-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The death of the Game Console
- Thread starter jeff_rigby
- Start date
pixelation
Member
Consoles won't ever die... they'll keep rocking forever... forever... fore...
Gamezone
Gold Member
Dude, that was already ruined this generation. I had to wait two days in order to play Halo MCC online after putting the physical disc in the tray. I wouldn`t call that plug and play.
Apoleptica
Banned
I used to choose consoles for their easy plug and play but that's not the case anymore. Now I choose them for exclusives and their cheap price to graphical ability ratio.
Theoretically, it would be that PCs would become like VCRs or DVD players: you just hook them up to TVs and they play games from wherever you get the software from.
Which, really, is kind of how it works now, but there are so many caveats to that present proposition that it hasn't hit any sort of critical mass.
You didn't address the merits of backwards and forwards compatibility, but that's fine.
Let's look at the current circumstances.
Sony and Microsoft adopted x86 architecture because developers requested it. Developers requested it because they wanted console development to fit within the PC development pipeline. Portability and scalable performance have become priority because there are more hardware options than ever before. Additionally, graphics technology is advancing faster and branching out into new segments like VR.
I don't believe consoles with a 5-6 year market are going to be able to keep up with the accelerated pace or innovation in the industry forever, so they'll either stay as niche devices or evolve in such a way to accommodate a growing number of gaming preferences. I lean towards the latter, because the gaming industry players are going to want to capitalize on the growing audience. If I'm right, there's no future for a locked down systems where you up and leave behind a library of games every 2-3 years, so backwards and forwards compatibility will make its way to gaming consoles just like digital games, standard HDDs, patches, apps, and online subscriptions services.
I have first hand knowledge of what you speak. I recently bought a PC(customs built) and the process from A to B was long and frustrating, several weeks.
- Days readings about PC parts on forums and reading review
- Actually buying the parts, then building the damn thing
- Installing windows and all the necessary drivers
There is nothing remotely plug and play with PC yet, maybe there is but I haven´t found it. Everyone have said its so easy but I don´t see much change from today and 10 years ago when I last gamed on PC. Buying a 399$ console and being able to play within minutes is so effortless and convenient. I thought Steam OS would change the whole scenario but....
Hyperzephyrian
Banned
IndoAssassin
Banned
I am from the past, who has come to the preseny, to tell you that the future is inevitable.
But you're not able to play within minutes on any modern console. And if you don't see much change from PC gaming 10 years ago to now, you willingly ignoring a lot.
Don't get me wrong, it's much much easier to buy a console than build a PC.
But several weeks? When I was 16 it took me 2 days to do it all, and that was before we had such great PC part picking websites and/or community help.
More_Badass
Member
Just curious, how knowledgable were you about computers at the time? Did you have experience replacing parts and stuff like that?
I read that list. None of that is why I own a home console. There are three huge reasons of which PC's do not address.
1. All games released on said platform work on said platform. There is no settings to mess with out the gate. They look decent and run well most of the time. This is a convenience you can't ever have in PC gaming, and I know this because I PC game. The first thing I do anytime I boot up a game on PC is mess with settings and I love that I don't have to do that on home consoles. It's a convenience for many.
2. Dedicated gaming platform. Games tend to take better advantage of lesser hardware in home consoles because said hardware is dedicated to gaming. While these consoels are slowly allowing other apps, etc, they still don't waste nearly as many resources as a pc does before a game is even fired up.
3. Exclusive content.
So long as these 3 points exists, home consoles will too. People also forget that when you buy a home console, it will practically play all new games for the next 6 to 8 years. Last mid range gaming PC I played already struggled with Unity, and I bought this rig 2 years ago.
1. All games released on said platform work on said platform. There is no settings to mess with out the gate. They look decent and run well most of the time. This is a convenience you can't ever have in PC gaming, and I know this because I PC game. The first thing I do anytime I boot up a game on PC is mess with settings and I love that I don't have to do that on home consoles. It's a convenience for many.
2. Dedicated gaming platform. Games tend to take better advantage of lesser hardware in home consoles because said hardware is dedicated to gaming. While these consoels are slowly allowing other apps, etc, they still don't waste nearly as many resources as a pc does before a game is even fired up.
3. Exclusive content.
So long as these 3 points exists, home consoles will too. People also forget that when you buy a home console, it will practically play all new games for the next 6 to 8 years. Last mid range gaming PC I played already struggled with Unity, and I bought this rig 2 years ago.
When I am spending over 2000$ on a new PC I want the best valued hardware and I basically didnt have a clue. So I spent alot of time researching. Very happy with the result, but there have been many hurdels....
Only #3 Still makes any sense.
1. Raptr/experience does the work for you if you don't want to tinker.
2. Consoles OS' actually have more reserved hardware than windows does. The advent of things like mantle and dx12 basically throw out any secret sauce metal type arguments, considering how many threads we've had on games performing as well as you think they would compared to console (you know, the i3+750ti stuff). And that's without the thinner APIs. The switch to nearly standard PCs has sort of robbed consoles of these arguments that at least had a smidgen of merit in the past
The 3ds is incredibly dead versus phones. It's about as niche as you can get, or I guess that would be the vita. The same thing will happen to consoles in the living room - tablets, phones, and PCs will replace them. Apple and Microsoft will optimize their OS for large screen displays, and then the day of consoles being somewhat mainstream is over. Sony is the one with the real problem, as they don't have a comparable OS and infrastructure to MS and Apple. Nintendo will be fine because they live in a niche space already.
Boombloxer
Member
I didn't address it because there is no evidence to suggest the audience wants it. Tech serves the customer. If the customer has already voted Against backwards compatibility and can already receive VR products like Morpheus, your scenario again applies to a tiny niche of the overall market.
You're nuts if you think Oculus and the other platforms won't be locked down to a degree. The hardware is only a gateway. So long as there are companies with competing interests, you will have closed platforms. And since closed hardware is the most cost efficient way to ensure tech for a set period of time, you'll have those too. Apples closed and the mass market doesn't care, monetizes great. Android is open and is more popular worldwide, but also more fragmented and harder to actually monetize because everyone is on different systems with offshoots, etc.
That scenario in the console market is an invitation to ruin. There's a reason why no ones interested in that.
Pokemaniac
Member
If the 3DS is niche, then so is all dedicated gaming hardware. As of the end of 2014, the 3DS has sold over 50 million units. (source) I don't think even the PS4 is particularly close to that.
The 3ds has been around for 4 years and is near end of life. If the ps4 or xbone only sell 50 million each in 4 years, both MS and Sony won't be very happy.
You also have to consider that the 3ds pretty much is the handheld console market, with vita sales being so abysmal. Xbox, ps4, Wii u combined are well over 50 million sales combined in only 1-2 years on the market.
What evidence are you referencing? Backwards compatibility is one of the top requested features on Xbox Feedback for the Xbox One.
I'm not saying a Microsoft console has Playstation games (not yet). I'm just talking about buying games on a platform that allows you to carry those games forward as the platform introduces new hardware, as well as dig into older games from previous generations if you're new to the platform. How does that invite ruin for the console market?
You might want to look at your numbers again
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
Alienware Alpha is readily available at a reasonable price yet that console isn't the market leader, the PS4 is by a wide margin.
If the video game console's days are numbered, to eventually be replaced by PCs, can someone explain this current marketplace reality to me?
In my eyes, that talk is all hot air
If the video game console's days are numbered, to eventually be replaced by PCs, can someone explain this current marketplace reality to me?
In my eyes, that talk is all hot air
Which numbers? The 50 mil for 3ds was sourced by previous poster, and off the top of my head ps4, xbone, and Wii u combined should be over 50 right? 20+ for ps4, 10-15 Wii u, 15-20 xbone is about right isn't it?
http://www.statista.com/statistics/269915/global-apple-ipad-sales-since-q3-2010/
When you consider that iPad sales per fiscal quarter since 2010 have averaged 10-20 million units, and that doesn't factor in the android and windows sales, yes all of the gaming consoles are niche. This is pretty much the point the op is making.
It's not just about one PC though or steambox though, it's a combined force of pcs, tablets, and phones. Annual PC sales are around 300 million units. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2896532/pc-sales-may-be-worse-than-expected-this-year.html
Factor in tablets and phones, and I don't even know. The point is that fewer and fewer people will see the need to buy a console, because they have other devices that do the same thing, as well as a plethora of other things that a dedicated console cannot. So, the console will adapt and essentially become a pc in order to provide more functionality and restore the value proposition.
I will argue that. It took me 5 minutes and 2-3 inputs to setup the PS4. What changed? Patches? They download themselves and do not block playing the game (as opposed to Steam, for example).
This thread ... just in time for the Windows 10 announcement and the surprise Xbox tie in!
I believe
exactly
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
I didn't say anything about me enjoying a paywall. I simply stated the absurdity of Microsoft giving up Gold subs and third party royalty fees to put out a Steam Box. Not going to happen.
When 4k TVs become widespread? LOL! Hope you don't mind waiting.
Looks like it is up to the consumer, and they're happily buying consoles, so there you go! Also, the notion of a console has been around since the dawn of the hobby, so this sudden evil corporate narrative crap is a real hoot.
Boombloxer
Member
Yes, from the 5%. Again, loud minority not majority.
Mattrick cited the usage stats at 5%.
So we're back at square one, niche feature for some enthusiasts, and "why can't this thing be more like this another device I use" while missing the point of why it's built like that in the first place.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
This is flat out wrong. You can pop a game disk into a brand new ps4 you just took out of the box and be playing within two minutes thanks to playgo if you just want to play the campaign and not connect to psn.
Seems like you're doing some willfull ignoring of your own.
4k will be the standard within 10 years.
And you think that the consumer is not at all influenced by corporate marketing that results in ignorant purchase decisions?
The PS4 is effectively a slightly customized, purpose built gaming PC in a console wrapper. If I'm Sony, why would I open up my ecosystem to other storefronts? If I'm Microsoft I feel like I missed the boat by not setting up my own version of Steam when I had the chance, and I am the dominant OS provider, so I make a play there. But if that flops like GFWL, do I risk my Xbox ecosystem by going all in? I'm not sure I believe that either of them do that.
In order for 4k to become standard in the US, cable company infrastructure will need to undergo some serious upgrades.
That was my first custom built PC. While I had been gaming on PC since I was young, I only got hand me downs so I had almost zero knowledge on the hardware aside from knowing you need a motherboard, hard drive etc.
Everything will be internet based, cable, higher speed DSL, and fiber already provide enough bandwith for 4k streaming. I stream 4k Netflix with a 40 meg DSL connection. 4k sets also display 1080 content upscaled beautifully. Cable and satellite doesn't need to moved to 4k broadcast for 4k to become the standard resolution on TV sets. 4k sets are already around the $1000 mark for name brand sets, in many cases roughly the same as higher end 1080p sets. You will see name brand $500-750 50 plus inch 4k sets within the next 2 years. Hell, LG and Vizio are already going for $699 at microcenter and elsewhere.
Boombox On
Member
You're crazy misunderstanding the context of that statistic.
There's the pretty obvious factor that just because only 5% of people want BC for one console after almost 8 full years - that 5% for the 360 was when the Xbox One was already announced - doesn't mean it's the same with all platforms at all times. There's way more finesse than that (like the number of games that actually fully work on that unfortunate software emulator in the first place, as well as the popularity of the older console) and the amount of people who ask for/use BC on consoles changes over the course of a generation.
The viability of the console gaming market has little to nothing to do with hardware capabilities. We all know and have known that a PC will always have the capability to surpass a consoles output, but that is where the advantage ends. Every aspect of gaming on PC is harder than console gaming.
Building a PC is near imposdible for a layman
Buying a gaming PC is asking to get screwed by ridiculous price exploitation
Installing anything using a wizard is to complicated for most people
Steam, Raptr and similar programs are too overwhelming for casual gamers
Hooking up a PC to a tv, despite requiring only an HDMI cable is to difficult for the average consumer
There is a serious lack of knowledge and trust about what is safe to run or install on a PC
There are no uniform development standards on PC making every purchase a risk
The list goes on and on. PC are simply not user friendly. The vast majority of people are typically versed in google and social media. Ask yourself how often someone asks you how to do something or how to fix something or if you can look at something for them. Then ask yourself how many times you've tried to explain what you did so that person could do it themself next time only to be met by a dumbfounded look.
The only way PCs could ever put a real dent in the console market is if they dumbed down every aspect of the operating system, see Windows 8's epic fail, and adopted a set of industry standards. Of course, this would make them in to consoles, aka the steam box.
Sony may colaps under its own weight, Microsoft may realize Xbox is wasting their money and people may forget Nintendo exists, but if any two of them exit the market, you can be confident beyond a doubt, someone is waiting in the wings.
Building a PC is near imposdible for a layman
Buying a gaming PC is asking to get screwed by ridiculous price exploitation
Installing anything using a wizard is to complicated for most people
Steam, Raptr and similar programs are too overwhelming for casual gamers
Hooking up a PC to a tv, despite requiring only an HDMI cable is to difficult for the average consumer
There is a serious lack of knowledge and trust about what is safe to run or install on a PC
There are no uniform development standards on PC making every purchase a risk
The list goes on and on. PC are simply not user friendly. The vast majority of people are typically versed in google and social media. Ask yourself how often someone asks you how to do something or how to fix something or if you can look at something for them. Then ask yourself how many times you've tried to explain what you did so that person could do it themself next time only to be met by a dumbfounded look.
The only way PCs could ever put a real dent in the console market is if they dumbed down every aspect of the operating system, see Windows 8's epic fail, and adopted a set of industry standards. Of course, this would make them in to consoles, aka the steam box.
Sony may colaps under its own weight, Microsoft may realize Xbox is wasting their money and people may forget Nintendo exists, but if any two of them exit the market, you can be confident beyond a doubt, someone is waiting in the wings.
I do agree this part can take the longest:
Especially if you are comparing prices, trying to configure within a certain price range. 1-2 parts, maybe not. Whole PC? That can take several weeks. At least. We are talking about:
Case - how many external USB and other ports included in the case, psu at top or bottom, mobo form factor, etc.
mobo - again how many USB, specs of the ports, right form factor for said case, etc.
cpu - AMD or Intel, specs, overclockable or not, do I want it to be OC or not, benchmarks, etc.
and so on and so on..
biglittleps
Member
Agreed. Not everyone can have time to spend hours on gaming and they want to save money for limited gaming , so console offers better price ratio and good exclusives along with retail market for physical discs which I prefer as I'm kind of collector for games I love.
So if Microsoft released a small form factor gaming PC that booted into a gaming-centric environment, but also ran windows 10, none of y'all console gamers would buy it? If it was still called an Xbox even? I think this really just boils down to marketing, branding, and blind consumer loyalty.
There are far more casual gamers playing games on PCs than there are consoles sold this generation. And if plugging in an HDMI cable is too difficult for someone, console gaming isn't for them either.
Cited what usage stats? I provided a link to my source, the least you could do is link yours so we can look at the data together and discuss.
We're not back at square one. I still believe the consoles are becoming more PC like than ever and I don't believe it's going to stop or reverse, especially as PC gaming tech advances at a faster rate and API development allows for more efficient use in gaming likes consoles are able to achieve.
I think the introduction of Steam Machines, Nvidia SHIELD, and Alienware Alpha are a sign of more to come in terms of consumer-friendly, small-form PCs for gaming.
I believe digital distribution will continue to grow and become preferred over time. With it consumers are going to demand that they be able to keep access to their digital library even as we take generational leaps, so there will be backwards and forwards compatibility.
I see more types of gaming emerging with a broad range of performance requirements. The global gaming audience is growing, but also fragmenting. I think gaming consoles will evolve to accommodate various gamer preferences, because console manufacturers will chase volume in sales even if it means a small range of models in performance.
You can ignore how consoles have evolved and how close they and PCs are right now if you want. I have no skin in the game, I'm just making observations and making guesses as to where it may be in time. It's silly to think consoles are going to stay the same as they are now when they haven't been exactly the same across any generation.
They'll say no, but this is no different than when generations before said they wouldn't game if HDDs were required, or patches came to console games, or subscriptions for online gaming. It's just people whining because of change.
Memorabilia
Member
This post accurately sums up reality: Simplicity is king. Most tech-heads seem to have a difficult time understanding this fact. They exist in a little thought bubble where everyone cares about the same techy things they do. Which is why this debate pops up from time to time. I'm somewhat of a tech-head myself, with multiple PCs of various builds in my household, 2 of which are hooked up to big ass TVs for couch gaming. But I still prefer the simplicity of console gaming at least 50% of the time. And the bottom line is the vast majority of the people I know in real life want things to be as easy as possible. They simply dont care about most things people like us care about. And thats fine. Its only a problem in threads like this where this fact is conveniently forgotten.
Sure, *you & I* would probably at least consider making that purchase precisely because the ability to tinker with a full OS would be a value-add to guys like us. Id LOVE to have the official manufacturer sanctioned right to tinker with the current Xbone or PS4 without having to hack them. But, to the vast majority of people who just want to fire up the latest Halo, Gears, CoD, etc...? Not so much. The fact that a future iteration of either console might have a "full fledged PC OS under the hood" is going to be met with blank stares & a heavy dose of "yeah, so? I just want to game bitch." Most people I know who console game don't give a rats ass about tinkering, upgrading or OS functionality. At best, those things would be met with apathy (not a reason to buy). At worst, more capabilities = more complication, which may actually put people off the purchase. Most "normal" people (read that however you like) just cant be bothered with anything beyond the complexity of hitting the power button & putting a disk in a tray. They want it to play games when they put the disk in. Easily. Instantly. Without any further complications that a more feature-rich OS might bring. And even if these "extra" capabilities are hidden in some way so as to make tinkering an opt in, it'd open up the console to millions of noobs accidentally doing something that just bricked their shiny new console. If you've ever worked in IT support in any capacity you would immediately understand why keeping things simple & unbrickable by preventing most tinkering is a very good idea.
I do think there are some merits to the OPs line of thinking in the more distant future. But I don't see PCs necessarily replacing consoles so much as co-existing with them (& mobile)...all using the same platform/ecosystems to play your games on multiple devices at multiple resolutions &/or with different control schemes. This either/or argument doesn't make much sense to me considering the growth of the console market (PS4s & Xbones outselling PS3/360 to this point). And how exactly MS or Sony would monetize a generic platform that doesn't bring you into the ecosystem hasn't been answered yet, unless you think both companies will simply become software/game producers sans hardware platforms. I dont see that as impossible in the distant future, but I'd say for at least the next generation its highly unlikely.
Consoles still have a place for the foreseeable future because from the perspective of the average gamer they are dead simple to use & hard to fuck up/break. And from the perspective of MS/Sony the console is increasingly becoming the platform that bridges the gap between PCs & mobile, provides a deeper gaming experience than mobile without the complications & support headaches of PC...all as a way to rope people into their respective ecosystems. I dont like paywalls, but to think either company will give up on that idea without a way to replace that revenue is silly. PC gaming is arguably better...and online is free...but it is far too complicated for the average person & given the fact that there are thousands of different combinations of hardware & potential problems this brings from a developer standpoint, this wont be changing anytime soon. Consoles give devs one target to hit & piblishers can milk that for 5+ years before having to re-invest in new R&D.
Consoles just make too much sense as a delivery platform for the masses. PCs have their niche. And mobile/pads will continue to grow, maybe even eventually becoming a common way to "sling" games to a big screen. But there's really no logical reason to think all of these cant co-exist. In fact, as noted earlier, I think that's slowly becoming the long-term plan. To deliver games that you can play across multiple platforms. At home or on the go.
I would. And I believe the folks who were upset Other OS was removed from the PS3 would too. I was one of those folks pissed it was removed.
Good point. Especially as this gen is less plug n play than before. Even tho the Wii U was mentioned earlier as being more plug n play than the others.....day 1 it was exactly like the PS4 and XBO. Maybe that huge update coulda been installed before it launched. Maybe the Wii U coulda been delayed while the update was sent to all consoles. Whatever the case it also needed a huge update at launch.
Now? It is more plug n play than the other 2.
Boombloxer
Member
Here's Mattrick: http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/22/43...compatibility-backwards-thinking-don-mattrick
There's nothing to misconstrue, a tiny minority uses it. Requests matter less than actual behavior data.
All of the systems you named are niche machines for a niche audience. Average person isn't buying any of those over a regular console.
Digital distribution has a giant hurdle related to infrastructure more than anything.
If you want to know how the gaming consoles evolved in the past for emerging markets, they basically sell older consoles in the regions that aren't there technically yet, they do not make brand new, differently specs machines.
And I said a Few pages ago that consoles are evolving, but just not into differently specd versions because the market has rejected that as a viable option. They also rejected the most PC like console above a certain price point. The most successful consoles of the past generations have just been really easy to play, get online, and generally offer a no frills experience that lasts for years. There is simply no reason for anyone to believe that evolving the model means 3 different upgradeable PS4s instead of 1 version that stays.
You've conveniently ignored that the mass market doesn't need the same depth as the enthusiast one, that they don't care about BC, and they are perfectly fine with the current offerings, view game consoles differently from phones, don't actually care about any of the products you stated, that closed ecosystems exist on phones, PC, and consoles regardless of hardware and people are actually fine with it.
The actual reality is that the majority doesn't want the future you're describing. The enthusiasts do, but they never drive mass adoption into the 100M range.
And you're in the niche. pS4 doesn't have it, mass market doesn't care and hasn't asked about it.
JayhawkerStL
Banned
I think the issue is one of confusion on the part of PC enthusiasts. They are absolutely right the PCs are more powerful and flexible, and could absolutely serve as gaming machines, DVR's, and streaming devices. Basically, all of the great things we have in console gaming right now, are because of the work of PC enthusiasts.
The confusion is, they think everyone wants that flexibility, when many, the vast majority of people, really, want plug and play. They sacrifice all kinds of possible advantages if they can avoid all of the things you need to do to maintain a PC.
I guess what they don't realize is that everyone with a DVR, a game console, and maybe a dedicated box for streaming services have computers hooked up to their TVs. They are just easier to use and provide everything people want.
I hope PC enthusiasts keep on keeping on. There is no reason to stop innovating now. But stop thinking that those innovations are going to add an actual PC to our TVs. They aren't. They are going to provide more functionality and services to dedicated boxes.
The system works symbiotically, and everyone should be happy.
Except you can get Plug-and-Play with a little hassle on PC right now. X-box Media Center/Kodi will do the work of Apple TV or another DVR-like device. Steam will give you a console-like experience of buying and downloading titles.
Is it perfect? No but it can get there.
He doesn't even elaborate on how they arrived at that data. Was it some kind of market study? Why are Sony and Nintendo researching and investing in ways to make back catalogs accessible?
The context in which I named those small form PCs for gaming was clear. Don't spin it just so you can dance around the fact that billion dollar businesses are building those machines for a reason.
What giant hurdle does digital distribution have? Are you going to dance around the growth of it and the implications of it too?
I didn't say emerging markets, I said emerging game types and a growing variety of gamer preferences, which may drive console manufacturers to find ways to reach that growing audience. I get that redirection is your thing, but don't get lazy on me if you're going to continue doing it.
All those points you say I'm ignoring are just sweeping assumptions of yours. That's fine, but don't pass them off as facts.