_{^{PS3's add-on hardware, such as PlayTV, showed how the functionality of existing hardware can be augmented}}

It’s important to note that Nintendo’s position is very different to that of Sony and Microsoft. Cash-rich and powerful with publishers, Nintendo can afford to build a new console. But Pachter is adamant that ‘Wii HD’ will only match the power of PS3 and 360. “They always had the plan to get some traction with Wii and then bring out Wii HD. I don’t know if it’s end 2010 or a year later, but it’s coming,” he tells us. Wii HD would be a canny business move. Publishers and developers are increasingly comfortable releasing games for current-generation technology, having reduced costs and streamlined production processes. And with Nintendo able to build a system that’s straightforward for developers to port their 360 and PS3 games from, and to, it would be an easy sell to ensure that principal game licences like FIFA, Tiger Woods, Call Of Duty, Guitar Hero and GTA appear on it from its earliest days on sale.

Such a console can only delay any wishes from game-makers to move to a new generation. Publishers have put massive investments into producing games for today’s hardware, and the prospect of ramping up production for a new generation, and the starting-from-scratch installed base that would entail – cannot be attractive. Developers are in a similar position. “360 and PS3 are awesome pieces of kit,” says Bizarre Creations’ Martyn Chudley. “Personally, I’m very happy where we are, with good levels of performance, a mature tool chain and engine, and a very stable user experience, particularly with Live on 360. And, obviously, a nice, healthy userbase.”

Having developed games for PlayStation and Dreamcast, and launch games for both Xbox and 360, Chudley has ample experience of what it means to ramp up production for a new generation. “Trying to make a game with no tool chain or engine and not knowing what the new platform is capable of is a complete pain,” he says. “Making games for hardware launch is like trying to build the brakes of a car from leftover bits of old cars, all while you and the car are hurtling towards the edge of a cliff. Speaking for myself, I’d like to stick with the current hardware for at least another two or three rounds of games.”

One platform, however, isn’t a slave to generational change. With new graphics cards and CPUs being released every month, PCs have always provided a technical benchmark for consoles to aspire to. But with the highest-specification PC already running a game like Crysis at fantastical resolutions and with the benefits of DirectX 10-fuelled graphical effects, consoles are already falling significantly behind. In three years, might the kind of people who buy the first consoles of a new generation have gravitated towards PC for their thrills?


_{^{Projects like OnLive remove the whole idea of having a console in the first place}}

Pachter is clear that it’s not relevant, saying: “PC games are such a small slice of the overall business now that it’s almost irrelevant if there’s a quality difference.” But it’s a complex question, not least because of the changes that PC gaming is currently undergoing. PC technology leaders are emphasising other uses for hardware power, seeing GPUs as ideal for such computationally intensive tasks as AI and physics. In relation to the fear that graphics would therefore take a hit, Roy Taylor of Nvidia told us last year: “If we’ve got the baseline graphics at a point where people say that that’s good enough, then no. I think we’re getting to a point where baseline graphics are somewhere around Crysis and that’s pretty damn good. What we need is not more photorealism, but more going on.” Could developers continue to create games that can take advantage of this power and also easily be ported to the current generation of consoles? Might a gulf in power be harmful to the ongoing development of games on PC?

Going back to hardcore console gamers, though, is this notional group actually big enough to make an impression on hardware strategy? “Now we are working with Activision we have to think broader, and the hardcore audience is just too few in numbers,” says Chudley. “To survive as a studio of over 200 people we have to pay the bills, and even selling a million units of a title these days just doesn’t cover the costs – so we have to look beyond the hardcore.” Pachter, however, wonders whether it really exists at all: “Hardcore gamers always want something new, but do they really care whether GTAV plays on a new console or one they’ve already got? Most people would just rather it be a better game – when God Of War II came out, how many people questioned whether it could really be a PS2 game? Every game is going to get better on existing hardware.”

All the while, however, the idea of consoles as they currently exist is being eroded. It might be difficult to imagine forthcoming streaming game services like OnLive, David Perry’s Gaikai and AMD’s Otoy project practically implemented on existing broadband infrastructure, but their potential can’t be ignored. “The concept is logical,” Perry tells us. “We buy the highest end, so the hardware is far more expensive than anybody could normally buy, and finally your gaming experience moves where the world is at. Conceptually, would you rather have a machine sit on your shelf for six to eight years with dust all over it before you can taste the next level? Or would you rather move with the times? Me, I’d rather experience it.”

And then there’s Apple. Pachter admits that he knows no one at the company, but believes that it makes sense for it to build on the success of iPhone and create a living-room computer that plays media (Apple TV style), supports Skype-like internet phone and video calls, and runs applications according to principles set by the App Store, all using similar technology to what Apple is already selling in its MacBooks. It wouldn’t represent a new generation, but it could cause for consoles the reshuffling of attitudes that iPhone has done for handhelds.

The only thing that’s sure right now is that never before has so much money been at stake or the market so large and complex. Quite which party – manufacturers or game producers – has the guiding hand in when the next generation hits is unclear. But for the next three or four years at least, they will rely on the game-buying public to continue supporting what’s already out, allowing them to finally capitalise on the heavy investments they’ve made for it. “The consumer doesn’t change his behaviour until he knows something else is coming out,” says Pachter. If he’s right, we’ll just have to wait until the big players are good and ready, busying ourselves with only makeovers and other enhancements in the meantime.

This is an edited version of an article that originally appeared in E203.
Like what you’ve read? Buy your copy of Edge now for £4.50 and get it delivered to your door (UK and Europe only).
www.myfavouritemagazines.co.uk/gamesradarshop