Thoughts About a "One-Console Future" for Video Games

Haven't exactly thought it through a lot, but it seems like a good idea... it would certainly keep development costs lower, and hopefully a little bit of that savings would be passed along to the consumer. Plus, no more having to buy multiple systems or s*** a brick when your system breaks... because it would be common hardware.

 

I guess you are talking about something similar to a format war. This will never happen.

A format or standard is more of an intellectual property. These consoles are hardware that eventually become profitable.

The game software companies are not big enough to sway which one wins like the format wars are.

 

but it would be far less likely to have companies willing to sell the consoles at a loss just to grab market share.

so I don't understand how they would be cheaper.

 

yep they would be more expensive. probably about the same as buying 2 of the consoles now. since all the companies would want to profit off the hardware and not just the games.

 

good luck, i'm still waiting on the All-in-One Dildo to be invented.

 

I agree. Sega tried going software only only to discover its total size shrunk and it's user base divided. They later merged with Bandai.

There's mega money involved with making a console. While companies often need 5 or 6 years to break even on manufacturing costs, they can profit immensely on royalties, extra accessories, and licensing. A One-Console format would benefit manufacturers like Toshiba, Sony, or Samsung, but then again with the stakes so high and the money so lucrative, what's to say the manufacturers won't get trapped in a Two-Console Bluray/HDDVD battle?

If you were Nintendo, you wouldn't give the keys to the kingdom to third parties, who haven't made a big dent on the Wii, and let them design the One-Console. A company like Nintendo will always do their own thing. They outsell their games like crazy, and because they don't pay licensing on their own console, all of that is pure profit.

So in the end you'll have one or two main consoles, plus Nintendo.

What were we talking about again?

 

It's a fairy tale. Not only would you probably not get all those different parties to agree to it, but having a 'standard' would probably help kill the interest in the hobby.

They all have different visions for the industry and take very different approaches. With one console those all go away. Sony, MS and Nintendo all have different ideas about how to go about the business. Who will concede? Not too mention consumers lose the variety and price advantages of competition.

About the only positive is that you would get rid of stupid console wars and system fanboys. Though, more than likely, they'll find something to cling to anyway.

 

Dude.

 

I wonder if the companies will just keep plagiarizing each other or if Nintendo will carve out it's own market separate from Sony/Microsoft's.

That's so lame if either of them copy the Wii. They took the risk and it paid off.

 

How is this any different than a pc.

 

You cannot copy the Wii.

The time of its release was perfect and Nintendo predicted perfectly the hole that the high tech expensive machines would make.

Wii was supposedly profitable from its release date.

 

I hope no one copies the Wii......... I like my high definition graphics with games like COD4, Oblivion, 2K8 etc.......

 

It's possible but someone will always separate.

 

when the ps3 came out it cost 499 and 599. It was estimated to cost 800 and 900 to produce (mass produce) sony lost billions in the first year of release. So if they do not discount (and with no competition there is no need to) you are looking at a release price of 900 or so.

I can buy 2 consoles for that and have cash left over.

And with 2 consoles you get the obvious advantages of different features and support.

 

Lack of variety. Lack of options. One console is probably going to get pegged with one 'identity', no matter how many different types of publishers they try and get. All the small publishers would only have one option, anyway, so they would possibly get crowded out by the big money developers.

Having different systems allows for more freedom for different genres, publishers and fans. As I said above, I don't think it is realistic to think that all these different folks with their hands in the cookie jar are going to work together to give us just as many options in a single machine as we have now.

I mean, heck, their outside interests almost guarantee it. Media players, media formats, digital download services, etc. etc. They have too many areas of interest out there to sacrifice it for one of the biggest industries out there.

I just don't see the good in limiting options for consumers.

 

The biggest reason for them to jump on this, imo, is to have a PC-like machine with copyright protection. It could be modular (upgradeable for the richest) with a format limited proprietary disk to prevent burning or modding.

Everything else is icing on the cake.

Yeah. I was mistaken.

Jaffe is in over his head. All he wants to avoid is paying royaltees or choosing which side to bet all his chips on.

I think predicting Nintendo's innovations is a big mistake. All you need to know is that they're a company vested in the immediate bottom line, somewhat cheap and sneaky on the features (they'd rather sell it to you when it's necessary than include it as an extra), and have a high bar on customer enjoyment and satisfaction. While I call them cheap for skimping around the edges, such as DVD playback, they're really good to their customers and excel over the other two at customer service. It's part of a company code that other gaming companies lack.

I don't know if you remember, but Sega had around 10 years of greatness with a following that almost matched Nintendo's in the US. Golden Axe, Sonic, Toe Jam and Earl, Ecco the Dolphin, Phantasy Star (not the MMO), Streets of Rage, and many many more were heavily debated among the greats of gaming. As an arcade maker on the side, they also had gimmicky Dreamcast games that were fun to play at home. Now look at them. They're still a good developer, but not a legendary or great developer as they were.

The day Nintendo stop making consoles is the day Nintendo stop making games.

What's interesting about this idea is that companies like Philips and 3DO tried using this approach but in reverse.

They made a CD or DVD player and assumed the video games would follow. What ended up were really crappy games to an expensive disc player.

When manufacturers get a hand in this, they won't just make a 360. They'll make a default 360, then a blu-ray 360, then a media center 360 and so on... After all, they have one standard, a de facto monopoly. Cheaper consoles? Only in the fine print...the default dummy version that has gimped HDMI....

It gets real crazy if it becomes modular because it'd become another PC standard where you develop for the lowest common denominator. If you plunked 800 bucks on your media center, you will demand that it lasts. Modularity might not sound uncommon in 5-6 years. That's the way graphics cards and CPUs are going isn't it?

So while this sounds like a new utopian idea, it's really a trojan horse by manufacturers who have dreamed of putting an all-in-one set top box in our homes but have failed miserably among gamers and electronics consumers as a whole several times before.

 

also want to add that the Wii has shown that video gaming has become to big to be served by one TYPE of console.

The Wii filled a huge hole in the market and is bringing in the $$$$

 

Does the console consolidation extend to arcades? Casey's comment made me think of the niche DDR found ...