months ago

    @50
    "Why invest billions in machines that push development costs even higher, when neither Sony or Microsoft haven't recouped the costs of r&d on 360 and PS3"

    - Obviously, we have to wait until N give us more info on the Wii U console but can you imagine a N console being the most powerful (upto 50%) on the market for a significant amount of time? It will totally ruin their image (Sony and MSFT) and I don't think they want to lose any "core" market share to another competitor, that's' so strong with the "casual" audience.

    So I think the answer is pretty clear. Both MSFT and Sony are relying on their online DD services to recoup costs and profit major in the long-run. In MSFT's case cutting short the console lifecycle by about a year or two is no big deal, compared to the potential of keeping / attracting more customers to Xbox Live. Silimarly, Sony will have to react to this. The irony here is that original online DD software is likely to be low-spec and not hardware intensive at all! LOL!

    So expect long-term deals with developers to produce even more DLC content, probably at the sacrifice of the main game and maybe lots of exclusive contracts on what platform to deliver these on.

    Edited by RawNinjaKid at 16/06/11 @ 13:53

  • Beano #54 11 months ago

    "But by then they could release the Wii3... "

    Nonsense - Nintendo will not release another Wii for at least 4 years after Wii U. Well after the true next-gen has arrived.


    "Nintendo do likes to play their own way, it's possible their are working to their own console release timelines and not syncing with Sony/MS?"

    True - but that does not make Wii U look less old in 2 years.
    Edited by Beano at 16/06/11 @ 13:28

  • SEVQA #55 11 months ago

    @Master09

    Yes indeed real time graphics using polygons will reach an eventual peak where photo realism' the Holy Grail has been reached. Though there are many other techniques that more processor intensive such as N.U.R.B.S for example, Non Uniformed Rotational B Splines essentially meaning rather than using polygons, uses a perfectly curved line to get from A to B could in the future be used by more advanced technology. Until we have near infinite resolution and ability to control what’s being displayed on screen (or whatever) on a per pixel basis I think we have a little wait before seeing that on a commercial basis.

  • spekkeh #56 11 months ago

    I seriously doubt it. It just doesn't make any sense from a business perspective. MS and Sony only started making money very recently. Introducing a new console would just have them make a loss again, let alone the console would cost 400E and nobody really wants to buy it. It will take them years to reach the same market share as today and they will stand to gain nothing from it as they'll still be making a loss. Then apart from the biggest ones, most publisher and developers don't want the next gen either as it will absolutely cripple them, meaning less game support.
    I can totally see why Nintendo went for just a bit more, in order to keep it profitable.

  • spekkeh #57 11 months ago

    I thought NURBS went the same way as raytracing a long time ago.

  • Buran #58 11 months ago

    ^ Nintendo is currently struggling to sell 3DS and Wii despite all the units sold (well, way less than PS2) finally floped and is clearly out of fuel...

  • dunbain #59 11 months ago

    Such a development strikes me as a disgusting affront to the innovation gaming can offer. Graphics have helped gaming reach new heights, but the pursuit of CG-graphics can almost do nothing more than offer 'life-like' or reality-simulated shooters, etc.

    The increased horsepower will undoubtedly benefit some creative designer minds and studios, but given the likely dismal ratio against whatever new consumer-base, the future of gaming looks increasingly abismal according to this man's vision.

    I'm a game designer, and I know plenty others in the industry who do NOT welcome such developments when games' dev cycles have reached years, sapping creators' energy and exhausting thinking creatively.

  • Ali360 #60 11 months ago

    why wont they just go have a rest and let us enjoy our consoles for now. we'll calll for it when we're bored.

  • Rack #61 11 months ago

    Can you imagine what the PC specs needed to run these things will be? You need an i7 8 gigs and a pair of 590 GTXs just to run a 360 port these days.

  • Max_Powers #62 11 months ago

    Can't wait for a new power house of a console! 360 and PS3 are beginning to show their age and I'm an unashamed graphics whore that is to lazy to bother with PC's.

  • beastmaster #63 11 months ago

    All you nay-sayers! Does't the prospect of a new Timesplitters game & a new game by Avalanche on a new XBox get your juices flowing?

    It seems as though certain developers are already working on games for it. Perhaps not on locked down tech just yet. The prospect for a console owner to have a next gen versions of my favourite titles is quite mouthwatering.

    I speculate the next XBox will launch with the final chapter of the new Halo trilogy (Halo 6?), next COD, Forza & FIFA.

  • BOFH_UK #64 11 months ago

    Just to throw this out there but have a quick look at what's coming up on the PC in the next year or so. Battlefield 3 is the obvious example but there are more out there that show, all of a sudden, a fairly significant step forward in terms of graphics. Now I'm sure that it'll all be scaled down and work fine on current consoles but it'd make a LOT of sense for the PC to be used as, basically, a testing ground if the current mid to high end hardware was going to form the basis of the next gen consoles...

  • Collymilad #65 11 months ago

    @Stoomonster.

    When he said a current PC, did he mean a mid range one or the very top end one? (as in running SLI etc)


    And yes, imo we do need new consoles soon-ish. Just because some devs have been screwing around for the past 4-5 years doesn't mean that it's not time for new consoles. If they come out in 2013 the 360 will have been out for EIGHT years, and the PS3 not too much less.

    That's already above an average console lifecycle. If they had followed the last few gens we'd probably have seen new consoles at E3 this year, if not already have them in our hands.


    Negged, I assume by Team ICO fanboys. Fact is what I'm saying is true. Dev's have put out 2-3 quality games (if not more) - there's really no excuse for this being thier first game this gen.
    Edited by Collymilad at 16/06/11 @ 16:57

  • Sid-Nice #66 11 months ago

    It has taken Microsoft almost 6 years to sort out the 360; that was due to them rushing their first model to the market place back in 2005, just to be FIRST. The Xbox 360 is now enjoying a surge in popularity; the Xbox 360 slim is what the original model should have been, quiet and reliable. The 360 is currently running on 2004 PC technology using DirectX 9 and if we believe the rumours; the next generation of Xbox will be running DirectX 11.

    The rumours and speculation are a bit contradictory considering that John Carmack thinks the new super consoles will retail for $300. The Wii U will retail for more than $300 and that’s for a console using 2009 PC technology using DirectX 10.1. Microsoft will want the Xbox next to be a multimedia hub with bells on. The cost of components will be more than $500 for the early build and I know that Microsoft make a loss on their hardware; but they’re not going to take a step backwards, by not including built-in Wi-Fi, rechargeable controllers and a HDD.

    Microsoft recuperated a lot of income with peripherals and accessories with the current Xbox; Play & Charge, Wireless Adapter, Official HDMI lead and extra controllers. The software attach rate is going to have to be high for them to make any money next generation. Furthermore the next generation could be looking towards 2016 when the Ultra high definition era of HDTV’s is said to begin; 2048p, 4096p etc.

  • AnteCashovina #67 11 months ago

    People we are talking about 8-9y advance in hardware from Xbox360/ps3 to Xbox3/ps4, ofc its gonna be more than 10 times more powerfull.
    For example, a 2009 radeon 4650 50-60 $ looowend gpu card is more powerfull then gpus in xbox or ps3.

    Why do ppl belive that they will put todays hardware in a future console (2013-14). MS and Sony always put the best possible hardware becuz they have to,console need to stay 5+y on the market, in this gen thats 8-9y.
    OR they gonna go the nintendo way and realease 20-30% more powerfull Gamecube, that became the Wii.

    In 2005 Xenon and RSX were high-end gpus(ps3 came 2006 but it was of bluray and psn that it was delayed.)Same with xbox1 in early 2002 with a geforce 3/4 hybrid, ps2 in early 2000 with GS, dreamcast in 1998.
    They can do that becuz they dont buy retail 500 $ GPUs, they buy at factory price, RSX (geforce 7800 400$+ in 2005) cost them around 70-90$ to make in 2005.
    So you can expect to see a 2013 highend GPU in next gen, it does not mean that the console will cost 600$. Ps3 was 600 becuz of bluray(200$) and Cell (230$) with manufactory cost of over 800$.
    Now only thing im worried about is RAM, if they put just 4GB then thats to low. Sony console always had 16x the ram of previous gen.
    PS1 2mb, PS2 32mb,Ps3 512mb, Ps4 8Gb?

  • Murton #68 11 months ago

    "A legend but is he that relevant today?"

    Given that the man invented various bits of tech and techniques that are still used today (including the engine used by a little known game called CoD) I'd say yes, he's certainly more relevant than the likes of Pachter and is infinitely more knowledgeable than suits like Kotick, Riccitiello and Bilsen.

  • TagemandBagem #69 11 months ago

    I have a feeling he uses "10 times..." as a phrase, in much the same way Ned Flanders' doctor uses "and may god have mercy on us all".

    Meaningless.

  • Softie2k #70 11 months ago

    @Murton

    Considering the names you mentioned were CEO's and games analysts and not technical directors, I don't understand your point.

    John Carmack a long time ago was at the front of graphics programming, but now he simply talks the talk whilst everyone else produces better looking games. He is a legend, but his contribution has waned.

  • zecker #71 11 months ago

    crytek and dx11? dont make me laugh

  • Swifta #72 11 months ago

    Wow, I am absolutely disgusted with SONY on their 10 year+ plan bullshnit. I have a 1080p 55 in samsung and the damn ps3 has very few games that actually play at 1080p so 98% of the games for the system look distorted, washed out, pixelated and just plain ugly. I think that most can agree with this. Atleast the xbox up converts everything to 1080p and looks slightly better than the ps3 but damn. Most everyone that has a tv now adays it's 1080p... how can you guys settle for this crap and take it up the butt from sony giving them praise???

    I just want a damn system that will play my games at full 1080p so it looks crystal clear on my TV.... I'm hoping Wii U will accomplish this and if they do then i'm buying it day one... if they dont then they can keep it!

  • darc #73 11 months ago

    This is so totally not news. I read the interview; the guy was just thinking out loud. It's probably true to some extent but there's nothing quantitatively predictive about it.

    And it's certainly not two distinct news items. (I'll be looking for the "Eurogamer Reveals that John Carmack Says That Next XBox..." headline shortly.)

  • Subdominator #74 11 months ago

    #4 No, there will never be a point where it doesn't get better. Reality is infinitely more beautiful that any computer graphics could ever achieve. If you take an Xbox 360 and let it render a single leaf in the same quality that the very same leaf has in reality - it won't be possible. That is how much processing power can be improved.

    While todays games do look pretty good they are all doing so because they avoid the things that aren't possible. Ever wondered why Crysis 2 is all narrow when Crysis had open environments? With the current gen developers have to work around the disadvantages so the player doesn't recognize them. Things like realistic lighting or even human skin are not possible with current tech (or the next gen or the next next gen).

    It's a neverending process. Every generation since the SNES players say "graphics can't become much better than this, we don't need more" and then the next gen blows them away. Just like they always want 60 fps, which will never happen because developers love to give you twice the detail more than twice the frame rate. If you want to see what the next gen looks like: Watch that Dead Island announcment CGI trailer. That will be possible in realtime on the next generation. Final Fantasy movie like quality will be possible. And it won't be the end.

  • Bravestinsane #75 11 months ago

    @Master09 #4

    I think your missing the point, gaming isn't just about graphics.

    Graphics may get to the point when they can't get any better, but then you improve physics, you improve how the world reacts, you improve AI make things behave as you would expect them, make worlds busier so RPGs feel like there real living breathing places, animations swaying trees, realistic movements as you walk through small bushes in forests and jungles.

    While graphics may come to slow down, theres so many other things that can be improved on what will need more power than just delivering graphics.

    Imagine full open world RPGs like Oblivion with the number of moving creatures on screen rivaling Dead Rising, games need the power to do various things not just graphics.

  • meanmrmustard #76 11 months ago

    Don't worry console fans I'm sure the developers will find someway to push as many particle effects and whatnot as needed to get them running at sub 30fps so we can keep that console-like experience that we have all grown accustomed to.
    Edited by meanmrmustard at 16/06/11 @ 16:32

  • sjmlondon #77 11 months ago

    '1 million times better' said Dr Evil

  • Shabbaranks #78 11 months ago

    Is EG going to have speculation next gen news everyday from now until I finally pick one up and plug it in, whenever that may be.

  • evarofzentral #79 11 months ago

    The next-generation of home consoles – the next Xbox and the PlayStation 4 – will be ten times as powerful as the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3 and 50x bigger, so that only the four richest kings of Europe can afford them.

  • sjmlondon #80 11 months ago

    'I'm so excited', said The Pointer Sister

  • sjmlondon #81 11 months ago

    'Make it So', said J Luc Picard

  • sjmlondon #82 11 months ago

    'I think the new consoles will reverse the polarity of the newtron flow' - Doctor Who

  • Hindle #83 11 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:04:43 04-04-2012

  • geoneo123 #84 11 months ago

    I hope that then it comes to the design of these next gen consoles that they include all the ports we require to futureproof them.

    EG, Include a USB3, S/PDIF, Decent display adaptor inputs for future displays.

    I dont want to have to buy another "Slimmer" console to gain these.

    Also I hope they include 10x the cooling capability. :p

  • fletch273 #85 11 months ago

    Graphics don't make games.

  • Carn82 #86 11 months ago

    Well..

    The Xbox360 and PS3 are based on hardware requierements that are 8 years old. The Wii actually used 5 year old hardware, give or take. Now, Nintendo is coming with a 'current' medium-to-high end system that will probably be able to support all DirectX10-and-some-more features, which won't cost them that much when it releases in 2012-something. Basically, it's a consoleversion of the current generation PC hardware (like the Nvidia's Fermi based GPUs..the GeForce 300/400 series etc). I don't think we'll see anything 'new' on the Wii U that we aren't seeing in today's PC games. But still, that's a big step forward compared to the Wii.

    My guess is that Sony / Microsoft are atleast aiming for an equivalent of the upcoming Nvidia hardware, the Kepler and Maxwell range, which are launching in 2013-ish, with atleast DirectX12 like functionalities in HD.

  • Ahskay #87 11 months ago

    Took a long time to put that interview online Eurogames, i read all this stuff in local magazines more then 5 weeks ago. Don't pretend this is hot news and catch up with your articles.

  • meanmrmustard #88 11 months ago

    I just hope they don't cheap out on the RAM (who am I kidding?)

  • man.the.king #89 11 months ago

    @Kami

    I think you are giving Nintendo too much credit.

    MY OPINION: Sure they made a pile by pandering to the "casual" crowd (by which I mean the sort of people who were satisfied with just Wii Sports, and possibly Wii Fit), but then come 2009-2010 they saw the same crowd migrating for their casual entertainment experiences to the Mobile scene where entertainment cost far less than the premium Nintendo wanted to charge for experiences just as fleeting. So, because Nintendo thought they were about to lose the casual crowd (you could kind of see where things were going when Nintendo were complaining about game-platforms such as Smartphones a half-year back) and that they may not be able to make big bucks off of those people much longer, they decided they needed to address the "hardcore" crowd again - Enter the Wii U.

    And as Nintendo seemingly don't want to (or possibly can't afford to) change their core philosophy of being able to profit off of the hardware itself, I think their hardware may not be future-proof beyond 2012-13, or once the PS4 and Next XBox come out.

    And no, graphics is not the same as gameplay, but given the same gameplay experience for better visuals, audio, physics, AI, I know what I would go for - I suspect most of the "hardcore" are in the same boat. They will be willing to shell out money for a better overall experience, and then Nintendo may be left with just their long-time Nintendo fans, sans the "casuals" who would have since moved on to cheaper avenues such as Mobile phones (and possibly handhelds if the games were cheap enough).

    Long story short, I think Nintendo are stuck between a rock and a hard place right now. Nintendo played fast and loose with their core audience (the ones who repeatedly spend lots of money on games) with the Wii and in the process lost many of them, and now they are scrambling to get them back with no clear long-range plan.
    Edited by man.the.king at 16/06/11 @ 19:05

  • bigbadbeasty #90 11 months ago

    Nonsense! Nonsense! Nonsense!

  • DrStrangelove #91 11 months ago

    @Reedo

    "10x as powerful, not that anybody would be able to tell the difference...."

    If it's true that a current gaming PC is also "10x as powerful" as a console, then that would make a hell of a difference. If you can tell the difference between PS2 and PS3, then you can tell the difference between PS3 and a gaming PC.

  • DrStrangelove #92 11 months ago

    @fletch273

    "Graphics don't make games."

    But bad performance destroys games.

  • Quixz #93 11 months ago

    I like new things and not too big on nostalgia. I sell all my stuff when moving to a new a console, bring on the NEXT GEN!

  • sweatyBallacks #94 11 months ago

    It annoys me people who say graphics can't get much better (incidentally I'm not referring to Carmack here). I'm currently playing through Crysis 2 and honestly, it seems the FPS genre has not moved on a great deal from the time of, say, Half Life 2. I'm serious. There is still no real interaction with environments. The way your bullets affect enemies is still lame (isn't it about time we had enemies that get properly wounded from shots?). And this all adds to the graphics to me - not just textures. Which can go a great deal further too.

  • DAN.E.B #95 11 months ago

    I have to say im up for the next gen now as I dont remember the last time I was wowed this gen and I love new tec
    however I share the concerns of others about developers closing down because of increasing costs.
    Just imagine if Activision and EA where the only ones left making games
    Tiger Woods and COD would probably be running on the same engine in five years as they are now!

  • BlinkeredAxis #96 11 months ago

    My son is a pretty good barometer of where the industry is going, and he is now buying PC versions of games where possible, as the graphics have overtaken console, and there is the prospect of some excellent modding software and communities that are involved in all that. And that's true even with less than top-of-the-range PC's.

    The console makers know this, and have to move in the next 1-2 years.

    And BTW, for gamers, mobile phones and tablets are shit, and always will be.

  • Hellion83 #97 11 months ago

    Post deleted at 20:12:17 01-02-2012

  • natureboy #98 11 months ago

    Microsoft are rushing as usual. The 360 and PS3 can go for 10yrs. I don't know why Nintendo scares them so much..lol

  • BartonFink #99 11 months ago

    Kinda obvious but this really puts the WiiU into perspective and how utterly pathetic it will be when it comes to the next generation of consoles. Thanks but no thanks Ninty.

  • SeesThroughAll #100 11 months ago

    Yes, Moore's law is amazing.

  • aphex187 #101 11 months ago

    We can all go on that consoles will be this times better but the one main ingredient it is missing which it lacks compared to a PC is the mouse and keyboard.

  • Ashcroft #102 11 months ago

    I'm not sure if I have enough Gamecubes or enough sticky tape to match the power of these imaginary consoles.

  • BuddyChrist #103 11 months ago

    And games will take 10x as long.
    10x as many companies bite the dust, like million pound flies dead on a window ledge.

  • dmt2 #104 11 months ago

    Jesus wept: not next generation talk again.

  • Kaminari #105 11 months ago

    This extract is incredibly biased, considering it's coming from an interview where Carmack clearly says the potential of the current gen has yet to be tapped out.

  • Reedo #106 11 months ago

    @DrStrangeLove

    Not really the best of comparisons in the world, seeing as the PS3 is about 30x as powerful than the PS2 was. Raw power just doesn't hold the same value as it used to. The "massive difference" you refer to from console to (your? (probably)) top of the range gaming PC is really nowhere near as an improvement as it was from the aforementioned jump from PS2 to PS3. I remember seeing the PS2 graphics for the first time and thinking WOW, after playing a PS1 for so long. But now? It's nowhere near as impressive. Maybe I'd share your opinion if I had loads of money to burn (on a high end rig) and a tiny penis (which I would then counter with my huge rig).

  • Merdistaneren #107 11 months ago

    Shouldn't they be much more powerful? If you follow Moores law and they are both released in the year 2014 then it will be 9 and 8 years after their originals. Moores law state that the number of transistors will double every 18 months making it double 6 times for the xbox which would give us 64 times the original transistors. How much that translates to in performance is har to say but it's surely more than 10 times better. If you look at the roadmap for the tegra chipsset for example it's set to become a 100 times faster than the original in just 5 years so i highly doubt his prediction is true.