As long as consoles don't fuck it up by adding too many online features, updates, and other up-front bullshit, PC's will never overtake the plug and play ease of a console for the average parent looking for something for their kids that they don't have to spend a weekend setting up.
Im sorry OP but your point eludes me. How exactly is PC taking over the living room?
I actually addressed that. This is something that very few people actually care about.
Old interview with Mattrick said 5% of players ever used it.
Focused indeed.
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.
Consoles won't ever die... they'll keep rocking forever... forever... fore...
Are you from the future?
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....
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....
Just curious, how knowledgable were you about computers at the time? Did you have experience replacing parts and stuff like that?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.
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.
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.
I'm sure that my phone can produce better visuals than my 3DS, and yet I'm pretty sure the average 3DS game still has more depth than the average phone game. I don't think power is what's holding back mobile devices. I think the bigger problem is the software ecosystem that mobile devices have created.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
You might want to look at your numbers again
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
Now if many of you are going to argue that consoles are still easy peasy plug and play stick the disc in and go.
This thread ... just in time for the Windows 10 announcement and the surprise Xbox tie in!
![]()
Nah.
The average console gamer doesn't care about any of this.
So you enjoy having everything behind a paywall? Regardless, they could still offer a gaming subscription service, something along the lines of EA access or Playstation now. They could also easily put online mp for first party titles behind a paywall.
Once beautiful 4k displays become widespread, people will actually want to do productive things on those displays. I do photo editing on my 65 inch Panasonic 4k, for example.
I don't see why you wouldn't want the ability to run a full blown OS on future systems, you're intentionally asking for a locked down corporate ecosystem. Why? As I've said, you will be able to boot into a console type mode if you want. It should be up to the consumer what kind of use they want to get out of their hardware if the hardware is capable of running it. I don't understand why so many people advocate for corporate supply side decision making.
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?
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.
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.
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.
4k will be the standard within 10 years.
Just curious, how knowledgable were you about computers at the time? Did you have experience replacing parts and stuff like that?
In order for 4k to become standard in the US, cable company infrastructure will need to undergo some serious upgrades.
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.
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.
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
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Jeff have you ever thought about why hundreds of millions of people don't move their PCs to the living room even though they've had the capability to hook them up to the TV for years?
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.
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.