We Really, Really Don't Need New Consoles

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
Doom972 said:
The biggest problem, in my opinion, is that in this generation, gamers were introduced into digital content
That's so incredibly wrong. Gamers have always been using digital content. The cartridges on an Atari 2600 were digital.

Doom972 said:
... and we know that it's only a matter of time (two years is my guess) before Microsoft and Sony will close the current XBL and PSN networks in favor of the new ones that will be used with the new consoles.
How do we know that? What's your source for this information?

How do you know they won't merge the current online systems into the new ones? People have mentioned in this thread that they will lose their trophies, achievements, etc. That seems a little ridiculous - it's a minimal amount of data, why wouldn't they just import this into your new account? It would cost almost nothing, and encourage customer loyalty.

Having a new console doesn't mean they have to shut down their old networks or make the new ones incompatible with older systems.
 

TheSteampunkGuy

New member
Apr 24, 2013
1
0
0
Agreed Yahtzee, I hate how the consoles are really trying to compete with the PC yet they don't realize it that its better. When I get a new PC fuck consoles forever and there stupid creators.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
TheAsterite said:
Also it's spelled homogenized, escapist has a spell checker...
Actually, "homogenised" is how it's spelt outside of the US. It's not a misspelling.

I'm also pretty sure that The Escapist website itself does not have a spell checker - that's a function of your browser, and it uses the dictionary that you choose in preferences. So, if you use a UK or Australian English dictionary (for example) "homogenized" will be underlined as incorrect, but "homogenised" will not be.
 

rob_simple

Elite Member
Aug 8, 2010
1,864
0
41
TheAsterite said:
So you can find, say, a Ratchet and Clank game with the same care and attention that Insomniac puts into it on the 360? Please point me in that direction.

I too could quote Jim mindlessly while missing the whole point. Also it's spelled homogenized, escapist has a spell checker and you couldn't be bothered to right click it and correct it? Talk about lazy.

So you don't count Mario only being on a Nintendo system as exclusive? Yeah OK, keep talking nonsense.
Uh huh, and you might have had a point before the Ratchet and Clank games became dull paint-by-numbers shadows of their former selves with needless forced multiplayer gimmicks.

Also, maybe in America that's how it's spelled, but as a general rule of thumb I find that the British spelling always replaces the 'z' with and 's'; I ignore the spellchecker on my browser because it's an American dictionary. Good job picking me up on my spelling though -two hundred-odd words and I spelled one wrong, god I'm such a pig- that is absolutely not the last bastion of a man with no leg left to stand on.

Also, who is Jim? You need to be more specific if you're going to accuse me of mindlessly parroting the words of someone I don't know anything about.

Of course Mario is an exclusive, I was just pointing out that your whole Mario vs. Sonic argument didn't equate to modern day exclusives because it's a completely different market. Mario vs. Sonic was more about marketing than actual games; both companies were trying to appeal to kids more with their mascots by putting them in cartoons and on every piece of merchandise they could. Nowadays exclusives largely don't matter, because the majority of them, like Metal Gear Solid or Final Fantasy, ultimately end up on all the consoles, and the ones that don't are all pretty samey, anyway, (can't play Killzone? Doesn't matter, there's any number of dull, repetitive shooters on the PC and 360.)

Essentially the entire premise of your argument is built on a foundation of sand, and I think you know it as you've resorted to insulting users who call you out or pulling them up on their spelling.
 

rob_simple

Elite Member
Aug 8, 2010
1,864
0
41
j1015 said:
"And I, for one, am not going to burn all my photos just because you invented a shiny new photo album that only holds photos of an approved shape and format."

A lot of times I agree with you. However, on this point not only are you wrong, your point is fucking retarded. Why can't the old system be treated the same way as when you run out of room in your old photo album? Put on the shelf until you want to play with it again.

It's really lazy to continue harping on backward-compatibility when so many gamers don't even use it. We always want the next thing. New phones, TV's, clothes, furniture etc. Some of those things we can and do use again. And when we need to put on a shirt that is three years old, we go to the closet and put it on. Old consoles can be the same way. BC is nice, but it's an arrogant, simple-minded thing to get bent out of shape over, as though you're owed this luxury. And when it comes down to it, that's all it is.
As the consumer, we have a right to make demands of a product. I shouldn't have to dig out my old console and hook it all up to the telly every time I want to play a game that I could just as easily put in my new console and run. If they spent less time putting R&D into all the useless social media bells and whistles that no one wanted or asked for, then they would probably have found a reliable way to emulate games on the PS4 right back to the PSX. But then that would cut into that precious revenue stream they've got going on the PSN; charging up to £8 for fifteen year old games, some of which we already own but can't play because they removed backward compatibility from the PS3.

When it comes to electronics, less should always be more. That's why I don't need to carry my phone, MP3 player and Gameboy with me when I go out anymore: I have all three on my iPhone. New products are supposed to streamline the service, not lump us with another giant box every five or six years, until our houses start to resemble one of those computer rooms from the 70's.

You're right it's a luxury item, but when it's a luxury item I'm spending upwards of three-hundred quid on, you better believe I'm entitled to ***** and moan when they jettison genuinely good features in favour of shit no one cares about.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
rob_simple said:
As the consumer, we have a right to make demands of a product.
But you don't have the right to receive the things you "demand" unless it's an explicit feature that's not working as promised, or other faulty merchandise covered by consumer protection laws. Companies aren't obliged to give you what you want, just as you are not obliged to give them your money.
 

likalaruku

New member
Nov 29, 2008
4,290
0
0
Well, I can't really argue with that, considering I've been spending a lot of time with a PS1 & an NDS. The polygon graphics that turned me off to 3D gaming in the late 90s are beckoning to me like a topless red-haired siren, or a basket of fluffy kittens. I'm quite sick of realism & I want bright colors & cartoony models now.
 

rob_simple

Elite Member
Aug 8, 2010
1,864
0
41
Aardvaarkman said:
rob_simple said:
As the consumer, we have a right to make demands of a product.
But you don't have the right to receive the things you "demand" unless it's an explicit feature that's not working as promised, or other faulty merchandise covered by consumer protection laws. Companies aren't obliged to give you what you want, just as you are not obliged to give them your money.
True, but it is the company's purpose to give it's customers what they want, or else lose sales. I won't be buying a PS4 when it comes out, possibly ever, because I don't want to lose my entire PS3 game library, (I know I'd still have it but having to set up my console up every time I want to play one game is more hassle than it's worth,) in exchange for...what? A slightly more powerful machine? Games on the PS3 already look amazing, the worlds are already massive; there is absolutely nothing a hardware upgrade could do for me.

I know it sounds stupid to say I won't buy a new console just because I can't play old games on it, but it's rapidly becoming a crucial feature given that we've seen next to nothing regarding next-gen launch titles, as Sony and Microsoft both seem more interested in who can have the shiniest graphics or the most processing power (while the PC sits quietly in the corner, smirking and lighting a cigar) while they all forget that gaming is supposed to be about the games, not the hardware specs.

I appreciate that I am not reflective of every gamer out there, but I know there are a lot of us who would be more likely to buy a PS4 if BC was an option, and who give less than a shit about social media integration or whatever else they're currently trailing to attract the Farmville market.

If you ask me, Sony's decision to abandon BC is only going to harm them in the long run as more people decide to stick with the massive game library they've already got at their disposal, instead of spunking five hundred quid on a new machine that has five games (the majority of which are sequels) to it's name.

TL;DR: I'm not owed anything, but it's in the company's best interests to keep the consumer on-side unless they want to continue hemorrhaging money.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
But you don't have the right to receive the things you "demand" unless it's an explicit feature that's not working as promised, or other faulty merchandise covered by consumer protection laws. Companies aren't obliged to give you what you want, just as you are not obliged to give them your money.
While that's completely true, I think the relationship between the consumer and producer is changing.
In the last console generation, game companies have started making demands of the consumer; more than just an exchange of money for a game.

Origin and Steam both request access to your computer (Origin legally demands access to your entire hard drive, since it's so vaguely defined). Targeted advertisements are appearing on Xbox Live. The threat of Always-Online is growing stronger each year, and the biggest companies want to turn gaming into a service.

Some of those demands are getting a bit "personal". If companies want to move closer to consumers (for whatever reason) via their products and services, it's not unreasonable to expect an elevated consumer response; be it "entitled" or otherwise.
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
Doom972 said:
The biggest problem, in my opinion, is that in this generation, gamers were introduced into digital content
That's so incredibly wrong. Gamers have always been using digital content. The cartridges on an Atari 2600 were digital.

Doom972 said:
... and we know that it's only a matter of time (two years is my guess) before Microsoft and Sony will close the current XBL and PSN networks in favor of the new ones that will be used with the new consoles.
How do we know that? What's your source for this information?

How do you know they won't merge the current online systems into the new ones? People have mentioned in this thread that they will lose their trophies, achievements, etc. That seems a little ridiculous - it's a minimal amount of data, why wouldn't they just import this into your new account? It would cost almost nothing, and encourage customer loyalty.

Having a new console doesn't mean they have to shut down their old networks or make the new ones incompatible with older systems.
I was talking about digital copies of games and DLC - not the other stuff you mentioned. As for the current networks being closed in favor of new ones - I might be wrong, but that's not the main issue anyway. If you'd like to think that it won't happen, I won't argue about it.
 

Triality

New member
May 9, 2011
134
0
0
Gorfias said:
Not sure why the venom not at PS3, just the 360. The PS3 has 256 Meg of RAM. Hey, I love the PS3, and have 2 in two different room (I'm a family man with kids). But its pretty accepted that cross platform game released concurrently on both systems (and that is most games) perform just a little bit better on the 360.
That's a fair point. I didn't say anything about my ps3 because I didn't know the specs and I haven't played enough games to justify the rant, so I picked the easier target (what with it's outdated disc format, it's piss-poor tiny HDD, it's budget PC specs, and low-res crappy graphics-I-don't-care-how-shiny-UT3's-Engine-makes-textures-to-hide-the-imperfections).

If we can just get one more solid console from both parties that does 60 frames at 1080p with thousands of on-screen elements, FXAA, pixel-perfect vanishing-point draw distances, and split second processing there won't be a graphical necessity for 10 years this time, maybe forever.

I have to admit, after going on 8 years, there's nothing they can introduce on the PS3 regarding graphics that is going to excite me. They've pretty much hit the envelope and they've done a great job on both systems.
Agreed. Now that you've exposed those spec elements for the ps3 I've gotta agree it's time they take to this next and hopefully final tier of power specs.

I have plenty to play on the PS3 so, if you want to get my attention about upcoming console games, it's going to have to be on a new console. For me, it is time. But there is more competition than ever before and this really may be their last hurrah. As much was written about the Vita. In a land of Tegra 2 phones and tablets, it is unnecessary, but if Sony is going to take a try at it, they did a pretty good job. And this may be true of consoles. A few nuts like me may move up, but 10 years from now, you'll download better games directly to your TV set. For now, you may forgo improved graphics and do things like build a gaming PC, get the $100 Ouya or Gamestick, heck, phones that connect to a TV and a wireless controller.
Yeah competition is getting more horizontal and going much wider than deeper these past 3 years and onward. Haven't played many tablet games yet, but I hope to change that soon enough. I really wanna expand my horizons beyond "Triple AAA library only."

I just hope they don't screw up with "always online" type stuff. They can scare me away. I'm already discounting the 360 next due to the rumors. I hope they are untrue.
If the negative press was enough to get that small fry Orth fired from Microsoft, there's almost no chance of Always Online.

As for forgoing great graphics and just going for great, innovative games, while I do have an Android phone, I have to admit the 3DS is very tempting.
Especially with the XL's larger screen and the pointless 3D turned off. I've always wanted to play the Phoenix Wright series.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
rob_simple said:
True, but it is the company's purpose to give it's customers what they want, or else lose sales.
Not really. A company's purpose is to make money. There are plenty of companies that do that by persuading people that they want their product, even if it's not really what they want. There are entire industries built on false wants disguised as needs.

Hell, there are entire companies that aren't even customer-facing. There are companies that make products which are sold because of regulatory requirements, etc., not because they are desired products. Does anybody really want to have their car serviced by a mechanic? No, but it's something that has to be done, or your car will die.

Games on the PS3 already look amazing, the worlds are already massive; there is absolutely nothing a hardware upgrade could do for me
I'd appreciate faster loading times, and would especially appreciate a better use interface than the wretched thing that is currently on the PS3. But, yeah, I'm not running out to buy a PS4 until a compelling reason comes along.
 

Aardvaarkman

I am the one who eats ants!
Jul 14, 2011
1,262
0
0
Doom972 said:
I was talking about digital copies of games and DLC - not the other stuff you mentioned.
But when have copies of games not been digital? That's my entire point. Why are you talking about "digital games" as something new, when the medium has always been digital?

As for the current networks being closed in favor of new ones - I might be wrong, but that's not the main issue anyway. If you'd like to think that it won't happen, I won't argue about it.
I don't know if it it will or will not happen. But you stated "we all know" as if this was common knowledge, and we have any idea of what the companies plan to do with their online networks.
 

rob_simple

Elite Member
Aug 8, 2010
1,864
0
41
Aardvaarkman said:
rob_simple said:
True, but it is the company's purpose to give it's customers what they want, or else lose sales.
Not really. A company's purpose is to make money. There are plenty of companies that do that by persuading people that they want their product, even if it's not really what they want. There are entire industries built on false wants disguised as needs.

Hell, there are entire companies that aren't even customer-facing. There are companies that make products which are sold because of regulatory requirements, etc., not because they are desired products. Does anybody really want to have their car serviced by a mechanic? No, but it's something that has to be done, or your car will die.
You can't apply the same psychology to different markets like that. In terms of luxury items, I think there was a time when what you are saying was true, but consumers are becoming more and more informed on their purchasing decisions, and companies aren't doing nearly enough to keep up; especially in the gaming world.

Even as recent as the PS2, they used to get away with releasing games that flat-out didn't work; it was a common occurrence and we just had to roll over and let it happen. Now we're starting to see real shit storms with things like Aliens: Colonial Marines marketing deception, Sim City's busted always-online DRM and the Mass Effect 3 ending scandal. Of course you could argue in some cases that the results we see are only small, and also that the complaints aren't always justified, but as consumers, gamers have made it clear they're not afraid to say what they want and what they don't.

Game companies can continue to ignore that of course, they can continue to do what they want and they'll still manage to wring money out of a good wedge of their customers, but that is only going to work up to a point. You only have to look at the number of publishers/developers declaring losses or shutting down altogether to see that there's a big change coming, and the AAA industry has no one to blame but itself.

It's pretty much exactly the same thing that happened with the music industry: for years stores like HMV charged exorbitant fees for CD's because we had no choice but to pay them for what we wanted. There were no real alternatives until Napster came along and changed everything, because suddenly we didn't have to bend to their whim.

Then, just like with major game companies blaming the used game market today, the music industry blamed a lack of morals in the general public as the reason no one was buying CD's for ridiculously inflated prices anymore, willfully ignoring all the success places like the iTunes store were having by charging reasonable prices for goods.

I can see the same thing happening with AAA gaming: the industry is going to collapse in on itself eventually, and then all the indie developers, the little guys who still remember that gaming is about the games, will pop up and start reaping the benefits held by respecting your customers and giving them what they want at fair prices.

Personally, I'm looking forward to it.
 

gorfias

Unrealistic but happy
Legacy
May 13, 2009
7,083
1,849
118
Country
USA
Triality said:
I didn't say anything about my ps3 because I didn't know the specs and I haven't played enough games to justify the rant, so I picked the easier target (what with it's outdated disc format, it's piss-poor tiny HDD, it's budget PC specs, and low-res crappy graphics-I-don't-care-how-shiny-UT3's-Engine-makes-textures-to-hide-the-imperfections).
Yikes! My 360 died last fall after over 6 years of service. I forgot so much bad about it! I limped along with a 20 Gig HD that the operating system took about 10 Gig of to start with (I put a non-proprietary 500 Gig in my fat PS3). And Bluray has been terrific vs. 360 DVD. And I paid $100 for a wireless device and $60 a year for onlive. Now that I think of it, I'm glad it's dead!!!! Forces me to focus on things like Uncharted 3.

The tablets have been amazing and cheap. Most of the games are on par with simple 360 arcade stuff. Lot of it is free, a lot of it cost under $5. And some of it looks almost AAA for $5ish.

 

deadish

New member
Dec 4, 2011
694
0
0
Can't say anything regarding the next Xbox since I haven't been keeping track.

As for the PS4, based on developer quotes, I believe it's fairly well received. Developers will welcome the increase in capabilities - more processing power and a ton more RAM means it's easier on their programmers. Sony also appears to have learned from the PS3. The PS4 will be a lot easier to program for, having a PC-like architecture - if not better as it has unified memory.

As for art, I think that will plateau by itself sooner or later and we don't need to worry too much about it. I mean the movie industry hasn't gone broke now has it. The industry will hit an equilibrium with regards to production cost. The bean counters working for the likes of EA aren't stupid.
 

Doom972

New member
Dec 25, 2008
2,312
0
0
Aardvaarkman said:
Doom972 said:
I was talking about digital copies of games and DLC - not the other stuff you mentioned.
But when have copies of games not been digital? That's my entire point. Why are you talking about "digital games" as something new, when the medium has always been digital?
By digital, I meant download-only. As in, games that you buy through a service like XBL and PSN and download them to your console. I hope that my point about DLC was obvious.

As for the current networks being closed in favor of new ones - I might be wrong, but that's not the main issue anyway. If you'd like to think that it won't happen, I won't argue about it.
I don't know if it it will or will not happen. But you stated "we all know" as if this was common knowledge, and we have any idea of what the companies plan to do with their online networks.[/quote]

It seems obvious to me. If it doesn't seem obvious to you, I won't argue with you about it.
 

FlipC

New member
Dec 11, 2008
64
0
0
I do love the constant refrains of "Just keep the old console too" or "No-one's forcing you to buy the new one". Imagine the same situation in the 80's with music.

In the beginning was tape (well okay it wasn't but bear with me) then came CD and now mp3, but imagine if the music you owned on tape couldn't be transferred to CD and was never released in that format. Imagine the jump to mp3 in exactly the same way.

Oh well you just don't buy the new CD/mp3 player. Great except you won't be able to play any new music at all and the only music you can play are your frozen-at-that-point collection.

Well just keep your old tape/CD player and use that for one type. Great until the hardware breaks; oops sorry we don't stock/repair/make those any more.

The new consoles aren't upgrades, they're not additions; they're replacements. Who's asking for a replacement? I'm not; are you?
 

A Weakgeek

New member
Feb 3, 2011
811
0
0
zefiris said:
The real issue the PC platform has is creative bancruptcy. I played PC games when they weren't same-y nonsense, and actually had heart and character. Today, you can only find that in the Indy game scene. Incredipede is a good example.

Years ago, that was PC mainstream :/ Nowadays PC mainsteam is just the same kind of games that look the same, have the same characters and play the same. Diversity in PC gaming has been shot outside of a few indy game studios.
Wat.

Are you arguing that the PC has less diversity? How?

The only genres in my experience the PC doesn't have much games in is fighting games and JRPGs. (And many big fighting games have started to release on PC)

Consoles on the other hand have practically ZERO strategy games, simulator games (Racing/flying games for example are very arcady on consoles, mainly due to lack of buttons.) , MMOs (Those that have tried usually suck), MOBAs etc. The latter two especially are a huge demographic these days.

Also, I'm pretty sure the indie scene is alot stronger on PC, seeing as theres not nearly as many hurdles to jump when publishing your game on PC, instead of dedicated services like PSN or Xbox live.
 

Clovus

New member
Mar 3, 2011
275
0
0
Blachman201 said:
Clovus said:
A lack of foresight? So, Sony should have realized that they might lose backwards compatability on a system that is almost 10 years old? So, therefore they shouldn't have bothered trying to engineer a game specific processor? What company do you not find "worrisome"? Did you write off Nintendo when they created the Virtual Boy? Did you given up on Microsoft just because the first XBox wasn't that great? So, yeah, Sony cannot magically see into the future. I don't think you'll be consuming much if you only buy things from companies with psychic ablities.
Spare me the lame facetiousness, please. I find it annoying.

I just happen to consider future-proofing products of culture like games somewhat important. Not only because it is a nice service for a costumer like me to be able get more bang for my buck, but future generations should be able to experience retro gaming too. If the only available substitute is a "sub-par experience" as you called it in your first reply, that might make the enjoyment part kind of hard.
I'm gonna' just keep writing the way I write regardless of you finding it annoying. Sorry.

I don't think there's any problem with "future-proofing" until someone makes a console that cannot be emulated. Do you want all game consoles to somehow have backwards compatability for all previous generations? That just seems untenable. It's not that hard to find the last generations console, and beyound that I think you are asking for too much.

Even if backwards compatability is included, it's often not that great even without the complications of a streamed system like Gaikai. For example, I found playing Gamecube games on the Wii to not be a great experience. It was cool that the Wii could do that, but I wouldn't consider that future proofing.

Anyway, the main reason I replied originally was that I was unsure why you thought Sony specifically was something to be worried about. But, it sounds like you have a general problem with how the console market works. Did you also not want PCs to move from 32 to 64 bit since that would cause some problems with older titles? Technology has to keep moving forward. Backwards compatability and future proofing cannot be the main consideration, which they would have to be to achieve what you seem to want.