We Really, Really Don't Need New Consoles
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So you're going to assume that every buyer of a PS4 already owns PS2 and PS3?j1015 said:
What about people like me, who are looking to buy a brand new console but are also interested in the library of classic games provided by previous consoles? Why can't the new console play the old stuff? PC's can play older games (my Steam library dates a long way back and everything works) so there's really no excuse for why the latest consoles can't do it too.
Your example of "phones, TV's, clothes, furniture" is retarded because all of those things can do what previous generations of those things did PLUS more, they all do the older functions while enhancing them and adding new stuff at the same time.
Here's your example returned to you, what if you bought a TV that refused to play older shows/movies and you had to wait for new shows/movies to arrive just so you could make use of that fucking TV? Or how about a TV that only played a brand new format specific to that TV and no other formats, so you have to wait for media to arrive in that new format?
Without a library of stuff to watch your TV, it's nothing but a piece of expensive junk.
"But why can't I watch my favorite western classics on my new TV?" the poor buyer asks.
"Just keep your old TV handy for when you want to watch the old stuff!" would be your response (with a completely straight face). Hahaha, just store it in the closet like t-shirts right?
Ooh, how about a new phone that only accepts the numbers of friends who own phones from that current year onwards? "Just keep your old phone handy for when you want to contact friends who have older phones!" would be your response. Err, no, fuck that.
The entire point of new technology is to serve the core functions we have always required of them, enhancing those functions, and THEN perhaps introducing new functions. You don't throw out the core functions and expect us to keep the old stuff around! A big healthy game library is exactly that to a console - a core function.
A new car needs to be able to function on old roads - if the car seller tells me that I should just keep my old car handy for when I need to drive on old roads (your logic, right?) I would tell him to shove that new car up his ass.
Hope Yahtzee's point got through to you.
Sony invented backwards compatibility on console and originally had it on PS3, the precedent is for them to give a damn about BC. In the previous generation they had the excuse of "we're doing this new processor architecture and this extra stuff we need to add to make BC work is too expensive", now they took away their excuse but kept the BC out of the picture totally. To not do the bare-minimum and have backwards compatibility for the older consoles, something that should be simple and something that they'd have to have been morons to never consider is a massive "fuck you" to me. It's not that they just don't have ps2 BC, it's not that they just don't have ps3 BC, it's that they have fucking nothing.Clovus said:
I guess you're right though, I'll just emulate PS2 games for now on.
And how did that work out for them? It made the console really expensive, and didn't really drive many sales, if any. Meanwhile, Microsoft eats their lunch by not providing backwards-compatibility and lowering costs.mike1921 said:
As much as you or I would like backwards-compatibility, it doesn't seem to make business sense. It requires a huge engineering effort and increased hardware costs, for little, if any gain. The niche that wants to play last-gen games is very small, and they don't provide much new income, compared to the influx of new users who didn't own the previous console.
It may not be pleasant, but that's the reality. Why would console makers be interested in servicing people who have already bought a game, rather than the new consumers who want to buy the new one?
I'm caught between buying a new graphics card or getting a PS4, running 2 gtx 580's on SLI atm. Tempted to get some Titans.
I need a new PC, not a new console. I'm happy with my 360. I need a PC for school to play Hawken, ARMA, and Starcraft, and to work in Maya.
Get out of my head Croshaw. You've essentially summarized most of my thoughts on the console industry in their entirety.
One of the only real differences being I've been saying these things since the half-way mark of the current gens life-cycle.
At this point, I honestly regret buying an Xbox360.
Even if every major publisher went under; and dragged most of their developer subsidiaries with them; we would still have a thriving video game industry.
Perhaps not quite as large nor "mainstream" as before, but we would still have developers and smaller publishers churning out titles and making plenty of cash in the process. (perhaps more, even)
And this isn't even addressing the ever expanding, and rather lucrative, indie scene nor the prevalence of crowd-funding ventures like Kickstarter.
One of the only real differences being I've been saying these things since the half-way mark of the current gens life-cycle.
At this point, I honestly regret buying an Xbox360.
By leaps and bounds, in fact.Zachary Amaranth said:
Even if every major publisher went under; and dragged most of their developer subsidiaries with them; we would still have a thriving video game industry.
Perhaps not quite as large nor "mainstream" as before, but we would still have developers and smaller publishers churning out titles and making plenty of cash in the process. (perhaps more, even)
And this isn't even addressing the ever expanding, and rather lucrative, indie scene nor the prevalence of crowd-funding ventures like Kickstarter.
"Need," is a kind of weird word to use. Does, "need," imply that computers have advanced enough that the old hardware is holding game development back? If so, modern consoles are fairly outdated, and perhaps new tech would create a market for new games.
It depends on how they play their cards, but a next generation console (That didn't require the developers to find uses for cheap hardware gimmicks, I mean) could inspire quite a bit more launches. There aren't many new launches now, but that's not really surprising, seeing as how the next generation consoles are around the corner.
And more importantly than need, is there a market for new consoles? Probably. I'd certainly buy one, since my computer can't really be used for gaming and I don't want to spend the money for one that can. And short of using virtualized OS's, non PC users can't really play more than a handful of games. "Need" is a moot point when people will buy it anyways; it's just a matter of numbers.
It depends on how they play their cards, but a next generation console (That didn't require the developers to find uses for cheap hardware gimmicks, I mean) could inspire quite a bit more launches. There aren't many new launches now, but that's not really surprising, seeing as how the next generation consoles are around the corner.
And more importantly than need, is there a market for new consoles? Probably. I'd certainly buy one, since my computer can't really be used for gaming and I don't want to spend the money for one that can. And short of using virtualized OS's, non PC users can't really play more than a handful of games. "Need" is a moot point when people will buy it anyways; it's just a matter of numbers.
For christ's sake did you even read my whole post. I'm not going to repeat myself, here's what I said saying they had good reason to not have it last genAardvaarkman said:
I even said that I don't give a fuck about PS3 BC
Getting on to your points that can't be reflected by reading, it worked out really well for them to have BC, look at the success of the PS2. The PS3 had some dumb architecture that made Backwards-compatibility more expensive, having architecture that natively supports PS2 games without raising costs significantly should have been something that the console was designed around, not an afterthought. But at this point they shot themselves in the foot so they need to break BC at some point, but there's no reason a PS4 can't emulate a PS2.
The 360 has software-based backwards compatibility of most popular games on the console : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_games_compatible_with_Xbox_360
Any source on that being a small niche? That makes absolutely no sense to me as anyone who is in anyway a gamer either has games from last gen or the one before that they want to play, either for the first time or a second, at some point or is likely to hear about games from previous generations that they want to play. Also consider that the people who do want BC are the more hardcore gamers who would probably buy more games.
They would want to service people who already have games to get consoles in homes. The more consoles in homes the more your new games can sell.
Ps3 could play discs from a system 2 generations ago, every single ps1 game is compatible with that system, something that´s apparently very easy to include, which makes you wonder why they would remove it on ps4.Clovus said:
The thing is, they probably already have the Technology, since people have been making functional ps1/ps2 emulators for ages, if the ps4 is as easy to work with as they say, it shouldn´t be tough to include it. But it will probably never happen because they would rather sell the games to us again :/. I would prefer Gaikai + Psn ports AND my own library of games. But they´d rather take away our choices and force us to rebuy our games (or the small segment that were popular enough to be rereleased...)
Now that a lot of games are getting pc releases, I don't think I'm gonna get suckered into buying another overpriced console for a while. I have some very good compatible-with-everything controllers and an hd cable, so it's just like playing on a console, minus the bullshit I have to deal with using consoles. And if I don't want online play? I just turn off the internet connection. Seriously, unless some of those consoles show up at goodwill or a second-hand store I don't think I'll be buying it.
It's strange, I started gaming on a windows 95, gamed exclusively on consoles for almost 20 years because pc gaming was a hasstle, and now I'm back to pc games because console gaming is becoming a hassle.
It's strange, I started gaming on a windows 95, gamed exclusively on consoles for almost 20 years because pc gaming was a hasstle, and now I'm back to pc games because console gaming is becoming a hassle.
the problem is the changed architecture. previous consoles all had identical or similar architecture with just pimped hardware. now the complete architecture has changed.MrBaskerville said:
PCs can emulate consoles because they have the processing power to run a virtual machine with the simulated architecture of the console. but it takes a lot of power, and even fast PCs struggle a bit and the emulation often runs pretty chuggy and slow.
now the architecture has changed. the ps4 is essentially just yesterdays low-middle class PC and thus completely lacks power to emulate a PS3 with any sort of speed that would be sufficient to make games playable.
Exactly what I'm doing. If the rumors of these "New Gen" systems turn out to be true and backwards compatibility has been sacrificed so a system can play Blu-Rays, I'm better off investing in a older system.Thunderous Cacophony said:
Eh, I think Yahtzee is wrong here. The WiiU failed because they came too late to the party and tried to cater to a market that was already being served. I mean, really? A year before the next generation comes out and all they bring is a machine that's just a little more powerful than the existing machines without very many titles? They deserved to fail and it may not be long before we see Nintendo go the way of Sega and start focusing on software (at least they'll still have handhelds).
Hypothetically, these new consoles should save money. For one, the second largest console (PS4) is no longer using proprietary hardware. All these game companies can spend significantly less time on ports because of this and the ps4 was a resource hog where development time was concerned (stupid asset categories, making people fit oblong games into tiny boxes). There is no reason why developing for one of these new consoles should necessarily cost significantly more money like it did in the previous generation when the step from the ps2 to ps3 was momentous. This generation is going to be the same type of hardware, just better.
So developers also won't have to worry about being as efficient with resources as they had been before. Everything should be easier. The only problem will come if AAA want to make the biggest and baddest possible and have no idea how much to budget. Companies that don't know how to budget deserve to go away.
Hypothetically, these new consoles should save money. For one, the second largest console (PS4) is no longer using proprietary hardware. All these game companies can spend significantly less time on ports because of this and the ps4 was a resource hog where development time was concerned (stupid asset categories, making people fit oblong games into tiny boxes). There is no reason why developing for one of these new consoles should necessarily cost significantly more money like it did in the previous generation when the step from the ps2 to ps3 was momentous. This generation is going to be the same type of hardware, just better.
So developers also won't have to worry about being as efficient with resources as they had been before. Everything should be easier. The only problem will come if AAA want to make the biggest and baddest possible and have no idea how much to budget. Companies that don't know how to budget deserve to go away.
Already have a decent gaming PC. Done!
Seriously, though. I have no plans to buy anything from the latest console generation. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo need to learn their place. And that place is: without my wallet. I'm guessing other people will follow. (Hoping.)
Seriously, though. I have no plans to buy anything from the latest console generation. Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo need to learn their place. And that place is: without my wallet. I'm guessing other people will follow. (Hoping.)
PC gamers would benefit the most from new console hardware existing. As a fellow pc gamer (though I do have consoles as well), don't you realize that the capability/quality of our pc games have been held hostage by the console market? This is because developes want their games to reach the largest market as possible and so games are often held back by the weakest machine they need to reach.tehweave said:
Processing power. Am I a hero now?Anathrax said:
No really. Games like the Fallout series and the Elder Scrolls series are simulating the entire world all the time. This eats up massive amounts of processing power and is, in short, the reason those games tend to be bugged and/or freeze up. If you kept the same graphics (which is unheard of, I know)but upped the processing power you could alleviate most of those problems and then use the left over processor space to pretty up your game in the graphics department.
And then you have the game Defiance. I am interested in seeing how it plays, basically being an MMO on the xbox and all. Which is no small feat to have all those people interacting in "lobbies" decidedly larger than 16 people. The down side is the game looks bad. I attribute the graphics nightmare to all the processor power being routed to keeping the game in a functional state. Perhaps the "720" will allow for MMO like games that don't look half bad either. Who knows?
But really. Am I a hero now? It's all I've ever wanted my whole life was to be an internet hero. Please don't dash my hopes and dreams... Please...?
I don't think the threat to consoles is PC's over the other way around, I'm surprised anyone still gets worked about that. It's tablets and smartphones. I actually never thought that traditional consoles would be released in 2013, I thought everything was headed towards handhelds, which headed towards tablets. I thought the 3DS was going to be a Nintendo tablet. I'm still not sure what the Wii U is, and I like the Wii U. I can play games on the couch with my girlfriend without any split-screen nonsense. Unfortunately, most game designers wouldn't dare dream of making a game under the supposition that most people who will play it experience any form of genuine human interaction anymore.
But anyways, it's still a few years off before it starts to become obvious how much trouble everyone else is in, and tablets are not. All tablets are always BC, BC isn't even a concept it's just a basic assumption. Someday there will be tablets with all the buttons and joysticks we need without any hideous handles, and they will play most of the games we like to play. Once these breeds of tablets come along and get that kind of support (the kind we typically expect from consoles) it will be like a super nova destroying two petty little moons arguing over whose orbital axis is more elegant, and surface more pleasing to the eye, ignoring the giant ball of heat consuming everything in its way.
Consoles are an issue because new platforms have become a problem. Everyone hates new platforms, we want incrementally better versions of platforms we already own, but not all-new platforms. PC's are an issue because AAA games don't sell, so most developers either go F2P, go small, or go out of business. Big PC games are a problem, of the few exist they can only fund themselves by being multi-platform or being a Valve or Blizzard game. Oh, never mind, Valve usually subsidizes development though multiplatform too, and Blizzard's most recent Diablo game was a beta for the console versions. BC is also not a strength of PC gaming, if it were we sure as hell wouldn't need GOG to fix and re-sell our games to us. Even then they aren't without their problems.
Right now, I think everyone kind of stinks. The only games I really enjoy anymore are Nintendo games, but don't get too excited because they only win by default. There's something to be said for one of the world's biggest publishers that has never published a military shooter or a single game with an online pass, much less that horrendous season pass crap. Okay, I'll spend my money on the potential of content that doesn't exist yet. It's either anxiety insurance or a landmine for impulsiveness. All video games seem to be about anymore is cheating impulsive people out of their paychecks, it's like we've come full circle to the arcade again.
But anyways, it's still a few years off before it starts to become obvious how much trouble everyone else is in, and tablets are not. All tablets are always BC, BC isn't even a concept it's just a basic assumption. Someday there will be tablets with all the buttons and joysticks we need without any hideous handles, and they will play most of the games we like to play. Once these breeds of tablets come along and get that kind of support (the kind we typically expect from consoles) it will be like a super nova destroying two petty little moons arguing over whose orbital axis is more elegant, and surface more pleasing to the eye, ignoring the giant ball of heat consuming everything in its way.
Consoles are an issue because new platforms have become a problem. Everyone hates new platforms, we want incrementally better versions of platforms we already own, but not all-new platforms. PC's are an issue because AAA games don't sell, so most developers either go F2P, go small, or go out of business. Big PC games are a problem, of the few exist they can only fund themselves by being multi-platform or being a Valve or Blizzard game. Oh, never mind, Valve usually subsidizes development though multiplatform too, and Blizzard's most recent Diablo game was a beta for the console versions. BC is also not a strength of PC gaming, if it were we sure as hell wouldn't need GOG to fix and re-sell our games to us. Even then they aren't without their problems.
Right now, I think everyone kind of stinks. The only games I really enjoy anymore are Nintendo games, but don't get too excited because they only win by default. There's something to be said for one of the world's biggest publishers that has never published a military shooter or a single game with an online pass, much less that horrendous season pass crap. Okay, I'll spend my money on the potential of content that doesn't exist yet. It's either anxiety insurance or a landmine for impulsiveness. All video games seem to be about anymore is cheating impulsive people out of their paychecks, it's like we've come full circle to the arcade again.