DISCover article on ZDnet

**Blaine** · 01 Aug 2003, 12:48 PM

I hate the concept of the highend/lowend consoles and inherantly distrust any business plan that utilizes this in an important manner.

The GameCube and Q, for example, aren't highend/lowend for my topic because they both play the same games. They are essentially the same game console. Ditto for the Turbo Duo and the Turbo Grafx 16. You can add a RAM card and CD-ROM and have a Duo.

But from the sound of this, they're going to have a more powerful and more expensive unit. Unless they're charging the buyer an additional $400 for an 80gb hard drive.

Why I think that's a bad idea:

Have you ever noticed console games look so good? I mean, compared to your average PC game a high end console game has amazing graphics.

What's more, if you look at the specs on a console, it's nowhere near as powerful as a PC.

But the games look as good if not better.

This is because when you develop a console game you have a very specific set of specs to fullfill. You know exactly how fast the machine is, exactly how much RAM it has. Each console is identical to every other one in the world. You have a predictable outcome for all players.

Not so with PCs. A developer has to design the game to run on a myriad of hardware configurations. A variety of software setups as well. Top this off with, when they are actually making the game they're designing it to run on what they anticipate the average computer will be when they finish it a year or two later. So they're designing it for a computer that doesn't really exist.

Alright, so the difference here may just be a faster processor, maybe a better GPU. Minor differences.

While it may not be a scientific fact, most will agree that a game developed for PS2, Xbox and GameCube all at once will usually be slightly inferior to a game that was designed exclusively. Some times this is because the game is created to play consistantly across all 3 platforms. Which means they sort of have to tailor it for the lowest powered unit (PS2) and then they can up the polycounts and texture sizes for the other two versions.

The end result can be a really good looking and good playing game. But out of all the consoles, it can be argued that the games that utilize the hardware the best (graphics wise, audio wise...etc) are usually games designed exclusively for that console.

So my long winded point is this: Creating a console that exists in two different incarnations, with actual performance-effecting differences, means that either you'll have to design a game that will run on both (which my non-scientific bullshit has shown, often isn't as good as an exclusive game) or even worse, games that will only run on the high end machine. I don't think they'd do the later, that's just stupid.

But why even bother with the high end machine?

What else are they going to do? Just not try to utilize the extra power of the $699 machine? Way to alienate the ones spending the most money on your machine. Make games that will only play on the $699 machine? Way to alienate most of your consumers.

I don't like this at all. Any time I see this, it strikes me as a poorly thought out solution to the cost/power ideal.

Then again, I may be just rambling more than normal. Maybe they will be charging you $400 extra dolars for a 120 GB hard drive.

**Mzo** · 01 Aug 2003, 01:01 PM

He hasn't done anything yet to deserve it. If you're going to throw around banstick notions, please at least supply concrete evidence as to why it should be used.

No ,no, no, no, no! Didn't you read his introductory post to the boards??

I was just referencing his proclamations of being banned from other forum sites, and was like "Oh, now I see why!" as a joke.

I guess if you missed the "Here Comes a New Challenger" post, it doesn't make much sense.

Trust me, I'm the last person to suggest ANYBODY be banned. Hell, I was even sad to see Zidane go!
:-P

PS - haha, "understanned." I think I'm drunk today.

**Lhadatt** · 01 Aug 2003, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by Mzo

No ,no, no, no, no! Didn't you read his introductory post to the boards??

I was just referencing his proclamations of being banned from other forum sites, and was like "Oh, now I see why!" as a joke.

OH! I got it now.

**REIROM** · 01 Aug 2003, 01:37 PM

who are the mods of this forum?

i dont do nothing,i dont said i write the article

seems here have many ga kind of ban for no reason

if i dont have freedom speak here
i quit here for my self

**Joust Williams** · 01 Aug 2003, 01:42 PM

Where did you get your English degree from? You said you got one in another thread.

**Jeremy** · 01 Aug 2003, 01:43 PM

Thanks for changing the thread title so it makes sense, whoever did it.

JM · 01 Aug 2003, 01:47 PM

Originally Posted by REIROM

who are the mods of this forum?

i dont do nothing,i dont said i write the article

seems here have many ga kind of ban for no reason

if i dont have freedom speak here
i quit here for my self

You haven't been banned, that was just a misunderstanding. Carry on, & don't leave.

JM