Square Enix: Next gen of consoles need lots of RAM

I don't see the consoles getting much more memory, and one reason i've never cared for them. No keybaord, unless you go out an pay extra, and then awkward to use with a game controller too... So what is the point. For controls i much prefer a joystick/mouse and keyboard, or better yet one of the old side winder command controllers, then rocked, i own in FPS's...

4 gig at the least I reckon prefer console gaming to PC myself.

I reckon we'll be lucky to see 2gb of RAM.
Shame really as the way prices are right now it could hardly be much cheaper.
If they do push the boat out & go with 3 or 4gbs then, if talk of the expected CPUs & GPUs is accurate, I reckon the next round of consoles could be very decent.

Somebozo.....

Little USB keyboards cost next to nothing these days.....and some people (raised on consoles) are always going to find a console controller better than mouse & keyboard.

Quote:

---

Little USB keyboards cost next to nothing these days.....and some people (raised on consoles) are always going to find a console controller better than mouse & keyboard.

---

Ty, I was just going to say the reasons consoles do not have keyboards is because they have USB ports now. Back in the earlier days of consoles Dreamcast and up have had compatible keyboards.

I find that it depends on the gaming experience you have what would suit better. I would rather a controller for games like Mario. Games like Diablo, and strategy games like Civ I prefer mouse and keyboard. FPS a lot of people prefer the precision of a mouse, (and I do have a gaming mouse), but again it depends on the FPS for me (Fallout, Borderlands, etc. = controller while Call of Duty and other more serious army FPS = keyboard/mouse)

To each their own in the end of things.

Now as for RAM, Sqaure has a point, it would need a lot. However companies don't slap a lot of RAM in their consoles to help keep the MRSP down. Especially on launch the proto-type of the consoles could see a lot of ram, then about half of it is out the window to save on costs once consumers realize what it would cost them.

Either way I fear the next generation is going to leave the hardcore gamers behind which is why I spent a lot on my PC. All the motion controlling augmented reality crap, just isn't for me. I can see how next gen of kids would be into that, but I like my games old school.

I agree with brockie 4gb is a good amount. They should stop being cheap on parts that are very cheap now like ram. They want there consoles to last several years yet wonder why 4-5 years in most devs hit a wall on newer games. I don't think it would cost all that much extra to be honest they are buying in massive bulk and should be getting it very cheap.

They been needing more ram for about 10 years now.....

just out of curiosity but why dont you all just buy and install your own ram or else pay a proffesional to do it

Originally posted by will6:

---

just out of curiosity but why dont you all just buy and install your own ram or else pay a proffesional to do it

---

Are you being sarcastic? I think you just didn't read the article. But sure I will take your advise and have a tech come over tomorrow and upgrade my Xbox 360's ram. Thanks, I never thought of this idea before. Well now every other guy on the block with a 360 is going to be jealous. While he does that I think I will go ahead and upgrade the outdated GPU as well, might stuff a top of the line GTX 690 in there. Wow all these people just fools thinking every 5-10 years they had to go buy a new console to get better hardware. When all along you could upgrade it yourself, you my man are smart.

The ram was always a problem and I can see it being a problem with these new consoles again.

I sold my ps3 a few weeks ago because I couldn't get used to the cartoony graphics in all ps3 games and just went back to playing pc games and the graphics are 100 times better plus i'm a keyboard and mouse gamer, just couldn't get use to the gamepad. This desktop pc is an xps 630i 3.2gb ram geforce 9800GTX+ core 2 duo 2.4ghz overclocked to 3.2ghz and it still plays all new games at 1080p maxed perfectly so i won't be falling for these new consoles with little ram again as the pc will always have better quality graphics, what's the point.

lmao I think the purpose of the console was to make it convenient to play games rather than worrying about having to add more hardware to it. Controller's are centralized versus all the buttons on the keyboard. That's why I like it.

Originally posted by will6:

---

just out of curiosity but why dont you all just buy and install your own ram or else pay a proffesional to do it

---

use to be able to do that with ram and cpu in xbox 1.hasnt been done in any other consoles and the parts arn't compatible in other consoles.

well the xbox 360 ram is only 512mb and game developers do a great job with it, so really no more then 2gb ram would be needed.
Tablets are coming with about 1gb so i would expect 2gb in the next console's and that will be more then enough.
My pc which is 450gts can handle the next gen demos at around 30 frames and the next gen consoles will be better then this at the full 60(game company aim for 60fps so no unexpected slow downs)

The standard pc for gaming on the market is just over 450gts mark which cost around £90, the GTX 680 is a £400 card alone which not many people have sitting inside their pc's(you have to be realistic) so there is no "lets play catch up" as not many people are not even above 560ti cards which cost around £140.
Over 60million xbox 360's have been sold so even if catch up did exist there is much profit to be made.

Next remember consoles are not bloated down like a pc,so therefor the games will run much smoother with less hardware which cost less.
The console is also much cheaper as the graphic card etc used will be bought in huge bulk/wholesale deals saving even more money.

In the end the console will still pull of the same effects on lower hardware at a much cheaper cost then a pc. And frankly a console does not have to play rival with a pc as 60million+ sales from the predecessor means a pretty profit will still be made.
Company's just want your money at the end.

Originally posted by VGenscher:

---

well the xbox 360 ram is only 512mb and game developers do a great job with it, so really no more then 2gb ram would be needed.
Tablets are coming with about 1gb so i would expect 2gb in the next console's and that will be more then enough.

---

Meh mediocre results are mediocre...they are forced to use minimalistic ram which drags the industry down... IMO


4GB would be best and yield much better results

you still need consoles......not very socialble with just a pc gaming you need a balance of both.

Gigs of ram weren't required till AFTER the systems came out. Just like in computers. Xp ran fine on 512. Vista ran fine on 1gb.

Originally posted by JGJD2001:

---

you still need consoles......not very socialble with just a pc gaming you need a balance of both.

---

Agreed, some games play better on the PC and some on the consoles, and i find most of the games i play are much better on PC's, but that is relative only to the games i play.

There was an RTS game i really liked and was ruined when the company ported it to a console game. I completely understand why they did it, mainly to have as much of a single source with only necessary changes as needed per the platform...

I would say games on consoles need to be simplified more because of the controller, while some games are really geared towards consoles, my favorite arcade game is terrible on a PC and best on a console.

All to often people want to be all or nothing and no room for compromise and want to agree some games are simply better on different platforms.

Well they better sort the jaggies out this time on both xbox 8 and ps4 and have it mandatory that all games have at least 4x antiailiasing because the ps3 was like jaggyville. 8x AA would be superb and i don't know why they don't integrate this properly into these new consoles and as was said 4gb ram so developers can run wild with the graphics. Everytime i see a game with jaggies i go nuts so it will be interesting to see will this be a thing of the past with these new consoles, well i hope so and then i might decide some day to purchase one as the consoles as we all know have some really great titles.

Microsoft and sony.....Sort those jaggies out will ye.

it will be at least 8gb. even 16 gigs is just average..32gb is good..

I'd be surprised if the next Xbox/PS4 had more than 2GB RAM. Besides, most devs that want tons of RAM are usually lazy ones that love bloatware. There are reasons other than cost that RAM is kept to a minimum in consoles.

Originally posted by stardata:

---

The ram was always a problem and I can see it being a problem with these new consoles again.

I sold my ps3 a few weeks ago because I couldn't get used to the cartoony graphics in all ps3 games and just went back to playing pc games and the graphics are 100 times better plus i'm a keyboard and mouse gamer, just couldn't get use to the gamepad. This desktop pc is an xps 630i 3.2gb ram geforce 9800GTX+ core 2 duo 2.4ghz overclocked to 3.2ghz and it still plays all new games at 1080p maxed perfectly so i won't be falling for these new consoles with little ram again as the pc will always have better quality graphics, what's the point.

---

I see your point and then again, your point is sort of weak. PC systems only have better graphics, because, well, we install better graphics cards. In order to have state of the art graphics in my machine, I installed a 400.00 graphics card. Had I installed a cheaper one, say, 59 bucks then I would have been arguing that my graphics experience was pretty terrible.

Really there is no reason to compare a console to a PC. We build our Pcs and customize them to our likings. If I want to spend out $4,000.00 on a PC, as I have in the past, then I can if that creates the ultimate PC experience. I am limited to what the manufacturer of a console can give me. So, it's like comparing football to archery, it doesn't make sense.

Originally posted by stardata:

---

Well they better sort the jaggies out this time on both xbox 8 and ps4 and have it mandatory that all games have at least 4x antiailiasing because the ps3 was like jaggyville. 8x AA would be superb and i don't know why they don't integrate this properly into these new consoles and as was said 4gb ram so developers can run wild with the graphics. Everytime i see a game with jaggies i go nuts so it will be interesting to see will this be a thing of the past with these new consoles, well i hope so and then i might decide some day to purchase one as the consoles as we all know have some really great titles.

Microsoft and sony.....Sort those jaggies out will ye.

---

Why on earth would they do that? Now, com'on, let us be real. If they did that now, what will they do in 2023? They hold back just to give you later. Just like an artist who creates a music CD and holds better songs for later CD's then gives you 2 good songs with 9 crappy ones.

Oh, and though I have two PCs that blow my xbox and ps3 out of the water, I would never sell either console. It just seems ludicrous to me. There are games which I will ONLY play on the consoles. I am still sitting on my Dreamcast, sega, genesis, and nintendo64, and my old original Nintendo.

my computer is still running a hd4550 graphics card from 2 years ago and 4gbs ram.The only thing ive had trouble running on my pc was needforspeed shift 2 which was a terrible game anyway.consoles are optimised for gaming and have less multitasking.decent graphics card and 4gbs of ram should be fine in my opinion for a console.

After playing quake 3 and kingpin back in the good ol pc days (when 350mhz cpu's were the bollox), I found fps using a joypad very difficult, but gradually adjusted, and now appreciate the convenient placement of buttons.
But 1 thing I always wondered is why the consoles have such poor ram, I mean, I know it's not like a pc which needs a big drain on ram like windows running in the background but still, the cost would be so tiny for such a big improvement, it's like they could even add it onto the cost of the console, if u had to pay 310 instead of 300 who would really care, people wouldn't say "I'm not buying that at 10 extra" they just buy regardless.

So here is a thought and just a thought at this:

Video game companies have been replacing the old outdated machines with new ones, and PC gamers have always had a small leg to stand on because they can upgrade at will as the necessity arose.

But what if console creators built 90% of the parts for their consoles themselves? Rather than go out and buy it, wouldnt it make some sense for them to be able to allow for bigger systems with better things, like a PC in the way of customizing the machine to your liking, but also allowing those who want to spend big bucks for more bells the ability to do such, and those who cant dont have to. The HDD has been customizable but im talking the machine itself, like a PC. Just my two cents.

Originally posted by SomeBozo:

---

I don't see the consoles getting much more memory, and one reason i've never cared for them. No keybaord, unless you go out an pay extra, and then awkward to use with a game controller too... So what is the point. For controls i much prefer a joystick/mouse and keyboard, or better yet one of the old side winder command controllers, then rocked, i own in FPS's...

---

um the little keyboard on the xbox 360 controller is just as good as a regular keyboard it actually makes the controller feel better on your hands

Originally posted by djkorn:

---

So here is a thought and just a thought at this:

Video game companies have been replacing the old outdated machines with new ones, and PC gamers have always had a small leg to stand on because they can upgrade at will as the necessity arose.

But what if console creators built 90% of the parts for their consoles themselves? Rather than go out and buy it, wouldnt it make some sense for them to be able to allow for bigger systems with better things, like a PC in the way of customizing the machine to your liking, but also allowing those who want to spend big bucks for more bells the ability to do such, and those who cant dont have to. The HDD has been customizable but im talking the machine itself, like a PC. Just my two cents.

---

It would probably take 10 years to recoup on economies of scale. Im not sure how long it would take company A to recoup from hiringr specialist or employeeing specialist on a permanent basis. It is much cheaper to outsource for the immediate time period.

Originally posted by djkorn:

---

So here is a thought and just a thought at this:

Video game companies have been replacing the old outdated machines with new ones, and PC gamers have always had a small leg to stand on because they can upgrade at will as the necessity arose.

But what if console creators built 90% of the parts for their consoles themselves? Rather than go out and buy it, wouldnt it make some sense for them to be able to allow for bigger systems with better things, like a PC in the way of customizing the machine to your liking, but also allowing those who want to spend big bucks for more bells the ability to do such, and those who cant dont have to. The HDD has been customizable but im talking the machine itself, like a PC. Just my two cents.

---

what do you mean by build parts.to manufactor a pc motherboard after you have purchased all the components that would cost thousands alone then you have to solder them to the board.the reason pcs and consoles are so cheap is everythings done in bulk.