Multiple Consoles, do we need them?

[pompom8volt]

I personaly think that the more competition the better the games will be. Then again the Wii is still flying off shelves so maybe not

note: I am a PC gamer and think ALL consoles are stupid as hell.

 

[Yoshi_egg80]

How is it competitive? We all know they're working together on some level that they jacked the prices of all the games to $50 even 60$ now across the board.

 

[VZLANemesis]

For them yes. For the customers not.

Why not? It eliminates the stupid console war, and encourages video game wars, which isn't a bad thing because it means way more competition.

No. By having two/three consoles, it makes the makers of the consoles put out better consoles with better games on it.

Competition makes people work harder in outdoing others. Which means better stuff for the customer.

"Hey! If the PS1 sells why make a new one? Its not like anyone is releasing a better console?"

-Because crysis 2 just came out and everybody is now playing in a fucking pc, we need a ps2 NOW
^^

 

[ThisNewGuy]

For them yes. For the customers not.

Why not? It eliminates the stupid console war, and encourages video game wars, which isn't a bad thing because it means way more competition.

No. By having two/three consoles, it makes the makers of the consoles put out better consoles with better games on it.

Competition makes people work harder in outdoing others. Which means better stuff for the customer.

"Hey! If the PS1 sells why make a new one? Its not like anyone is releasing a better console?"

"Anyways, I don't see the problem with games because games will have more competition against each other (Killzone won't just be competing with PS3 shooters, but every shooter). Console makers would definitely push the envelopes because with each iteration of consoles, they make a lot of money, and each generation of console needs to be significantly better than the previous generation or else the consumers would rather play with the old console until the new console gets dirt cheap with tons of games.

And people who argue for higher prices needs to understand that game prices will not behave differently than in a multi-console world because there are even more competition in a single console industry. But the problem is with consoles, however, that's not a major problem since in a single console industry, that console will have so many games in its generation that gamers can easily just wait till the new console drops in price by playing the old games."

I'll give you an example. Microsoft had the monopoly in operating system, so why make Vista when XP sells? It's because making a new version sells better. When you've already over-saturated your market with your product, you'll want all of them and more people to buy your product again, which can only be done by making a newer, better one.

 

[OneBig Man]

See the thing is the 3 systems are made by three companies, so they are all trying to make a better profit than the other guys. Part of doing that is to have console exclusives that will want people to buy their console.

So do we need diferent consoles: NO

Are there going to be multiple consoles: YES.

 

[VZLANemesis]

Competition creates motivation. The lack thereof inspires apathy.

Read the damn thread :S
Same comment done a gazillion times, already answered...

 

[oliveira8]

*snip*

Your Microsoft example is flawed.

Microsoft has competition.

Mac and Linux are all bitting at Microsoft market. If MS doesn't put out a new and better OS people will go to the others OS.

Mac and Linux makes MS put out new software.

 

[ThisNewGuy]

*snip*

Your Microsoft example is flawed.

Microsoft has competition.

Mac and Linux are all bitting at Microsoft market. If MS doesn't put out a new and better OS people will go to the others OS.

Mac and Linux makes MS put out new software.

Ahahahaha, you're funny. Mac and Linux makes MS put out new software, that's a good one. MS has monopoly because they monopolize the ".exe" extension, which Mac and Linux can't use, and almost every software uses .exe or has a .exe version. Microsoft has monopolized its audience.

 

[oliveira8]

*snip*

Your Microsoft example is flawed.

Microsoft has competition.

Mac and Linux are all bitting at Microsoft market. If MS doesn't put out a new and better OS people will go to the others OS.

Mac and Linux makes MS put out new software.

Ahahahaha, you're funny. Mac and Linux makes MS put out new software, that's a good one. MS has monopoly because they monopolize the ".exe" extension, which Mac and Linux can't use, and almost every software uses .exe or has a .exe version. Microsoft has monopolized its audience.

Good to know that you still live in the last century.

Many many people are flocking out of Microsoft OS.

In the business sector the Mac is actually starting to be more usefull than Windows. Linux is still starting and its already better than anything that microsoft has to offer.

While Mac and Linux exists Microsoft is going to put out better software.

Again a race example: Just cause you going in first place, 100 km ahead of the second guy you are not going to stop to rest or sleep.

 

[GonzoGamer]

So... yeah, all important exclusives that Sony used to have are all going multiplatform (Square now working with 360's as well makes me cry), and many former Xbox exclusives are going the sony way as well.
Most exclusives are meh, or don't actually matter all that much, and if you are one of those people who wants to play both Fable and Disgaea 3, you have to pay for 2 consoles, that are almost the exact same shit.
Because of the extreme competitions of the 3 console companies, we're getting the worst pieces for each individual console, so Xbox getting constant RRODs, Wii's crappy graphics, and PS3's non-programmer friendly processor.

What do you guys think? Should Next Gen Consoles be only a huge bastard child made by all three companies or do you actually think we (as gamers) are gaining anything from their constant competition for our attention?

I feel the same way as you except about the exclusives spreading around (I think it's a great thing) I think however that the answer is in allowing other electronics companies to make consoles. After the whole rrod debacle, I wouldn't buy an xbox for $20, but I might've bought let's say a Panasonic console that plays xbox games.

 

[VZLANemesis]

See the thing is the 3 systems are made by three companies, so they are all trying to make a better profit than the other guys. Part of doing that is to have console exclusives that will want people to buy their console.

So do we need diferent consoles: NO

Are there going to be multiple consoles: YES.

Yes, I know it is that way. I just wanted to see if people truly understood this, so far, I realize they really don't.
Consumers are the ones losing here, and apparently they will fucking defend what they feel is "their" console, for whatever reason that fucking is.
I really am amazed at how many people go for the 360, in my country the first Xbox never really had a "boom" the way it did in the US. most of my friends and I realised Microsoft just wanted to buy the market by making an expensive console, and then paying big companies to design games for it. I really thought gamers would be smarter than to go for that shit, specially in the ps2 era where there was an amazing ammount of titles and there was something for each type of croud, besides even when the xbox had cool exclusives, the sheer ammount of awesome games that you had never played in the ps2 was something to keep you (well... me) from wanting to buy an xbox, just for better graphics.

But yeah, I can see why some gamers would just simply go for the xbox, they were pretty cheap for the awesome graphics it had. But then when the 360 came along, waaaay earlier than the ps3, the market just totally forgot about a coming ps3... people were just not gonna wait for it. And the ammount of good games for the 360 was pretty fucking decent, there were also the halo fans and the fact that the fps genre began growing exponentially (genre which I really don't buy that much into, except for its jewels aka. zeno gear, bioshock and the like). Even when people knew that the hardware was defective they kept on buying the thing.

Now the market is divided between 2 consoles that offer the exact same shit ...and the Wii isn't really anything but a ps2 with a much MUCH cooler peripheral. If they used some wii-remote like thing on a ps3 or xbox 360 to make original games, games that used the full potential of developers creativity (or hired this fucking guy http://johnnylee.net/projects/wii/ ) then consumers would actually be gaining more than they are now.
Wii developers think that all wii owners are extrictly casual gamers (party games, kid games, etc) and are not willing to make good use of the console ...because its graphics suck
PS3 is getting fucked by everyone because its processor is too finicky and hard to program to.
..and the 360 is charging for online gaming (which in my opinion is fucking wrong) and is buying all of sony's former exclusive associates.

I know I'm digressing excessively much, but seriously, consumers are the losers in this "console war". We are ending up paying over 600$ in order to get 3 semi-decent consoles, that could easily be replaced by a really good one.

(sorry for the wall of text)

PS. btw, in a world with only one console (...and the pc) games would probably get made even quicker because they wouldn't have to think how to adapt each game to 3 consoles, instead of making full use of the one

I know it won't happen, EVER but damn if it wouldn't be cool.

 

[ThisNewGuy]

Good to know that you still live in the last century.

Many many people are flocking out of Microsoft OS.

In the business sector the Mac is actually starting to be more usefull than Windows. Linux is still starting and its already better than anything that microsoft has to offer.

While Mac and Linux exists Microsoft is going to put out better software.

Again a race example: Just cause you going in first place, 100 km ahead of the second guy you are not going to stop to rest or sleep.

XP had monopoly, no doubt about it. The only reason why people are flocking out of windows now is because Vista was crap. That is to say, the only reason why Microsoft is relatively "losing" now is because they failed to be better than XP. Which is exactly what I mean when I said that the company owning the single platform industry will need to innovate to be better than its previous console for people to buy it again, which is a good incentive because that is a lot of money if you managed to get all of your current install base to buy your new product.

 

[VZLANemesis]

So... yeah, all important exclusives that Sony used to have are all going multiplatform (Square now working with 360's as well makes me cry), and many former Xbox exclusives are going the sony way as well.
Most exclusives are meh, or don't actually matter all that much, and if you are one of those people who wants to play both Fable and Disgaea 3, you have to pay for 2 consoles, that are almost the exact same shit.
Because of the extreme competitions of the 3 console companies, we're getting the worst pieces for each individual console, so Xbox getting constant RRODs, Wii's crappy graphics, and PS3's non-programmer friendly processor.

What do you guys think? Should Next Gen Consoles be only a huge bastard child made by all three companies or do you actually think we (as gamers) are gaining anything from their constant competition for our attention?

I feel the same way as you except about the exclusives spreading around (I think it's a great thing) I think however that the answer is in allowing other electronics companies to make consoles. After the whole rrod debacle, I wouldn't buy an xbox for $20, but I might've bought let's say a Panasonic console that plays xbox games.

...so your solution is to add more consoles, and therefore pay more in hardware to get the same software, neat.

 

[oliveira8]

Good to know that you still live in the last century.

Many many people are flocking out of Microsoft OS.

In the business sector the Mac is actually starting to be more usefull than Windows. Linux is still starting and its already better than anything that microsoft has to offer.

While Mac and Linux exists Microsoft is going to put out better software.

Again a race example: Just cause you going in first place, 100 km ahead of the second guy you are not going to stop to rest or sleep.

XP had monopoly, no doubt about it. The only reason why people are flocking out of windows now is because Vista was crap. That is to say, the only reason why Microsoft is relatively "losing" now is because they failed to be better than XP. Which is exactly what I mean when I said that the company owning the single platform industry will need to innovate to be better than its previous console for people to buy it again, which is a good incentive because that is a lot of money if you managed to get all of your current install base to buy your new product.

Also its due that the competition is offering something as good.

To be innovative you need to look at what exists and improve on. Your own stuff and the other guys stuff.

You have Blizzard as an example of this, in which their franchises are built in watching what other people make and then do the same, but better.

 

[Ashbax]

Competition creates motivation. The lack thereof inspires apathy.

This.

if there was no multi consoles, then one corporation would be in control, with no standards to live up to and no competition and we would end up with a pompous dickhead company who will eventually just be re-releasing titles every year without even bothering changing anything. Like EA's sports games. Except moar evil.

 

[VZLANemesis]

Good to know that you still live in the last century.

Many many people are flocking out of Microsoft OS.

In the business sector the Mac is actually starting to be more usefull than Windows. Linux is still starting and its already better than anything that microsoft has to offer.

While Mac and Linux exists Microsoft is going to put out better software.

Again a race example: Just cause you going in first place, 100 km ahead of the second guy you are not going to stop to rest or sleep.

XP had monopoly, no doubt about it. The only reason why people are flocking out of windows now is because Vista was crap. That is to say, the only reason why Microsoft is relatively "losing" now is because they failed to be better than XP. Which is exactly what I mean when I said that the company owning the single platform industry will need to innovate to be better than its previous console for people to buy it again, which is a good incentive because that is a lot of money if you managed to get all of your current install base to buy your new product.

Also its due that the competition is offering something as good.

To be innovative you need to look at what exists and improve on. Your own stuff and the other guys stuff.

You have Blizzard as an example of this, in which their franchises are built in watching what other people make and then do the same, but better.

If you look into the history of Microsoft and Bill Gates's success its really not a matter of doing the same but better, it's more of a doing the same (or even less) but making it look better... by advertising it... A LOT.

 

[VZLANemesis]

Competition creates motivation. The lack thereof inspires apathy.

This.

if there was no multi consoles, then one corporation would be in control, with no standards to live up to and no competition and we would end up with a pompous dickhead company who will eventually just be re-releasing titles every year without even bothering changing anything. Like EA's sports games. Except moar evil.

Again, read the fucking thread.
Console developers =/= Game Developers

 

[ThisNewGuy]

Also its due that the competition is offering something as good.

To be innovative you need to look at what exists and improve on. Your own stuff and the other guys stuff.

You have Blizzard as an example of this, in which their franchises are built in watching what other people make and then do the same, but better.

I'll admit that the Microsoft did copy its competition's ideas in creating new OS (same with Blizzard and pretty much everybody), but the same thing can happen in a single console industry. But instead of copying "competition" it would be "cooperation." What that means is that instead of talents spread over three consoles, they would all be working on one console so that all the great ideas that we see in all three consoles right now can be integrated into a single console.

 

[Ashbax]

Competition creates motivation. The lack thereof inspires apathy.

This.

if there was no multi consoles, then one corporation would be in control, with no standards to live up to and no competition and we would end up with a pompous dickhead company who will eventually just be re-releasing titles every year without even bothering changing anything. Like EA's sports games. Except moar evil.

Again, read the fucking thread.
Console developers =/= Game Developers

Im a gamer, remember? And im an especially L-A-Z-Y one.

I didnt read the thread, only the Title. and proud of it >:]

 

[oliveira8]

Also its due that the competition is offering something as good.

To be innovative you need to look at what exists and improve on. Your own stuff and the other guys stuff.

You have Blizzard as an example of this, in which their franchises are built in watching what other people make and then do the same, but better.

I'll admit that the Microsoft did copy its competition's ideas in creating new OS (same with Blizzard and pretty much everybody), but the same thing can happen in a single console industry. But instead of copying "competition" it would be "cooperation." What that means is that instead of talents spread over three consoles, they would all be working on one console so that all the great ideas that we see in all three consoles right now can be integrated into a single console.

Well..I have plenty of experience with just one sole competitor on a market and let me tell you...when theres only one calling the shots, nothing goes on.