This guy thinks 3 consoles hurts the industry; he wants 1 SUPER console!

VanillaGorilla

VanillaGorilla

CAGiversary!
Feedback
18 (100%)
http://www.startribune.com/459/story/1088760.html

By Victor Godinez, Dallas Morning News

"Gamers need fewer consoles. One would be sufficient.


I'd like to see Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft create a video game industry forum, adopt a common hardware standard and then license the technology to any company that wants to build a game machine.

Think about it. In any other segment of the entertainment and consumer electronics industries, having two formats (much less three) is considered idiotic and counterproductive for everyone.

When it was Betamax vs. VHS, everyone knew only one videotape format could survive, and it turned out to be VHS. When compact discs were flourishing, the Super Audio CD and DVD-Audio formats were guaranteed nonstarters.

DVD movie discs ruled for a decade, and now we're entering into the HD-DVD vs. Blu-ray format war that will almost certainly end with one specification becoming the dominant next-gen disc format for high-definition movies. The other format will be roadkill.

So why do we have three incompatible, competing video game consoles? It's bad for the industry and bad for gamers.

Well, let's start at the top.

When Microsoft, Sony or Nintendo wants to release a new game console, it first has to spend five to six years and hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars designing the systems.

Then, the software developers have to spend years and millions of dollars learning how to program games for three platforms that often have dramatically different hardware designs but relatively similar capabilities.
Finally, many gamers with limited budgets have to pick which console they're going to buy, forsaking the other systems' exclusive games.
If I can afford only a Nintendo Wii, for example, I'll never play "Halo 3" or "Metal Gear Solid 4."

Imagine, instead, that an industry forum met every five or six years to hammer out a new console platform, and then each hardware company was free to build its consoles based on those standard specifications. That's kind of like the TV industry and the DVD-player industry and others do.

So if you really wanted, say, the Sony-branded console, it would be available, but you could still buy all the cool Nintendo games you love and play them on your Sony machine.

Or if you wanted to support the designers at Nintendo, you could buy their console but still play a little "Gears of War" when the fancy struck.
Game developers, for their part, would make more money, since all their games would be available for the biggest possible audience, and they would have to develop for only a single format. And the hardware makers would be able to pool their resources and keep their costs down by spreading the design expenses.

Heck, gamers might even find that games and game consoles become cheaper.
I'm not holding my breath."


Does anyone honestly think it cost Nintendo a BILLION dollars to design the Wii?
 
What an idiot, Nintendo, Sony and MS make their profit from licensing games not selling systems. Now granted this could change but the end result would be less powerful systems that cost more.
 
no need for monopolies in the gaming industry...we already had/still have a problem with EA's monopolization of certain game types such as NFL games, etc.

competition creates better products and more competitive prices for the consumers...that's a fundamental theroem of the economy
 
[quote name='swetooth9']competition creates better products and more competitive prices for the consumers...that's a fundamental theroem of the economy[/quote]

QFT... beat me to it, bastard.
 
EA hasn't monopolized anything except a brand. Anyone can produce a football game so long as it doesn't incorporate NFL IP. JUst as anyone can create a skateboarding game without invoking the name or image of Tony Hawk.

The columnist is an idiot with little concept of how competition drives innovation.
 
I live in Dallas.

I think this is the same guy that writes the half-ass reviews of new games every week.
He sucks.
 
Yup, we need competition to get good games made and drive down prices (if there was only one way of playing games they could charge whatever they wanted for it).
 
[quote name='epobirs']EA hasn't monopolized anything except a brand. Anyone can produce a football game so long as it doesn't incorporate NFL IP. JUst as anyone can create a skateboarding game without invoking the name or image of Tony Hawk.

The columnist is an idiot with little concept of how competition drives innovation.[/QUOTE]

But who wants to play a "pro" football game without the NFL license? I've played many games of Blitz......but it just doesn't have that same feel. You can't use your favorite team, favorite player, etc.
 
Well, games would still compete. The systems they were on would probably suck, and would probably no longer be sold at a loss (like MS and Sony systems).
 
I think 3 is the magic number
Each system stands for a different aspect of gaming

PS3 is Power
X360 is Community
Wii is Innovation

With only one system, the experience would always be the same, there would be no competition, and there would be no choice.

The Video Game Industry needs choice to survive.
 
You have to be a real moron to be in favor of monopolies. Who doesnt like choices? And all the benfits that they bring?
 
[quote name='A Happy Panda']But who wants to play a "pro" football game without the NFL license? I've played many games of Blitz......but it just doesn't have that same feel. You can't use your favorite team, favorite player, etc.[/quote]So? I feel the same way about the MLB license being wasted by 2K, but those are the breaks.
 
Well duh everything would be better if instead of multiple things there was one thing that did everything well.

The problem is that it never works out that well. That and it would be expensive as hell.
 
This guy's an idiot. For the longest time, it was perfectly possible for two systems to have huge success. This gen it appears it'd be possible for three systems to do so.
He acts like the industry will collapse with competition.
 
[quote name='VanillaGorilla']
Does anyone honestly think it cost Nintendo a BILLION dollars to design the Wii?[/QUOTE]
Not billions...

MILLIONS!
untitled-786258.JPG
 
Hmmm, ever sense EA has had hte NFL exclusivity the Madden games have started to suck and not be as innovative from year to year... I wonder why...
 
[quote name='H.Cornerstone']Hmmm, ever sense EA has had hte NFL exclusivity the Madden games have started to suck and not be as innovative from year to year... I wonder why...[/QUOTE]
That started before they got the license.
 
Isn't this similar to the video game crash in the 80's? Instead of multiple systems playing everyone elses game, it is one console playing games from the big three? No thanks. I would rather shell out more money for 2 systems a generation than have one machine with no drive for innovation and strive to be the better system.
 
i would love to see older systems combine into one. Say like the

Super nintendo , sega gensis and the n64 combine into one system and older system combined
 
[quote name='slidecage']i would love to see older systems combine into one. Say like the

Super nintendo , sega gensis and the n64 combine into one system and older system combined[/QUOTE]
Emulators.
 
It's been said before, but it's worth reiterating: the videogame industry needs competition to survive. There's a reason that today's industry has the Nintendo Wiimote, Xbox Live, and Sony Cell Processor. There's also a reason why the Metal Gear Solid series, the Halo series, and the Mario series are all so damn polished... competition. Without it, companies have no reason for innovation, price-cuts, etc. Just look at Windows.
 
[quote name='mwynn']That started before they got the license.[/quote]The PS2 versions of Madden 2001 through 2005 all have an average score of 90% or higher at GameRankings, so statistics would tell you your wrong.
 
[quote name='A Happy Panda']But who wants to play a "pro" football game without the NFL license? I've played many games of Blitz......but it just doesn't have that same feel. You can't use your favorite team, favorite player, etc.[/QUOTE]

So you care more about the player names and logos than the actual gameplay? Why not save a bunch of money by buying a single issue of Sports Illustrate during the football season and all the other bits in your head?

I'll never understand the worship of professional athletes.
 
[quote name='epobirs']So you care more about the player names and logos than the actual gameplay? Why not save a bunch of money by buying a single issue of Sports Illustrate during the football season and all the other bits in your head?

I'll never understand the worship of professional athletes.[/quote]

It's about atmosphere. Playing as Raiden went over real well now didn't it?
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']What an idiot, Nintendo, Sony and MS make their profit from licensing games not selling systems. Now granted this could change but the end result would be less powerful systems that cost more.[/quote]


nintendo makes money on both
 
[quote name='slidecage']i would love to see older systems combine into one. Say like the

Super nintendo , sega gensis and the n64 combine into one system and older system combined[/quote]Wii Virtual Console?
 
[quote name='slidecage']i would love to see older systems combine into one. Say like the

Super nintendo , sega gensis and the n64 combine into one system and older system combined[/quote]

They made that already, its called a Wii. ;)
 
That guy is dumb. Its better with more systems. Sure you can't have all the games. But with competition, more quality games and consoles arise.
 
I agree, it is much different when playing YOUR team with YOUR favorite players than random no-names. It was always fun for me to make the Cardinals win the Super Bowl, and unless your a fan of sports, it's kind of hard to understand. and I played all maddens, and all of them were great and offered something new that was exciting, EXCEPT 2006, which was the first year they got exclusivity, which is also the last one I bought.
 
Everyone has said that competition encourages innovation, better prices, etc.

Exactly.


First of all, if there was only one format, Nintendo/Sony/MS would not "meet every 5 to 6 years and hammer out a new format". They would juice the current format for much longer. Second, THEY DONT GET TO DECIDE. He is ignoring the fact that consumers picked VHS, consumers picked DVD, and consumers will pick HD/BR. Also, video formats are pretty much are all the same product. There is little differentiation between what is essential, which is why a universal format is better. It doesn't so much matter WHICH format is chosen, but just that there is one format. Games are different. There is a much faster innovation period and more differentiation, which completely changes the market.
 
Wow... I'm posting without reading other CAG responses so forgive me if I repeat.

But this guy's a moron - comparing gaming consoles to movie distribution formats? WTF? I mean, does this guy think there should be ONE PC standard? And I don't mean Windows vs Mac or anything like that, but ONE single hardware standard that would run all software the same (as a standard game console would have to). That is just pure stupidity. Actually, the fact that there are ONLY 3 different consoles while PC's are all over the place in terms of capabilities (making PC gaming difficult for me, anyway, as I've never had a high-end system) is rather nice. But I wouldn't want one generic console. First of all, it would be expensive (despite his claims of cost savings by not having to invest [highlight]billions[/highlight] in the design :lol:). It would have to be capable of high-end graphics, the best storage medium, support all kinds of unique and varied controllers, and have a comprehensive Internet strategy. Not to mention that the big 3 would probably never agree and wouldn't want to in the first place ;).

Seriously, the consoles are not that expensive - it is the games that get you (especially if you are regular Joe consumer and don't know the ways of CAG). So while it might be nice in theory to have a universal system (saving a bit of money, possibly, and some space and electricity), I don't think I'd expect it, want it, or certainly bother to write an article about it :roll:.
 
Well, everyone is universally ragging on this guy, and I honestly believe a super console would not be a bad thing. Though, I buy into innovation, I think there are some other things to consider also.

1) Everyone universally feels that one console ruins innovation. I don't buy that. First, other formats (TV's, VCR, DVD, etc) were able to have a dominate format. I know, somewhat different, but not as far as you would think.

Think of it this way, imagine you needed 2 different cable providers to get Showtime and HBO? Imagine you needed 3 different players to watch Star Wars, Spider Man, and some adult content? This would be rediculous, the public wouldn't accept it. Yet, every 5 years, if you want to play all the best games, you have to be willing to drop $200-$300 on 2-3 consoles to play all the games. Yet, this isn't just "fair" to the gaming community, they wouldn't have it any other way.

2) Games would still innovate. We hear about EA having a monopoly on the license. That's a different issue. Games still need to compete for our dollars. But, instead of having each system needing it's own games, everyone competes against everyone else. Also, each game is optimized to that system. How many times are you plaing a 3rd party game that wasn't optimized for the system your playing it on? Those are wasted dollars and unfair to the gamer.

I'm not sure this is perfect or that there wouldn't be issues to work out (though, honestly, would it be so bad if the last generation lasted another year or 2, this newer generation felt rushed to me, not many of the games jumped out as saying they'd be impossible on the previous generation).

I don't think this is an idea that should be so completely shot down by the industry. Maybe the time isn't right yet, but I'm not so sure we're as far off as everyone here believes.
 
I few video games like Music. IF there was only one studio, instead of the 5 billion, would there be studios striving to find that new artist to get them money? probably not.
 
So this guy basically wants another 3DO: standardized hardware, multiple manufacturers. History doesn't look too kindly on the 3DO.

I say, "Viva la difference!"
 
[quote name='epobirs']So you care more about the player names and logos than the actual gameplay? Why not save a bunch of money by buying a single issue of Sports Illustrate during the football season and all the other bits in your head?

I'll never understand the worship of professional athletes.[/QUOTE]

It's a form of winning. Most people are losers, so they take up alternative ways to try and seem like they're "winning". Thus, all sports were born, along with fanboyism.
 
[quote name='David Jaffe, creator of God of War']As a gamer, I kind of miss the 'you can only get it on this system.' There's kind of an excitement that was about that back up until recently. With this new hardware, though, that idea is seems to be going away. Is it really all going to come down to first party now? Or it ultimately going to come to one system? 'Cause 10 years from now there's going to be one system because there's so much more third party software than first party software from any hardware manufacturer. It may not be feasible to make it the war of the first party or the war of the exclusives.[/quote]
http://kotaku.com/gaming/clips/jaffe-on-future-one-console-jaffe-on-luke-smith-smarmy-230281.php
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top