Support NeoGAF

[FuuRe]

Reading the Old vs New 3DS Hyrule Warriors thread made me think about a future where new hardware revisions are released 2 or 3 times during the lifetime of the console, all capable of playing the same games while providing an upgraded experience (framerate, resolution, VR...).

As PC's pretty much outperform consoles in raw power even before they are released to the public, this could be the way console manufacturers create futureproof games while enlarging the cycle between generations, avoiding the necessity and the cost of R&D to create new consoles to stay relevant to the audience.

What do you think?

 

[Tagyhag]

No, most mainstream gamers don't care about graphics.

They like knowing what they buy is all they need for a few years.

You start pumping out more necessary upgrades and games that require said upgrades, and not only will you confuse them, but you'll have some refusing to upgrade, which means devs will have to cater to even more different hardware or risk losing sales.

 

[James Scott]

Could be. I think there's been some rumors and speculation of Sony trying it with PS4 and Nintendo with NX.
There might be a thread on the PS4 one but I don't remember what it was called
That might be the best rout to take on handhelds. Maybe every 3 years or so release something like the new 3DS. It's easier to swallow as many are used to uprading their handhelds and mobile phones as they usually don't last too long.

 

[Funyarinpa]

I think that one of the main benefits of consoles is that they're good to go for at least 5 years (assuming purchase at launch) once you buy them- No getting left behind.

It's also incredibly convenient.

This approach could hurt the industry IMO because it can negate some of the advantages of consoles.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Absolutely not. Home consoles retail for like $400, nobody is going to upgrade for another $400 to get the next revision and then another possible revision after that.

At that point you should just buy a PC.

 

[Syntsui]

Zero chance.

 

[Strangelove77]

That idea would backfire gloriously. I would like it to happen just so I can see the amount of shit that would hit the fan.
Do it, MS.

 

[AlexBasch]

If they did something like the Expansion Pack (which I don't see how they could) I suppose it could be done, haha.

But getting a different, new PS4 to run the latest games? I'd switch to PC and upgrade stuff there, instead.

 

[Starlightmuse]

No, please, god, no, don't, no, no no no, no, god, please, no, nonono, don't, no, please no, god.

No.

Please.

No.

 

[PROh1bited]

No. All they have to do is look at Sega, and what they did with the Genesis.

 

[Linkstrikesback]

Not a chance.

They don't need to compete with PC to get third party games: consoles set the baseline and not the other way around. Until that changes, nothing will on this front.

Fortunately, I don't see that changing.

 

[sono]

No.

At least I hope not

 

[FuuRe]

I sure hope not, but i was wondering how it hasn't backfired for the 3DS

 

[{insert code here}]

I don't see it happening. Can you imagine the PR nightmare for Sony if they had to tell the 36 million PS4 owners out there to buy new hardware if they wanted to play Uncharted 4. Not happening.

 

[googleplex]

No but would pay for PS4.5 that would be able to play all PSVR game at a native 120fps.

 

[Chezzymann]

No, that would be terrible and completely defeat the purpose of a console. Honestly I'd be pissed if a new version of a ps4 came out and all the games were optimized for that and not the old version. And it would suck knowing that, even though I bought a ps4, I may not be having the best uncharted or god of war experience since there could be some revision later on that has the games looking way better. The whole purpose of a console is having a place where everyone is on the same page, developers and consumers. That would ruin it.

 

[pastrami]

I sure hope not, but i was wondering how it hasn't backfired for the 3DS

Nintendo has already trained their customers to buy multiple handhelds as they progressively improve them. I don't think it would fly if they put out an improved Wii U.

 

[liquidtmd]

I swear I remember in 1994 reading SEGA Magazine and a manager of Sega Europe came in and said something like the 32X would be a viable long term extension platform and offer graphics akin to Model 2 Board Daytona USA.

Good times. God I miss '90s drugs

 

[Bollocks]

hell no, I don't want another pc fiasco

 

[Shpeshal Nick]

That idea would backfire gloriously. I would like it to happen just so I can see the amount of shit that would hit the fan.
Do it, MS.

Sony is the one rumoured to be doing it.

 

[dieter]

While I dont really like this idea, I do feel like Microsoft could do this with the xbox one, by just making the OS / apps run faster. Since games effectively run in a VM, they could allocate the same resources to those VMs to ensure they continue to perform the same, while improving the OS responsiveness / features, which can be pretty slow at the moment. This could also add an extra feature, for example to allow you to suspend more than 1 game at once, where it effectively just stores the state in ram. So effectively have a new xbox one, with the same game performance, but double the ram and sell it on the "feature" of allowing you to keep multiple games in a ready to play state.

 

[IronicSonic]

pls no.

I could see consoles merging with TV before add-on as a trend in the industry

 

[Coxy100]

Whilst I don't think I'd want this...it could work if...

Original console releases at say £300.... And all games from then on will work with said original console. Incremental updates released say each year - just an expansion pack that you can fit in the console yourself (by swapping it with the original part) that costs say £50. All this does is speed up your game loading / nice shinier graphics / better fps or something.

So you could buy the expansion packs if you want a better experience but vanilla console works fine still too. Just an idea!

 

[lazygecko]

Historically this has happened a couple of times before the 3DS revision so we have some precedents for how both consumers and developers alike reacted to them. PC Engine/Turbografx and Sega Saturn had RAM expansion carts. And so did the N64 later. But these upgrades introduce a dynamic where developers are very reluctant over potentially shutting out potential customers by also requiring them to purchase upgrade peripherals, so they seldom ever take full advantage over their capabilities in favor of reaching the widest demographic.

The same is true for PC, where the biggest successes just about always run well on a wide range of hardware.

 

[Caayn]

Would like to see it happen. But I doubt that it'll.

That idea would backfire gloriously. I would like it to happen just so I can see the amount of shit that would hit the fan.
Do it, MS.

Lol, not even trying to hide the agenda aren't we?

 

[jack....]

People who want better graphics bad enough to continuously upgrade their hardware are probably PC gamers already anyway.

 

[xxracerxx]

No thanks, we don't need this.

 

[RipperGrim]

No, most mainstream gamers don't care about graphics.

They like knowing what they buy is all they need for a few years.

You start pumping out more necessary upgrades and games that require said upgrades, and not only will you confuse them, but you'll have some refusing to upgrade, which means devs will have to cater to even more different hardware or risk losing sales.

This is straight up false, graphics will always be the main selling point to the masses for a game, it's one of the reasons why the PS4 is kicking the shit out of the X1 sales wise.

What consumes want is simple and making a console like a PC isn't going to work because of that.

 

[tea_and_crumpets]

Absolutely not. Home consoles retail for like $400, nobody is going to upgrade for another $400 to get the next revision and then another possible revision after that.

At that point you should just buy a PC.

Well people quite happily drop a lot more than that for the latest I-phone iteration.

In fact, the iterative I-phone models serve as a great example of how a more incremental console cycle could work. Its a proven business model that works well for Apple, so there's no reason it shouldn't apply to a similar consumer electronics device like a games console, they are not world's apart.

There would have to be some sort of guarantee that older consoles would still be able to run newer games - I should think any new game should support the last 3 versions of the hardware offered (assuming they are new iterations every year or 18 months) - but apart from that, there's no reason it shouldn't work.

We've also seen new iterations of hardware in previous generations; the PS2, the slimmer PS3 and the revised black Xbox 360 - I should expect that there will be newer console versions this generation too, with more efficient parts, lower power consumption and faster hard drives. The leap to a more substantive hardware upgrade is not that big.

 

[Hex]

No.
If not notices, the "New 3DS" is not exactly setting things on fire.
The Sega CD 32X did not exactly rock the casbah either.
Consoles are what they are because devolopers know the hardware that they are dealing with and can master it.
I am fairly sure that this has been pretty much written to scripture by now.

 

[FuuRe]

If they did something like the Expansion Pack (which I don't see how they could) I suppose it could be done, haha.

But getting a different, new PS4 to run the latest games? I'd switch to PC and upgrade stuff there, instead.

No, with your "og" PS4 you could still play the latest games

But with the new PS4 you could get a better experience

Also this updates could be silent, say when a new revision (i.e. Slim) appears.

It happens with power supplies, hard drives and CPU manufacturing processes (shrinkage)... i don't see how it could hurt to upgrade the cpu or ram clocks (unless the games are developed without considering cpu limits (like old MSDOS games) where playing them in this new rev would require ninja reflexes

Spoiler

or a patch

 

[FatboyTim]

Very little chance of that happening. Splitting the user-base is patently not in the manufacturer's best interests.

The closest you might get would be an add-on like PSVR.

 

[NinjamicWZ]

That's how it should be.

 

[ethomaz]

Sorry but no.

 

[Hyoukokun]

It's not unprecedented. Oddly enough, it seems like it's mostly Nintendo that has done this in the past (N64 expansion pack, New 3DS). Sony also (very) quietly made some upgrades to the PSP; later models have more RAM than the first version, though I don't think games could usually make any use of it.

It sounds like Sony may be packing some hardware upgrades with PSVR whenever that launches, but I'm skeptical that they'd let said extra hardware play a role in non-VR applications.

 

[Mass_Pincup]

I hope not. If that's the case might as well rent consoles lol.

At worse I'll work on my backlog if that happens.

 

[Phoenix944]

I hope not. Don't want to mess with option/hardware to get something stable... If I wanted to I'd just buy a PC.

 

[Jay Sosa]

No, most mainstream gamers don't care about graphics.

They like knowing what they buy is all they need for a few years.

You start pumping out more necessary upgrades and games that require said upgrades, and not only will you confuse them, but you'll have some refusing to upgrade, which means devs will have to cater to even more different hardware or risk losing sales.

Huh? Sure they do.

 

[Timeless]

No. A console capable of upgrades either has to be capable of splitting tasks between old and new hardware (i.e., now there's two CPUS and/or GPUs instead of one), presumably with each new part being more powerful than the old one, or each upgrade kit has to contain a full console's worth of CPU and/or GPU power, which would make upgrades quite expensive.

That's on top of all the other problems people talk about with upgrading consoles.

 

[Ooccoo]

If it happens, I don't see it working. It basically becomes a PC then, with restrictions. That would be the downfall of consoles and lead to a crash of the industry.

 

[Minions]

It won't happen because it fragments the market. The best part about the console market is they have set specs that they cater to a huge audience with.

 

[Shalashaska161]

It really doesn't make any sense to put consoles on a fast upgrade cycle. Most people who buy consoles don't want to worry about if their hardware is as up to date as possible. They just want to have something to play the latest games on. As soon as you start introducing PS4 + hyper extreme editions you end up fragmenting your base and creating confusion amongst the mass market.

People who want to fiddle with hardware can do so on PC. Let the different platforms be good at different things.

 

[Owari]

This needs to happen if Microsoft wants to compete with NX. Sony should be fine with their VR box.

 

[CosmicQueso]

a future where new hardware revisions are released 2 or 3 times during the lifetime of the console, all capable of playing the same games while providing an upgraded experience (framerate, resolution, VR...).

What do you think?

Pretty confident this will be a thing, yes.

It won't happen because it fragments the market.

OP's scenario means it absolutely does not fragment the market.

That would be the downfall of consoles and lead to a crash of the industry.

Hoooo boy. This is far down the list on things that could cause the industry to crash.

 

[Jigolo]

no it's just dumb Nintendo shenanigans

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

Well people quite happily drop a lot more than that for the latest I-phone iteration.

In fact, the iterative I-phone models serve as a great example of how a more incremental console cycle could work. Its a proven business model that works well for Apple, so there's no reason it shouldn't apply to a similar consumer electronics device like a games console, they are not world's apart.

There would have to be some sort of guarantee that older consoles would still be able to run newer games - I should think any new game should support the last 3 versions of the hardware offered (assuming they are new iterations every year or 18 months) - but apart from that, there's no reason it shouldn't work.

We've also seen new iterations of hardware in previous generations; the PS2, the slimmer PS3 and the revised black Xbox 360 - I should expect that there will be newer console versions this generation too, with more efficient parts, lower power consumption and faster hard drives. The leap to a more substantive hardware upgrade is not that big.

I devices ARE worlds apart though. Those are devices that do more than play games - they're phones, MP3 players, calenders, social platforms, etc all in one and are seen in a different light.

More efficient releases and consoles are hardly surprising, but the revisions didn't suddenly allow better performance in games or allow new ones to run. Handhelds are a bit trickier but increased performance and exclusive games are gimmicks that amount to nothing for nearly everybody.

 

[liquidtmd]

Very little chance of that happening. Splitting the user-base is patently not in the manufacturer's best interests.

The closest you might get would be an add-on like PSVR.

True - and even with PSVR you're splitting the user base to a point I can't see it working.

PS5 pack in with PSVR2 or bust

 

[Strangelove77]

Would like to see it happen. But I doubt that it'll.
Lol, not even trying to hide the agenda aren't we?

I have a PS4. I don't want that curse put upon me.
And Nintendo isn't likely to do it either since they tend to not care about power.
It's MS by default.

If only Neo Geo or Sega still made consoles, they'd do it in a heartbeat...

 

[Ol No Bones]

I hope for upgrade revisions. It makes sense. The people with knee jerk outrage aren't really thinking it through I think.

 

[entremet]

I think it will happen.

Consoles have slowly become PCs in the last 10 years. That's the trajectory.

Would it bother me? No. Not really.