One Console Future

[Low]

I'm fine with the PS3/360 hanging out for another 5 years and a world where Nintendo would stick with portables and shift away from the home market. This....

I am ready for a new console/generation. Even the best PS3 games start to look the same

is a issue of creativity, the tech specs are still adequate. Besides what are developers going to supplement their multi-billion dollars projects with? DL titles will get more expensive as well and this gen is sucking every back catalog for quick DL cash or as HD collections.

[Nash]

I used to be against this idea, but now I don't even care. I have both a PS3 and an Xbox 360, but I really only play the latter. I haven't turned on my PS3 since Metal Gear Solid 4. Plus, with the direction gaming seems to be headed (e.g. DLC, DRM, etc.), I'm not even sure if I want to be a part of that. At least there's the backlog.

[Shou]

I totally support this as I have mentioned many times before, provided it's a standard where anyone can make hardware and not a monopoly.

3DO! Only 30 years ahead of its time, conceptually.

[Frogacuda]

What do you smoke? Google is 10 billion times worse than MS. Nobody just wants to admit it.

Google offers incredible services for no money. It's really hard to argue with that, even if it's frightening how much shit they're into as a result.

[Drewbacca]

They're all just big invasive tech companies.

Google is desperately looking to make in-roads in to the content management side of things, not simply the organizing of that data. The browser / world wide web are in decline. I can see that statement about Google moving in being completely realistic (this is the main reason that they're already doing it with Android).

This is not a trivial distinction. Over the past few years, one of the most important shifts in the digital world has been the move from the wide-open Web to semiclosed platforms that use the Internet for transport but not the browser for display. It’s driven primarily by the rise of the iPhone model of mobile computing, and it’s a world Google can’t crawl, one where HTML doesn’t rule. And it’s the world that consumers are increasingly choosing, not because they’re rejecting the idea of the Web but because these dedicated platforms often just work better or fit better into their lives (the screen comes to them, they don’t have to go to the screen). The fact that it’s easier for companies to make money on these platforms only cements the trend. Producers and consumers agree: The Web is not the culmination of the digital revolution.

[Frogacuda]

They're all just big invasive tech companies.

Google is desperately looking to make in-roads in to the content management side of things, not simply the organizing of that data. The browser / world wide web are in decline. I can see that statement about Google moving in being completely realistic (this is the main reason that they're already doing it with Android).

This is not a trivial distinction. Over the past few years, one of the most important shifts in the digital world has been the move from the wide-open Web to semiclosed platforms that use the Internet for transport but not the browser for display. It’s driven primarily by the rise of the iPhone model of mobile computing, and it’s a world Google can’t crawl, one where HTML doesn’t rule. And it’s the world that consumers are increasingly choosing, not because they’re rejecting the idea of the Web but because these dedicated platforms often just work better or fit better into their lives (the screen comes to them, they don’t have to go to the screen). The fact that it’s easier for companies to make money on these platforms only cements the trend. Producers and consumers agree: The Web is not the culmination of the digital revolution.

This is like the exact opposite of everything I've ever read on the matter. In fact, Google said the main reason they purchased Android is because they recognized that it would drive more web traffic to google. More searches, more clicks, more money for Google.

The same is true of the iPhone. iPhone and Android users consume like 30 times the amount of web traffic that users of other smartphones do (notice they're not even including web-enabled feature phones). These phones, unlike other smartphone platforms, have led to more web traffic, not less, because they give users access to the web at every moment of their lives. And that's actually the whole point, at least from Google's end.

[gamevet]

I can't imagine MS giving up its grip on the console market, when LIVE is earning a ton of cash, in addition to the profits earned from sales of consoles and games.

http://www.neowin.net/news/xbox-live...enue-last-year

According to Bloomberg, Microsoft “probably” hit $1 billion revenue this past fiscal year in earnings from Xbox Live alone. In an email, Dennis Durkin, the COO of the Xbox portion of Microsoft, said that half of the 25 million users connected to Xbox Live have paid for a one-year subscription to become Xbox Live Gold members, which adds up to roughly $600 million in subscription fees. Add to that the revenue from downloadable content such as movies, games, and TV shows, as well as small micro-transactions like avatar costumes and interface themes, and you’ve got quite a big number on your hands. According to Durkin, “Sales of products like movie and TV show downloads topped subscription revenue for the first time,” bringing Bloomberg’s estimate towards the $1.2 billion dollar mark in revenue.

[Shin Johnpv]

I totally support this as I have mentioned many times before, provided it's a standard where anyone can make hardware and not a monopoly.

The problem with this model though is that hardware manufacturers have no incentive to subsidize the price. Sony and MS sell their hardware at a loss because they're going to make it up on software. If you're Samsung and you get NO CUT of the licensing fees to make PS5 games, you aren't going to sell your version of the PS5 for 300 less than it costs you to make it. Consoles would go from 400 - 500 dollar investments at launch to 800 - 1,000. Do you think anyone's going to be upgrading that in 5 years when they paid a grand for it? And if you say well we will just make the parts upgradeable so then can do it slowly over time then you miss the whole point of it being a console and not a PC.

I don't know about you but I personally think gaming is too expensive as it is already. A one console future isn't going to make things cheaper.

If these developers are so sick of dealing with Consoles and the licensing and what not that entails, then develop for PCs.

[GohanX]

The cynical side of me thinks that is just a positive spin on the fact that a ton of people are dropping their Gold memberships.

[Yoshi]

I don't know about you but I personally think gaming is too expensive as it is already. A one console future isn't going to make things cheaper.

It's not expensive enough. Doubling console prices would keep the casuals and non-gamers out. I'd love to play half as many games if they were all developed with exactly me in mind.