Next Generation of Consoles Expected to Come Out in 2028

[Moonface]

With the current FTC hearing over Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard there's been a fair amount of things coming out from the case as they occur, and while a lot of it is just being reported for the sake of riding the wave of interest the overall case has I just saw this report from IGN about how in the court documents Microsoft stated they expect the next generation of consoles to start in 2028: https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-e...ut-in-2028

I hadn't seen before this that another document from the same hearing had Sony on record saying "it does not expect its next-generation PlayStation to come out until at least 2027".

Depending on which year it would be, both the PS5 and Xbox Series X/S would have been out for 7-8 years by that point, which would be more or less the same length of time that the PS4 and Xbox One were out for before their successors released. So I'm curious what folks think about another 8 year lifespan for PlayStation and Xbox and whether or not anyone would want the gap to be shorter like it was in the earlier console generations where it would be like 6 years or so between console releases.


7 years for me would be the absolute maximum I'd like for a console lifespan just because the last generation dragged on a little bit too long I think, but I won't be surprised for it to be 7-8 years given the slow start for this generation for Sony and Microsoft due to the console shortages that were happening around the PS5 and Xbox Series X/S releases. If that shortage hadn't happened I wouldn't be surprised if both companies considered a 6-7 year lifespan instead of a 7-8. I did consider that the last generation introduced that mid-generation upgrade idea but while it lets games run better it still holds things back because everything still has to run on the base models whereas a brand new console generation lets developers choose to focus just on that and push their games further.

So what are your thoughts on the expectation that the 10th generation won't start until 2027/2028?

P.S. I know Nintendo will technically start it first (since they're probably announcing a new console next year) but their release schedule is so out of sync now that they've single-handedly made it that console generations basically start within singular companies now rather than across the board like they used to.

[Mr EliteL]

Switch was...'17 or '16? I suppose it will be about time for a new one next year but darn it feels too soon because I've barely played on my Switch for the last few years and not really keen to get a new one just yet. I need to play on it again, geez.

'28 for the rest sounds fine, yeah because of the slow start. Hope they don't have similar problem next gen. I doubt I'll get any on their release like Switch/PS5 I didn't until like 2 years in or something.

[Moonface]

Switch was...'17 or '16? I suppose it will be about time for a new one next year but darn it feels too soon because I've barely played on my Switch for the last few years and not really keen to get a new one just yet. I need to play on it again, geez.

'28 for the rest sounds fine, yeah because of the slow start. Hope they don't have similar problem next gen. I doubt I'll get any on their release like Switch/PS5 I didn't until like 2 years in or something.

Well I expect it'll be announced next year and either gets released Holiday 2024 or has an early 2025 launch. To me the recent Direct pretty much showed the system is at the end of its run as every single game announced is a 2023 release except for the Untitled Princess Peach game, and I can't see Nintendo choosing to do a Direct that reveals a load of brand new first party games coming to Switch in 2024.

I doubt there'll be hardware shortages with the next generation of consoles since as far as I'm aware those issues have more or less resolved themselves by now with the current consoles for all the console companies (Nintendo were affected by it too, but it didn't hurt them as badly since the Switch wasn't new), and I'd imagine any of the big three will have figured out backup plans for any such event happening again. Not necessarily a backup that helps avoid a console shortage, but just something that doesn't harm their overall momentum or income.

What I'm most curious about is what the big "thing" will be for the next PlayStation/Xbox since load times are basically as fast as they'll ever get, and stronger hardware for better graphics/frame rate is a given and not really something that by itself tends to be viewed as a generational leap anymore like it was back in the 5th/6th/7th gens. Not that I necessarily need or want the next generation of consoles to have some massive leap forward in something over the current consoles, but with the mid-generation upgrades that Sony and Microsoft did with PS4/XBO it doesn't really seem like just making a console with more power is going to be enough by itself to justify a PS6/XB? unless the generation lasts so long that current hardware is clearly dated enough to not be able to keep putting new games onto it.

[Dragon Lord]

P.S. I know Nintendo will technically start it first (since they're probably announcing a new console next year) but their release schedule is so out of sync now that they've single-handedly made it that console generations basically start within singular companies now rather than across the board like they used to.

I don't know if I'd say that Nintendo is going to start the next Generation. I'd say more so they are just very, very late to the current generation and will be ending it right before Sony/Microsoft are starting the next generation. 

Anyways, this is a fine amount of time for the PS5 to last. I'd actually be okay with them squeezing a couple of more years out of it and making the lifespan go 10 years honestly. I'm in no rush for the PS6 to arrive.

[Moonface]

P.S. I know Nintendo will technically start it first (since they're probably announcing a new console next year) but their release schedule is so out of sync now that they've single-handedly made it that console generations basically start within singular companies now rather than across the board like they used to.

I don't know if I'd say that Nintendo is going to start the next Generation. I'd say more so they are just very, very late to the current generation and will be ending it right before Sony/Microsoft are starting the next generation. 

Anyways, this is a fine amount of time for the PS5 to last. I'd actually be okay with them squeezing a couple of more years out of it and making the lifespan go 10 years honestly. I'm in no rush for the PS6 to arrive.

Yeah, where Nintendo lies is screwed up due to the Switch having to release earlier than probably intended to salvage the disaster that was the Wii U, and it seems to vary on where people view the Switch in terms of generations. Personally I consider it 9th gen because it was the successor to the Wii U which was 8th gen, but Wikipedia lists both systems as 8th gen which would make Switch 2 a latecomer to the 9th gen party by that standard. If not for the Switch release messing with their console release timing they probably wouldn't have their console releases so far removed now from Sony and Microsoft but if they had still released the Switch before the PS5/XBO (but with a much smaller time gap) then they would probably still end up putting out their next system before PS6/XB?.
The way I try to view it now is Nintendo will have their 10th generation console out first (10th gen in terms of lineage rather than timing against other companies), but the overall 10th gen won't start really until Sony and Microsoft enter that fray. If Nintendo ever managed to keep a singular console going for so long they could re-align their releases with the other big two I doubt anyone would call whatever Nintendo console comes out at that point a member of the previous generation and would instead group it in with the new PlayStation/Xbox consoles due to all three being back in alignment for releases.


The more I've thought about it, I don't really mind if PS5 lasts for 8 years or so, just as long as the only reason it does is because games are not being severely limited by it. I feel like the PS4 went a little bit too long and could've ended a year earlier since it seemed pretty apparent to me that developers were really getting restricted by the limits of the hardware by that point.

[Dragon Lord]

Yeah, it's kind of hard to place Nintendo when in terms of console power/ability, they feel a generation behind, or more. Even if their next system released along with the PS6/Xbust, it'd feel more along the lines of PS4/XOne in terms of ability.

Maybe we just put Nintendo on a separate level. Example: While Sony/MS are on Gen 10, Nintendo will be on Gen 9.5, haha.

[Moonface]

Yeah, it's kind of hard to place Nintendo when in terms of console power/ability, they feel a generation behind, or more. Even if their next system released along with the PS6/Xbust, it'd feel more along the lines of PS4/XOne in terms of ability.

Funny you say this because I saw a report that the next Nintendo console has power equivalent to a PS4/XBO.

[Dragon Lord]

Yeah, I figured that would be the case for Nintendo. It's going to be interesting to see how third parties start treating Nintendo when they're going to be running PS4/Xbone level tech while the PS6 will be doing who knows what. Eventually it's going to get to the point where a game is just not going to be able to run on Nintendo's hardware without extreme cuts made to the quality, and I feel like some third-parties might just not find it worth the hassle to release games on Nintendo systems any more.

Obviously that won't affect Nintendo too much though, since their bread and butter has always been their first-party titles and they can easily get by with just those alone. Though hopefully during their next generation, they might also get after some of their first-party partners and make sure they are actually putting enough quality into their games and aren't releasing messes that don't get cleaned up *coughGameFreakcough*.

[Moonface]

Yeah, I figured that would be the case for Nintendo. It's going to be interesting to see how third parties start treating Nintendo when they're going to be running PS4/Xbone level tech while the PS6 will be doing who knows what. Eventually it's going to get to the point where a game is just not going to be able to run on Nintendo's hardware without extreme cuts made to the quality, and I feel like some third-parties might just not find it worth the hassle to release games on Nintendo systems any more.

A friend of mine who's getting married tomorrow and works in game development told me just yesterday that developing for the Switch is not fun, and not even just because of the limited power but also that apparently Nintendo just don't always give developers access to the full API that their internal teams have which means the extra tools they could have to port their game onto the Switch better just aren't available to them, and a lot of teams will simply not spend the time to achieve that same result using workarounds because of the time and cost it would involve. Of course that issue would exist even if Nintendo had a console on par to the others, but when they're already putting a limit on developers it isn't really helping if they're then putting another limit on developers by keeping stuff to themselves that could be beneficial to third parties.