Console Generations - Is It Still A Thing, or Are We at the End of the Line?

[_blank_]

My guess is as long as Sony and Nintendo are still making a profit, there'll be consoles. Microsoft doesn't give a fuck anyway since the Xbox One is just a prototype Windows 10 operating system anyway.

 

[SJ 485]

However many more sony and microsoft can squeeze $500 out of dumb gamers for. Of course every new gen console will be a stripped down version of the "pro" model to be released later. Gamers are cash cows with pathological brand loyalty who will buy anything with a character or a name on it they recognise. [See: Fallout 76]

 

[frozenrunner]

The slow convergence of console hardware and gaming PCs has been noticeable for a while, and I've never liked it. This trend of releasing upgraded versions of consoles to extend the console generation is especially troubling. But thinking about the total failure of the Steambox concept (just one of many such ideas over the years) has me convinced the dedicated console is here to stay.

Most gamers either already know or could easily learn enough to make their own gaming rigs, and they could do it at a comparable price... but they don't want to. They want to be able to plug a pre-assembled thing in and have it work, and they don't want to worry about a mountain of confusing optional features. So PC gaming is out of the reach of many gamers because they like the "purchase, plug, and play" aspect, and I don't see that changing.

I like that, but it's mostly because I like how consoles force developers to work within console hardware constraints, and that means entire generations of games that will work on equivalently powerful PC hardware.

 

[Tookie]

They'll keep going indefinitely. Nintendo will keep doing odd niche things with each generation. Sony and Microsoft will have backwards-compatible consoles from here on out now that hardware is standardized and they are basically gaming PCs. The console numbering will remain because it can drive sales and because consumers don't want to deal with figuring out PC hardware compatibility. There is huge portion of the market with no patience to figure out if their graphics card model works with a new PC game, it's better if they see "Playstation 6" on the box since they can remember they own a PS7 and it will run anything from 4 on up.

 

[Guts Gets Some]

For me, who only recently got into console gaming, I say fuck this competition and labeling and all this other bullshit.

I never agreed with the term of 'generations' for gaming or the fanboying console wars; just stick with the system (old/new, whatever brand) you prefer most (ie, that has the games you want to play).
I still play my PS3 far, far more than my 4, simply because I like the games more. And I'm more than okay with that. And most 3 games look virtually the same to their 4 counterparts as well. Not worth the extra cost.

 

[SJ 485]

I like how consoles force developers to work within console hardware constraints, and that means entire generations of games that will work on equivalently powerful PC hardware.

It's a double-edged sword there, we've got that side of things, but developers being primarily focused on the console market leads to a lot of really sub-standard PC ports and a lot very uncomplex and frankly boring games geared towards console control schemes and a more casual and uninvested audience. Never forget the 7th gen plague of third person cover shooters. Thankfully this is only broadly the case for AAA titles, these days smaller publishers and indie devs kick out a lot of great stuff as well, so I can afford to ignore most major releases these days at least until a few years after launch while still having fun games to play in the mean time.

 

[Marco Fucko]

Consoles won't ever 'die'. Consoles fill the market need for cheap and easy core gaming. Phones and tablets have a swathe of uber casuals, PC gamers are the ones willing to do research and assemble their own machine (sometimes not even then, considering all the pre-built firms out there). Consoles are what guys who want to play 'proper' games but don't want a lot of fuss or cost go out and buy. $500 is a lot, but in PC world that doesn't get you much unless you're buying used, and normal prices of ~$300 are in that range where most people can afford it.

Personally, I bought a PS4 late into the life cycle based off of last E3. Re2 remake, DMC 5 AND Kingdom Hearts 3 is finally coming out? Sign me up. Plus it has a bunch of HD remakes that I can play, since I sold my PS2 back in the day.

 

[User names must be unique]

Consoles will remain the Iphone of the gaming scene. Sure you can't customise it, it may not be the most powerful or well featured platform and you can't install weird unauthorized programs but people will continue to buy them because they're easy to understand and use and the uniformity of the platform means developers should be able to produce "quality" products.

 

[frozenrunner]

It's a double-edged sword there, we've got that side of things, but developers being primarily focused on the console market leads to a lot of really sub-standard PC ports and a lot very uncomplex and frankly boring games geared towards console control schemes and a more casual and uninvested audience. Never forget the 7th gen plague of third person cover shooters.

Definitely true that it affects design philosophy, and even if it didn't, it's astonishing how many developers don't put any effort into the quality of their ports. The users who provide third party fixes are heroes.

Thankfully this is only broadly the case for AAA titles, these days smaller publishers and indie devs kick out a lot of great stuff as well, so I can afford to ignore most major releases these days at least until a few years after launch while still having fun games to play in the mean time.

Yep. At least half of what I play these days is indie-developed. I'm really happy that consoles have embraced indie games, too... even though they've seemingly replaced the "budget game," those often great titles made by console devs that aren't high budget. Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think the PS4 or the Xbox One will have vast libraries filled with hidden gems like the PS2- and previous eras.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

I prefer console gaming, but these companies keep fucking up and making shitty decisions that end up costing them millions of dollars and even sometimes their own companies (See Sega, Atari, etc, etc).

Also; while shitty, the rise of mobile phone gaming is really going to put the hurt on console gaming in general.

 

[SJ 485]

Also; while shitty, the rise of mobile phone gaming is really going to put the hurt on console gaming in general.

I think this idea had its day, everyone thought this would be the case 10 years ago when smartphones got big and we had angry birds and such for the first time. It didn't turn out to be the same market.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

I think this idea had its day, everyone thought this would be the case 10 years ago when smartphones got big and we had angry birds and such for the first time. It didn't turn out to be the same market.

I agree, but there seems to be some kind of push by developers to force that shit down our throats.
Like the new Diablo game.

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

May I ask a question......I don't know very much about video games. I played some as a dumb kid like most people today have. I was wondering, why don't videa game companies release sequels to their video games like they used to in the older console generations?

 

[millais]

The slow convergence of console hardware and gaming PCs has been noticeable for a while, and I've never liked it. This trend of releasing upgraded versions of consoles to extend the console generation is especially troubling. But thinking about the total failure of the Steambox concept (just one of many such ideas over the years) has me convinced the dedicated console is here to stay.

Most gamers either already know or could easily learn enough to make their own gaming rigs, and they could do it at a comparable price... but they don't want to. They want to be able to plug a pre-assembled thing in and have it work, and they don't want to worry about a mountain of confusing optional features. So PC gaming is out of the reach of many gamers because they like the "purchase, plug, and play" aspect, and I don't see that changing.

I like that, but it's mostly because I like how consoles force developers to work within console hardware constraints, and that means entire generations of games that will work on equivalently powerful PC hardware.

Don't the big companies sell pre-assembled gaming PCs and laptops these days for prices comparable to consoles?

 

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

why don't videa game companies release sequels to their video games like they used to in the older console generations?

Probably because video game production is a shitload more expensive than it was 20 years ago and because most games are made to cash in on current trends. It's a much bigger gamble when trying to start a franchise now when back in the day even games that made mediocre sales could still eke out a sequel or two.

 

[NOT Sword Fighter Super]

Probably because video game production is a shitload more expensive than it was 20 years ago and because most games are made to cash in on current trends. It's a much bigger gamble when trying to start a franchise now when back in the day even games that made mediocre sales could still eke out a sequel or two.

Some of the best and most polished games (at least in the 16bit era) kept getting delayed because they were initially meant to be released on the NES, but were then moved to the SNES. Link to the Past is a good example. I know there are a few others, but I can't think of them right now.

 

[frozenrunner]

Don't the big companies sell pre-assembled gaming PCs and laptops these days for prices comparable to consoles?

I did say something about comparable prices earlier, but a quick Google search says... well, it depends on who you ask, and define "comparable," and how much research and work are you willing to do to build it as cheaply as possible? I see articles claiming it's possible to roughly match the price and power of consoles, but you're probably going to pay more upfront with a PC which is why people think it's the more expensive option. Even if it saves you money in the long run.

But PCs are still within reach of many gamers' budgets, especially when you consider the built in costs of consoles online services. And of course even though you pay more up front, you get a lot more value with a PC considering it can do so much more. Including playing essentially every game previously made through emulation and, if you plan ahead, a relatively cheap cost to upgrade in the future compared to consoles.

 

[Rand /pol/]

Yes

 

[A Hot Potato]

Yes

/thread

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Better question: who dies next?