EA: We'll see Xbox 560 before 720

By Robert Purchese Published 28 August, 2009

And PlayStation 3.5 before PS4.

EA's chief thinker Rich Hilleman reckons Microsoft and Sony "nearly expired" making PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360, and that we'll see incremental updates long before a true next generation rolls around.

"I expected we'll see a PlayStation 3.5 before we see a PlayStation 4 and an Xbox 560 before we see an Xbox 720," Hilleman told VentureBeat.

His words are arguably reflected in Sony's move to make a PS3 Slim and Microsoft's decision to do Project Natal, which was conceived to effectively relaunch the Xbox 360 sometime next autumn.

How long until we see a true next generation is unclear, although Sony's oft-touted Ten Year Plan suggests we have a while to go.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (74) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • StooMonster #1 2 years ago

    Isn't PS3 Slim the PS3.5?

  • idiotsavant #2 2 years ago

    Xbox 540, shirley?

  • cianchristopher #3 2 years ago

    I want an Xbox 453, followed by an PS3.255648. Then maybe Wii-Poo!

  • Azazel #4 2 years ago

    PS3 x 0.75 = PS3 Slim?

    /confused

  • Zomoniac #5 2 years ago

    What are his definitions of 3.5? I don't think either company will give either machine a horsepower increase prior to the next proper version. It wouldn't make sense. People won't pay a fortune for a minor upgrade, and devs aren't going to make games for the extra power if most people can't buy it. I'm sure we'll see reshapes and add-ons, but no change to the main tech-specs until 720 and PS4.

  • IneptPercy #6 2 years ago

    This could be interesting as a PC gamer, usually just as affordable PC's get the edge on the consoles the consoles comeback with new models and PC plays catch up again (PC's is usually ahead but not always affordable).

    It would seem that the margins PC have over the currrent consoles will only grow and at this rate there will be massively ahead by the next generation of consoles.

    They could just add waggle to current consoles and overclock them a bit...

  • sarcasmoidosis #7 2 years ago

    "What are his definitions of 3.5?"

    Minor tweaks on the same architecture. It's not as expensive as making a new model and it can bring on the big bucks from the guys that don't already own a console.

  • cianchristopher #8 2 years ago

    If the next Xbox is called a 720, well that just makes no f**king sense whatsoever! I mean, I get the 360 thing (in that Xbox 2 would suffer next to Playstation 3 and 360 degrees means it covers (what exactly? The entire circle? Pie? Burger?)) but 720 is, I dunno, so bad its good?

  • kestral #9 2 years ago

    Xbox Dizzy

  • KayJay #10 2 years ago

    Shirley this is expected... Sony have done this with all their consoles. PS, PS2 & PS3 all now have had several variations to their original states.

  • mkreku #11 2 years ago

    Zomoniac: People won't pay a fortune for a minor upgrade...

    50 million Wii owners disagree.

  • bunglebonce #12 2 years ago

    720 would be confused with 720p, which would be a branding faux-pas similar to Xbox 2. It'll have another abstract name for the next iteration.

  • menage #13 2 years ago

    I don't need another gen for at least 3 years.

  • J-B #14 2 years ago

    I pray to god it doesnt get called the xbox 560/720.

  • Zomoniac #15 2 years ago

    @mkreku

    Of those 50 million Wii owners, about 3 of them have ever heard of a GameCube and actually have any idea it was a new shape for an old console in the first place, so to them it's not an 'upgrade'. That doesn't apply here.

  • BadBoyBonner #16 2 years ago

    I fail to realise why some people think developing console games to run on two fixed spec systems would be so difficult - when lets be honest probably the only thing that will change will be the graphics (maybe a few bits of physics) - I guess over half of the developers out there have spent most of their career creating games for PC - it would be a cake walk to them, not some seemingly unmanageable budget and technical drain.

    The Xbox and PS increments will happen, as in 5 to 6 years time the mind boggles at what the difference in performance would be. You can already build a PC for less than the price of a PS3 that wipes the floor with it - and that will only get worse as IneptPercy has already pointed out.

  • Ace_McCloud #17 2 years ago

    "Xbox 540, shirley?"

    Maybe they're planning to crooked grind a rail? ... and don't call me shirley.
    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 12:25

  • mugwump #18 2 years ago

    It'll be the Xbox 1080. No doubt.

  • muscleblade #19 2 years ago

    "I pray to god it doesnt get called the xbox 560/720. "

    No need to pray. Its a media name and everybody know what they mean by it. MS would never call their next console that.

  • Olemak #20 2 years ago

    What would the next gen of consoles DO, exactly? Do we need a next gen any time soon, for reasons of resolution, sound quality and new game related technologies? Would be an interesting featur from the Digital Foundy guys - what are the actual limitations of the current generation?

    I mean - TV screens are currently maxed out at the 1080 resolution. In the right hands, current tech seems capable of delivering full HD titles as 30 and even 60 FPS - what more do we need? What elses is on the horizon? Will we get AI stuff that needs spesicalized hardware, or more calculations going on as the result of increased physics calculation - what's in stor, really? What will the next generation have to handle, and when will that be needed?

    My bet is that the current gen is plenty good for at least another 5 years, maybe even longer.

  • NorUraeus #21 2 years ago

    The big question with the next generation console is if either Sony or Microsoft are going to make their next console an upgraded version of their current console. Either generation before has switched CPU types and often radically changes the Game OS. But maybe for the next gen at least one of them will simply get a better CPU, GPU and add more memory and do a GameOS refresh be done with it. Would give them free 100% BC too.

    The historic reason for not doing it, being that game devs would be very tempted to just keep supporting the older platform as that would hit owners of both the new and old console, is still there of course, but the cost of new games and maybe having the competitor 'force' a generation shift could still make it a tempting option.

  • JahB #22 2 years ago

    @Olemak

    there's very, very few games out there that actually run at 1080p60fps. so i'd say there is definitely room for hardware improvement

  • mkreku #23 2 years ago

    I think the only thing the current generation of consoles are really held back by is the amount of RAM. Otherwise they seem to be doing just fine. Perhaps up the Blu-Ray speed to 4x.. and add Blu-Ray to the Xbox 360.

  • ps3owner #24 2 years ago

    since this gen is the "HD" gen... I bet the next gen will be the "3D" gen. so everyone can buy a 3D TV and wonder why it doesn't work as promised.

  • oupe #25 2 years ago

    PS3.5 and X560 are pretty misleading terms. Sony and MS won't be upgrading the core of their machines (motherboard, cpu). Updating them is something else, but the machine still stays a 360 or ps3.

    @JahB
    I really couldn't give a rats ass if a game runs on 720p@60fps, 1080p@60 fps or 649p@40fps. Sure, there is room for improvement but this does not warrant a new gen. A new gen is only justifiable if the total power of the system at least doubles.

    @BadBoyBonner
    No
    Edited by 2 at 28/08/09 @ 12:45

  • Zomoniac #26 2 years ago

    You can already build a PC for less than the price of a PS3 that wipes the floor with it

    If you can build me a PC for under £125 that can do GT5 level details at 1920x1080 I will eat my hat.

  • JonFE #27 2 years ago

    Well, a x360 Natal SKU could very well be a rather significant update before Microsoft rolls out a full successor to the x360...

  • midnight_walker #28 2 years ago

    You can already build a PC for less than the price of a PS3 that wipes the floor with it

    If you can build me a PC for under £125 that can do GT5 level details at 1920x1080 I will eat my hat.

    If you can find me a PS3 for under £125, I'll share it!

  • chessboxer #29 2 years ago

    You can already build a PC for less than the price of a PS3 that wipes the floor with it

    With a Blu-ray drive to watch films as well? The cheapest Blu-ray ROM I can find costs £79.99. That leaves £170 to build the PC and include an OS.

  • Whizzo #30 2 years ago

    While the pricing of a PC that can do everything a PS3 can for less money is rather an exaggeration, BD-ROM drives are at the fifty quid level rather than £80.

    My retail boxed Sony BD-ROM drive only cost me £55 a while back.
    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 13:13

  • Evolution #31 2 years ago

    An Xbox 720 would just be going round in circles... I'll get my coat.

  • Vistrix #32 2 years ago

    I hope Microsoft think of a new name. "Xbox 560" "720" sounds absolutely ridiculous.

  • Alterego-X #33 2 years ago

    A next generation must come soon, as this one is getting boring. No one is interested in playing the same games again, only with different levels, and new backstories.
    People need change. In the past, graphical updates did this, made games interesting again in every 5 years. Now graphics are good enough for the mainstream, so they need to innovate the gameplay with something new, as Nintendo did.

    xbox NATAL could be a real xbox 720, even if it doesnt have better graphics. GRAPHICS DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE!

  • Gastrian #34 2 years ago

    @badboyrunner
    No, just no. New specs would require a new architecture and most devs are not used to that. Console specs are linked closer to the OS than Mac OS's. We are talking the difference in creating games to run on Linux, Unix, Windows and MAC not the difference in creating games to run on a Gefore 9600 and a GTX290

    @Chessboxer
    You aren't looking hard enough http://ww w.ebuyer.com/search?store=2&cat... The first one is 4x Blu-Ray ROM with a DVD-RW for £55 so its faster than the one in the PS3 and more functional.

  • Gastrian #35 2 years ago

    @badboyrunner
    No, just no. New specs would require a new architecture and most devs are not used to that. Console specs are linked closer to the OS than Mac OS's are to their system specs. We are talking the difference in creating games to run on Linux, Unix, Windows and MAC not the difference in creating games to run on a Gefore 9600 and a GTX290

    @Chessboxer
    You aren't looking hard enough http://ww w.ebuyer.com/search?store=2&cat... The first one is 4x Blu-Ray ROM with a DVD-RW for £55 so its faster than the one in the PS3 and more functional.

  • JahB #36 2 years ago

    @oef
    I really couldn't give a rats ass if a game runs on 720p@60fps, 1080p@60 fps or 649p@40fps. Sure, there is room for improvement but this does not warrant a new gen. A new gen is only justifiable if the total power of the system at least doubles.

    from that attitude i take it that you're using an SD TV or you're blind. if you play on a HDTV (32inch and up) you start to see major differences between these resolutions and framerates (there's a world of diff between 30 and 60 fps), so i do care.

    i'd like to see a new generation of consoles where 1080p60fps is standard, so if MS/Sony would bring out a new console in 2 years that does that, i'd buy one in a heartbeat.
    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 13:38

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #37 2 years ago

    It'll be the Xbox 1080. No doubt.

    Duuur-nur-nur-nur nur-nur-nur-nur-nuur
    TEN-AY-DUH
    Duuur-nur-nur-nur nur-nur-nur-nur-nuur
    TEN-AY-DUH...

    Edit: http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=UJ12rCD-Dkk
    Edited by 2 at 28/08/09 @ 13:52

  • DryHeat #38 2 years ago

    PS4 will most probably be 2,3 or 4 faster smaller cells with a more powerful graphics card and 4Gb or more of memory. People seem to forget the PS3 was supposed to be 2 cells and no graphics card so the PS3 was built to handle more than 1 cell.

  • Marshall2008 #39 2 years ago

    @JahB

    Well, considering the sales performance of the Wii you are not going to see a new console from Sony or Microsoft other than hardware revisions for a few years.

    Neither Sony or Microsoft are going to spend money on launching a new console. Instead they are trying to broaden the install base of their current systems by adding new user interfaces such as the PS3 'orb' motion controller and the Natal interface on the 360. If, these new interfaces fail to grow the install base then, and only then, will Microsoft and Sony release new platforms. Even then the new platforms will be more evolutionary than revolutionary.

  • JahB #40 2 years ago

    @Marshall2008

    evolutionary is fine by me, i'm just sick and tired of "next-gen" games that look like PS2 titles.

  • StooMonster #41 2 years ago

    To all the negative voters, what is PS3.5 if it isn't the PS3 Slim?

  • Skurmedel #42 2 years ago

    Tried out BF1943 on my console last night and it's evident that the is not current generation on par with the average gaming PC anymore. But I don't want them to start crapping out new versions with better performance yet. There are still a some years in the existing generation.

    I also don't understand why anybody would want half a generation, that'll just segment all the users.

    Stoo: Something with an actual performance increase?
    Edited by 2 at 28/08/09 @ 14:09

  • ManicDrunkMonk #43 2 years ago

    I don't mind a wait, a lot of the best console games come out at the end of a cycle due to developers being used to the hardware and less worried about being judged on how much of a jump in graphics they can achieve.

    Also means I have to spend less money.

  • StooMonster #44 2 years ago

    Something with an actual performance increase?

    Like Sega with the 32X for the MegaDrive/Genesis? Or the Neptune which was like MegaDrive 1.5 with the 32X hardware built in.

    Personally I don't see that happening, it would split the userbase. If I was a developer would I code for massmarket and all historic units, or do something just for newer hardware with performance increase?

  • Bremenacht #45 2 years ago

    I think we'll hear more industry types coming out and saying stuff like this - almost encouraging the platform owners not to make the next generational leap too soon. Similar arguments (and comments) here and here.

    I'd welcome it. I've got too many unplayed games on 360 and Wii, and I've not even touched a PS3 yet. I'd like to catch up before I'm compelled to move on again.

  • Bremenacht #46 2 years ago

    I don't mind a wait, a lot of the best console games come out at the end of a cycle due to developers being used to the hardware and less worried about being judged on how much of a jump in graphics they can achieve.

    Absolutely. Publishers might also be more inclined to invest more or take more risks if they know they'll be able to make money or re-coup losses over the remaining lifetime of a console.

  • ChoedanKal #47 2 years ago

    Lets go back to calling them 256bit consoles!

    When I was little every kid would argue that their 16bit Mega Drive was stronger than the other kids 16bit SNES.

    Last generation was 128bit. I believe it was the last generation people in the industry and gamers actually talked about their game machines having this and that amount of bits. I miss it...

    I know it is not possible to compare the machines in the same way anymore. It would be hard to argue that the Wii(cube) is 256bit.
    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 14:44

  • chukcyQ #48 2 years ago

    I want a 2048 bit console NAO! Or then again, I'd just like to play _good_ games. Not some technology / engines...

  • Skurmedel #49 2 years ago

    StooMonster, I think we just agreed unintendedly :)

  • StooMonster #50 2 years ago

    Skurmedel: :-)

  • smoothpete #51 2 years ago

    Man in talking bollocks shocker. More at 10.

  • penhalion #52 2 years ago

    Nice way to echo what the general gamer has been saying there Hilleman. Only difference is that the general gamer doesn't get paid a 6 figure sum when they say it.

    Seriously. How many of us here have been saying that we'll see updates to the current machines that pretty much just make the old machine into a new beast. We've already seen evidence of this with the wands and natal. I expect to see a 360 slim with natal bundle at around the same time as natal hit's shelves in stand alone form. I expect to see a new sensor camera unit add-on for the PS3 as soon as the wand is ready to go too.

    Given the capabilities of the two machines. Adding motion control, while not new and exciting as it was when the wii first appeared, will totally re-open the market for the two consoles. The graphics on these new motion games alone will blow the minds of the casual gamers who thought the Wii was so wonderful.

    Next up will be 3D image capabilities (as in 3D tv not new cameras). At that stage a genuine upgraded machines may emerge, which allows for 120hz refreshing and perhsport new graphics chips to handle this. God of War 3D or Gears 3D anyone!

  • BadBoyBonner #53 2 years ago

    An update to the Xbox will probably simply cherry pick DirectX11 functions - DICE ported the Frostbite engine to Directx11 in a few hours...

    [link url=http://www.tweaktown .com/news/13065/battlefield_s_frostbite_engine_ported_to_dx1 1/index.html
    ]http://ww w.tweaktown.com/news/13065/batt...[/link]

    In fact - rather than being a massive pain in the arse to run - the quality of tessellation now available would mean only one model need be generated/used with the hardware handling the rest - seems some of the work will be even easier rather than considerably harder.

    The advent of Dx11 will make a console update much more palatable.

  • EmiliasHorse #54 2 years ago

    Sad fact is this may very well be the last generation I ever bother with. If the industry loses optical drives and kills the highstreet game shops, forcing DRM online purchase I can see me voting with my wallet and not bothering at all.

    On a brighter note, lets enjoy them all while they are here.

  • raion #55 2 years ago

    I'd just like to point out that we very well might have a new PS before the PS3 hits the 10 years. I mean... it's not like the PS2 disappeared into nothingness on the day the PS3 came out. they could release a new console 4 years from now, and still keep the PS3 afloat until it hits it's mark. (and then proceed to rub it in our faces with plenty of charts at each and every gaming convention, hehe.)
    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 16:53

  • Xerx3s #56 2 years ago

    "pc gaming is finished"

    The likes of you have been bleating that for 20 years now and you know what? The PC is still around. I can't say the same for all those consoles that came and went. When those consoles fanboys like you cream in your pants about are long forgotten, PC gaming will still be around.
    It's quite simple, PC gaming offers possibilities that consoles could never aspire to have and it has always been and will always be the birthplace for all gaming and hardware inventions.

    Edited by 1 at 28/08/09 @ 17:46

  • sarcasmoidosis #57 2 years ago

    [link url=http://sarcasticgamer.com/wp/wp -content/uploads/2007/11/happilydyingsince1985.png
    ]http://sa rcasticgamer.com/wp/wp-content/...[/link]

    And yes, I do own a console.

  • smelly #58 2 years ago

    @ChoedanKal : Actually, all three consoles run 256 bit graphics cards.

    So yes, if you're calling the other two "256" bit then you should call the wii it too.

    But then the original xbox had a 256 bit gfx card in it too,.. so that doesnt quite work.

  • rprince #59 2 years ago

    Don't be foolish. Sony's 10 year plans have historically meant 5-7 years between new console releases, but the console will be supported for 10 years, like the PS1 was and PS2 is.

    However, Sony's minimisation of their console has come much earlier in the usual lifecycle. We shouldn't be seeing the PS3 slim until sometime next year.

  • smelly #60 2 years ago

    "However, Sony's minimisation of their console has come much earlier in the usual lifecycle."

    Because it was selling badly and they needed to do soemthing about it.

    I *still* say however the most likely order for new machines are (in order):

    1. Wii plus (wii with motionplus built in, and some other improvements - hd?)
    2. new xbox (smaller with natal packaged/built in)
    3. new playstation

  • MrSpew #61 2 years ago

    @ChoedanKai "Last generation was 128bit"

    Uh, what?

  • Tiel #62 2 years ago

    Why do ppl call then next gen 360 a 720. They went from xbox 1 to 360--a multiple of 360.

    So the next xbox is surely the xbox 129,600.

    As the Americans like to say--do the math!

    :)

    Oh, and PC's will start to look impressive again if the main console manufacturers wait too long.

  • Xerx3s #63 2 years ago

    Donnie: Talking to you is like talking to a brick wall with - if it had them - fingers in it's ears. I'm sure that you are thinking that you are right in lalaland but companies such as blizzard and valve would chuckle. Random fact: The list of games released on the PC last year was larger than all other platforms combined. You could probably still find it on the forum when you get it out of the sand.

    Just for the record, you don't need to build a PC. My non work PC is a default FS pc, it cost me less than 499 on buy date and runs everything to date on near max settings (which is a shitload better than anything consoles could dream) without any tweaks. The purchase price is console territory, the games are far cheaper and the possibilities are far better.

  • raion #64 2 years ago

    pc gaming might not have the same spotlight console gaming has, for multiple reasons I'm not sure we want to go into.
    but, for me, pc gaming is superior to console gaming for one main reason: user generated content.
    console games have yet to start producing the same amount of mods, patches, add-ons that fans of the games happily produce. you're not stuck waiting some developer to release some dlc campaign that could have been in the game since the beginning, but since consoles have internet and hdds now, it's cool to have dlcs. you can go on any site dedicated exclusively to mods, and find a §#!+load of stuff to extend the play value of your game. and that's for single player games. let not us go even into multiplayer ones.
    but on consoles, if you want to mod your games you have to copy it onto the pc, mod it, burn it, and modify your console to be able to play it (infringing some warranties along the way). and what is the most popular mod for console games? custom tracks in guitar hero. oh. awesome.
    lastly, little big planet. finally! a console game driven by user generated content. but the fact remains that it's not a game. it's a level editor. you buy a level editor and read on the box "now YOU make your own game! exciting, huh?". well, yes. but on the pc we had that sort of thing for decades. the thing is, we also had a game with the editor. damn I miss jetpack.

  • Rodchenko #65 2 years ago

    i have a friend who works in the upper echelons of the msoft r+ d group ... i am only sharing these facts here on condition that you keep it to yourselves fellow EGs. thanks(donnie is not my really name btw)

    I have a friend who works in the upper echelons of Skynet's R&D department and he just told me that your buddy at MS will have to be laid off for spilling the beans on the BR thing. I am sorry, but I *really* don't know how he found out.

    By the way, I am shocked and disappointed that donnie080208 isn't your real name. Didn't see that one coming. How could you have possibly mislead us for this long?

  • dirk_aircool #66 2 years ago

    donnie . DON'T WORRY ,NO ONE WILL EVEN THINK ABOUT TELLING ANYBODY WHAT YOU SAID . your mates job, at the upper bits of MS R+D dept is safe . I bet a million people work there so MS will never find the guy who is committing industrial espionage .

  • canIdoyabombsforya #67 2 years ago

    mkreku needs to go back to maths school. The Gamecube only sold 10 million.

  • Vedder #68 2 years ago

    I want a PS PI :)

  • Kerome #69 2 years ago

    Well, blu-ray has been out there for 3 years, and it's only just doubled from 2007... that means that it -may- overtake DVDs by 2016... I wouldn't hold my breath.

    Anyway, seeing as Sony is forcing a per-disk royalty on the rest of the industry for using blu-ray, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a number of people pushing the HD download angle. That doesn't mean it will work commercially, though a decision to move to the Steam model of tying movies to an account which is player-independent would definitiely help.
    Edited by 1 at 30/08/09 @ 10:40

  • KingPepper41 #70 2 years ago

    Personally rather than a new console called the 560 or 720, i would like to see a Keyboard & mouse setup, officially released for the first person shooters on the platform, as this console is dominated by them, as well as project natel of which i am looking forward to using.
    Another point that i must make is that these XBOX consoles are being released too fast, as in the case of the 360, it was not tested enough to see if it would suffer from overheating, resulting in the RROD problems, hopefully Microsoft will of learnt there lesson there, so from now on, they should take a leaf out of Sony's book & slow down, make a quality machine which is stable & quiet, so we can all enjoy our gaming more.

  • sanctusmortis #71 2 years ago

    IIRC, the second Xbox became the 360 as "it's a complete revolution". It was a sort of cheeky swipe at Nintendo's Project Revolution, IMO. So 720 would make no sense, and it'll be the Xbox *buzzword*.

  • MENTAL1ST Verified Senior Software Engineer, Picsel UK Ltd. #72 2 years ago

    It's Xbox 360 rather than Xbox 2, because Microsoft didn't want the competition to seem 'one louder', as the saying goes. Adding '60' and a weak marketing-speak justification is just an excuse for them to make their machine have 3 after its title, just like Playstation 3 does.

    If they're going to number the next console, then I'd guess it'd have to be 1080. Firstly, it follows on with the extrame-sports connotations of 360. Secondly, one of the selling points of the console will surely be that it would initially run all of its games at 1080p (just as they mandated that all 360 games should use 720p, until they abandoned the restriction due to having to grant so many exceptions).

    I'd give it 50:50 that the next xbox will be called 1080, or some word, rather than a number.

  • Lukey__b #73 2 years ago

    Blu-ray won't be around for long. Certainly not in the way DVD is/has been. With the success of platforms like Steam and XBLA, I wouldn't be surprised if they ditch physical media altogether. You can get a 500 gig (think its 500, its massive anyway) memory stick now, in a few years when the next gen is out memory is not going to be a problem. Plus net speeds are getting faster and faster.

    I can already see gamers going into HMV, going up to the games booth, inserting their memory card and purchasing a new game to take home..... then leave the store before fiirng up their antigrav boots.

  • music626 #74 2 years ago

    dudes the next console will totally be the xbox36wii