Lyri said:
Ultratwinkie said:
PC gaming cannot die, consoles however have died and are nearing death again. This time however its a lack of games coupled with cost instead of a rush of crappy games with high cost.
What the hell are you even on about?
Source please, because until proven otherwise this is total bullshit of the highest grade.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983
Read up on it. Source? look around you. Consoles are fundamentally flawed in the idea. Sony, and the xbox are choking financially (basically they worked themselves into a corner). Look at how the generation of these consoles were lengthened due to high production costs of unleashing a new console. What does this mean? They need to adopt more PC ideas to increase longevity like selling upgrades, and other attachments. The high cost, and longer generation will spell out the death of consoles on the loss leader method of business. The death of consoles isn't by lack of players, its choking on costs. If selling consoles themselves can't make a profit they rely on games. On the developer's side however its absolute hell. Console tax, second hand market, and high development costs on top of that. If you want I can get the statistics to show the drop of the number of console games from the last generation to this one.
Here is the graph of games courtesy of Metacritic's game database.
Sixth Generation (1999-2006):
Ps2: 792 (out of 1609)
Xbox: 471 (out of 856)
Gamecube: 263 (out of 502)
Total Games: 2967.
Total games over 70%: 1526.
Seventh Generation (2005-present):
Ps3: 341 (out of 579)
Xbox 360: 479 (out of 924)
Wii: 242 (out of 649)
Total Games: 2152.
Total games over 70%: 1062.
See this graph? We are in year 6 of the console generation. The time frame for the last generation was 7 years, and yet the current generation is off by 856 games. Now you could say "higher complexity" of games, and that is the problem. You see when the Xbox and PS3 were first released they were sold at a loss, relying on console games to make up the difference. The Nintendo's wii however was the only console making a profit at that time. The reason? The Wii was cheaper to make, and has been known to be less advanced than its cousins. In short, the new tech doesn't fit into a small box like it used to. Standardization does not work anymore. The tech gets more complex, the cost becomes higher, and the profits decrease. You could say "oh but the console makes more money" but it isn't that way in the eyes of Activision, who makes 70% of their money from the PC, and portable PCs. Keep in mind this is the same "PC hating publisher" that was responsible for modern Warfare 2.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/148982/xbox_delivers_a_profit.html
http://www.joystiq.com/2008/12/01/forbes-nintendo-making-6-profit-on-every-wii-sold/
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.203926-Kotick-Only-30-of-Activisions-Profits-Come-from-Consoles
Basically, the profits are being drained by many factors including manufacturing, tech level, mounting development costs, etc. Want a "source" on the mounting development costs too?
http://www.next-gen.biz/news/ubisoft-development-costs-to-double-next-gen
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.52799-News-Report-Says-Rising-Development-Costs-A-Nightmare
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9823945-7.html?tag=mncol;title
http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/04/more-wii-games-from-ea-thanks-to-low-development-costs/
This isn't some prediction out of hate, its a prediction using the data available. Its not due to the lack of players as there are plenty, but its the cost that goes into the consoles that are beginning to take their toll. Consoles are not sustainable in their current business model, and if continued it will mean the death of the console entirely. Especially now that the PC and the casual market (much like the wii) have shown to be very profitable with less risk. You have to remember businesses don't make games for a hobby, they make them to make money. If another method proves more profitable and safe, then businesses will change sides without a second thought. Businesses have no "brand loyalty" to a platform, nor do they stay in one sector for long. The dynamics of the economy doesn't stay still. Its a cycle, businesses crowd in one area until its no longer worth it and move on. Sure there will be businesses to pick up the slack but its not the same as the clamoring before.
