Poll: Sony Pulls Out of the Console Race

[rcs619]

I honestly do not understand why we NEED another console generation.

Graphics have gotten to the point where they don't really need to get that much better, especially with a good art direction.

Besides better graphics, I don't see what you'd need a new console to do. Maybe social network integration, or some other silly feature. But really, why would you even need that on a console?

There's also the issue of game prices. New consoles mean new tech and more powerful systems. Games already cost over $60 (including tax) and have long development times unless you're Madden or COD and just release expansion packs every year. All a new console generation would do is add onto that.

I have to wonder what happens to digital purchases on a new console too. Are purchases made on the 360 going to be transferable to the new system? Or are they gone? What about people who had PS3's? Will their purchases transfer to the next playstation? What if there is no PS4, are they just completely out of luck?

Either way, I doubt Sony will pull out. So what if the PS3 is selling third? It is still selling, and still making millions. Corporations care about profits, and as long as there's a profit-margin, they'll usually continue to put out the product. I really just don't get why anyone would want another console generation though. Are a few extra shades of brown and green for whatever the game-of-the-month is worth all that?

 

[Lunar Templar]

seeing as i have already with drawn from this console generation and pretty much gone PC, it would change nothing for me.

 

[Snotnarok]

I would recuse myself to the PC completely.

Microsoft has earned my eternal enmity. Frankly, I don't see this vanishing any time soon. Plus, I know that if they have the "hardcore" console market almost entirely to themselves, they'll rapidly become even more intolerable towards their PC audience. Not something to look forward to, gentlemen. Not at all.

You will be turning to a PC...that runs on windows DUN DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUN.

Seriously though, I think I'd have to pull out of the console market all together. That is, unless another major company decided to get into the console business (I'm looking at you Valve). Imagine a little Steambox that you connected to your TV.


Now clean yourself up.

Steambox connected to your TV you say? That's easily done, as I have my PC hooked up to 2 monitors for work and connected via HDMI to a 42inch TV for play, Xbox 360 controller, PS2 or 3 controller, all works just like a console. Just easier on the wallet.

Edit: MS being the only console developer? That'd be fairly painful considering their consoles have had the highest failure rate in my collection, 2 Xbox's and 7 Xbox360's, yet PSOne, PS2, PS3, Genesis, Game Gear, Saturn, Super Nintendo,Wii, GBA SP, PSP, Neo Geo Pocket Color, all still work and have never needed any fixing

 

[Snotnarok]

I would recuse myself to the PC completely.

Microsoft has earned my eternal enmity. Frankly, I don't see this vanishing any time soon. Plus, I know that if they have the "hardcore" console market almost entirely to themselves, they'll rapidly become even more intolerable towards their PC audience. Not something to look forward to, gentlemen. Not at all.

You will be turning to a PC...that runs on windows DUN DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUN.

Seriously though, I think I'd have to pull out of the console market all together. That is, unless another major company decided to get into the console business (I'm looking at you Valve). Imagine a little Steambox that you connected to your TV.


Now clean yourself up.

Steambox connected to your TV you say? That's easily done, as I have my PC hooked up to 2 monitors for work and connected via HDMI to a 42inch TV for play, Xbox 360 controller, PS2 or 3 controller, all works just like a console. Just easier on the wallet.

Edit: MS being the only console developer? That'd be fairly painful considering their consoles have had the highest failure rate in my collection, 2 Xbox's and 7 Xbox360's, yet PSOne, PS2, PS3, Genesis, Game Gear, Saturn, Super Nintendo,Wii, GBA SP, PSP, Neo Geo Pocket Color, all still work and have never needed any fixing

I have a similar set up (with two monitors and an HDMI hook up) using a GTX 500 series nvidia card, are you able to use both monitors and the HDMI at the same time? I am still trying to figure that one out

You mean like duplicate the screen? I don't think you can because of stupid HDMI encoding (to prevent piracy, but doesn't).

Or if you're referring to having just 3 monitors hooked up? I couldn't tell you because I usually just have my tablet monitor switch off when I game.

My PC seems to have even adapted to the set up because when I put my receiver on the right setting my PC switches the monitors automatically AND The audio to the receiver.

 

[nathan-dts]

Would be horrible, Sony are the only one of the three that make amazing exclusives and new IP. Little Big Planet, Uncharted, Resistance, inFamous and The Last of Us all popped up this generation along with already established IP.

 

[Snotnarok]

I would recuse myself to the PC completely.

Microsoft has earned my eternal enmity. Frankly, I don't see this vanishing any time soon. Plus, I know that if they have the "hardcore" console market almost entirely to themselves, they'll rapidly become even more intolerable towards their PC audience. Not something to look forward to, gentlemen. Not at all.

You will be turning to a PC...that runs on windows DUN DUN DUN DUUUUUUUUN.

Seriously though, I think I'd have to pull out of the console market all together. That is, unless another major company decided to get into the console business (I'm looking at you Valve). Imagine a little Steambox that you connected to your TV.


Now clean yourself up.

Steambox connected to your TV you say? That's easily done, as I have my PC hooked up to 2 monitors for work and connected via HDMI to a 42inch TV for play, Xbox 360 controller, PS2 or 3 controller, all works just like a console. Just easier on the wallet.

Edit: MS being the only console developer? That'd be fairly painful considering their consoles have had the highest failure rate in my collection, 2 Xbox's and 7 Xbox360's, yet PSOne, PS2, PS3, Genesis, Game Gear, Saturn, Super Nintendo,Wii, GBA SP, PSP, Neo Geo Pocket Color, all still work and have never needed any fixing

I have a similar set up (with two monitors and an HDMI hook up) using a GTX 500 series nvidia card, are you able to use both monitors and the HDMI at the same time? I am still trying to figure that one out

You mean like duplicate the screen? I don't think you can because of stupid HDMI encoding (to prevent piracy, but doesn't).

Or if you're referring to having just 3 monitors hooked up? I couldn't tell you because I usually just have my tablet monitor switch off when I game.

My PC seems to have even adapted to the set up because when I put my receiver on the right setting my PC switches the monitors automatically AND The audio to the receiver.

Yeah, HDMI encoding is a pain in the ass, Have to turn my TV on, drag my bluray player ap over onto the TV screen from my main desktop, then insert the bluray to play it, if I try to do the bluray on a normal HD monitor it gives errors and refuses to play... the bastards.

My PC is still being a bit special when it comes to my HDTV, as I have to flip the audio over manually... (Might have something to do with my USB headphones)

But alas, thanks for your help, I was hopin someone would be able to give me the golden key to using my TV and my twin monitors at the same time, but I am to go on with my sadness XD

That MIGHT be a limit of your video card, it might only be able to do 2 sources out at a time. The HDMI out just being an option to DVI.

Yeah that does sound like a pain in the ass to hook up. I run win7 so maybe that has something to do with it. Literally I turn on the receiver and TV my PC does all the switching automatically.

 

[Louzon]

Concerning that we all known Nintendo is in a secluded little league of their own, that leaves Microsoft to handle the hardcore video game market next generation.

...You're joking, right? Right?

What's the joke? Nintendo has been doing casual games and 2-3 first party titles every year since the Wii launched. The last hardcore game they released was BRAWL, and that was what, 2008?

I respect Nintendo as a company, but let's please not pretend that Nintendo makes games for "our" crowd, ie: hardcore gamers.

Nintendo is already planning on adding the multi-platform games to the Wii U (which I hope gets re-named), if you just look at the games already planned for it online, so I'm guessing they learned their lesson and decided to welcome in games that appeal to mature gamers, while still probably having games for kids and casual gamers. That makes me happy, as I'm a gamer since age 5, but am now 29 with kids of my own. I refuse to use terms like "Hardcore gamer" or "Our crowd", as your example, because I think that gamers kind of get snobby with that kind of terminology. But yes, Nintendo plans on getting into the more mature game market, and I hope they get all those kinds of games to the system, because I love them, but I hope they don't forget where they came from, because my son loves games too and I don't want to have him have nothing to play for the next 10 years or so as he's only 4 and I don't want him seeing that kind of stuff yet. lol

 

[L0ki]

Why does Sony need to make a new PlayStation the PS3 plays blu-rays disc games which is the point of any new Xbox is to break away from the dvd. Nintendo is making the new wii because the wii itself was made to be so simple it has little in the ways of improvement without remaking it entirely and Nintendo has reached that point where its cheaper to make a new one.

Sony made the PlayStation systems to last longer than others so the next Xbox will come out and from a hardware standpoint be the PS3s equal so most likely sony is focusing on improving their software not hardware.

 

[Funkysandwich]

I honestly do not understand why we NEED another console generation.

Graphics have gotten to the point where they don't really need to get that much better, especially with a good art direction.

Besides better graphics, I don't see what you'd need a new console to do. Maybe social network integration, or some other silly feature. But really, why would you even need that on a console?

There's also the issue of game prices. New consoles mean new tech and more powerful systems. Games already cost over $60 (including tax) and have long development times unless you're Madden or COD and just release expansion packs every year. All a new console generation would do is add onto that.

I have to wonder what happens to digital purchases on a new console too. Are purchases made on the 360 going to be transferable to the new system? Or are they gone? What about people who had PS3's? Will their purchases transfer to the next playstation? What if there is no PS4, are they just completely out of luck?

Either way, I doubt Sony will pull out. So what if the PS3 is selling third? It is still selling, and still making millions. Corporations care about profits, and as long as there's a profit-margin, they'll usually continue to put out the product. I really just don't get why anyone would want another console generation though. Are a few extra shades of brown and green for whatever the game-of-the-month is worth all that?

It's not just graphics that need extra processing, it's things like physics and more importantly, AI. If a new console generation means AI that is more interesting to play against, then I'm down.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

How about Sony knowing they lost exclusives to the competition and funded and bought out other developers to crank out AAA exclusive titles?

Buying-out exclusives that would have otherwise been multi-platform isn't something that I'd call good for the gaming industry. It falls back into the Bluray issue where it's less Sony doing something for gaming, and more just Sony doing something to help themselves.

How about being pioneers in the Rhythm and Music Games genre?

Didn't Konami make DDR? And Activision made Guitar Hero. So while I'll admit that my knowledge of that particular genre is limited (mostly because I rarely play them), those are the two titles I tend to think of when I think of "pioneering rhythm and music games".

Or how about not charging for the PSN network?

Because they couldn't. Not literally, of course. They could have charged if they really wanted to, but they knew that it would have been a bad idea. Think about it, when the large majority of your target audience is already shelling-out $50 a year for a service with a competitor, how many of them do you think are going to be willing to shell-out even more for a newer service that they aren't fully sure of? Heck, this is something that MMOs learned long time ago. You think MMOs are going free-to-play because they're good people? No, because free-to-play with ads in the games are the only ways that most people will try/play a second MMO.

Same goes with Sony. Making PSN free was the only way to ensure that people even acknowledged it. It wasn't a good-natured moved on Sony's part, it was a defensive move in response to XBLA having already beaten them to the punch. PSN would have been a paid service if XBLA wasn't there already.

Sony has done a lot for the gaming world regardless if you like Sony or not.

Still not seeing it. Of your three examples, one is a case of them doing the opposite of good, one is a case that's gonna need explanation if its true, and the other is a case of their hands being tied.

 

[LilithSlave]

Why not move towards this?

Because it's not worth the time and money. Graphics are why this gaming generation is lagging behind the last. Gameplay always, ALWAYS takes priority over graphics. Also, why not move toward making more 16-Bit games again?

Also, because ewww, he's bald.

 

[LilithSlave]

Because they look and play like shit.

This is the most hilariously ridiculous statement ever.

The 16-Bit generation was gaming in it's prime.

They play leagues better than today's games. And they looked leagues better, too.

Seriously, I hate the way most modern games look. And between all the new games I play, I play a dozen old 16-Bit ones for the 100th time in between. Because those 16-Bit games are much more fun. They look better, they're more fun, and they're not a gamble like new games.

With a new game, it might be good, and it might not. Most likely not. With an old game, like a classic SNES game, you know you're getting a game that looks and plays good.

Graphics and gameplay aren't mutually exclusive, far from it.

No, but graphics mean more time and money spent on graphics that could be spent on better things.

Which in the current industry, means lots of games that focus on graphics at the cost of gameplay, leading to a lot of mediocre playing games that show hyper-realistic ugliness.

Games that will never be as beautiful as most 16-Bit games.

Between hyper-realistc military fps games, and new 16-Bit indie games like Terraria, which looks and plays better? Terraria, of course!

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I honestly do not understand why we NEED another console generation.

Graphics have gotten to the point where they don't really need to get that much better, especially with a good art direction.

Besides better graphics, I don't see what you'd need a new console to do. Maybe social network integration, or some other silly feature. But really, why would you even need that on a console?

There's also the issue of game prices. New consoles mean new tech and more powerful systems. Games already cost over $60 (including tax) and have long development times unless you're Madden or COD and just release expansion packs every year. All a new console generation would do is add onto that.

But they can get so much better.


I'm not embedding this video as a proof of cinematic achievement on Epic's count. I'm embedding this because it's something that's rendered real time. I'll let it sink in for you.

In a couple of years, given that technological progress doesn't run into a brick wall, we could have games that look like this. Bokeh depth of field, realistic clothing, awesome shaders and lighting, tesselation used to a great extent, et cetera. Even if you don't care too much about graphics, you have to admit, the prospect of games looking like this is exciting. At least a little.

Anyway, dropping the graphics part of it for a little while, the main reason is simple. A better collection of hardware would allow games to go bigger, the lack of which has been annoying many gamers. Console games generally being small-scale shooters isn't a design decision, it's something brought on by the limitations of the hardware. Developers basically have to make a choice between their games looking good or being big in their scale. With a new generation of consoles, we could have both. And a lot of other things, like more dynamic characters and environments, better AI or the use of physics.

Then there's the issue of optimization. A lot of time developing for the current gen of consoles is spent downscaling and optimizing everything in the game for the consoles not to die a horrible death. With a new gen, you could literally make a better looking game faster, because you won't have to reduce the quality of every texture and model to shit.

Edit: Or what about something like this?




Why not move towards this?

I think you are far too optimistic about extra processing power. Yes those graphics are nice but that will be the focus and not in the other which at the moment is sorely needed. For example, we could be doing more to push dedicated servers and 64+ man games on console for FPS games. Don't bother citing examples I know they exist but they need to exist in greater volume. Let's just hope at t he very and utmost least the former catches on and P2P in FPS games on consoles will die a horrible death and suffer for eternity in idea hell. In my opinion P2P has no place in these games.

This would be something worth buying a new console gen over.