Topic: One console to rule them all.

[MLS_man_64]

Sacrilege

[Maverick]

BURN HIM!

Seriously, the market can obviously handle this kind of competition.  Besides, that was extremely vague, what is it exactly that he's suggesting?  Different companies making different boxes that play the same software?  One company destroying the others and having a monopoly on consoles?  

[bustin98]

While it wouldn't hurt Nintendo all that much, imagine if EA created their own machine and did not release their titles on any other. The Madden freaks would pick it up instantly. And other titles like Bioshock, and now titles from Bioware and Pandemic... It could quake Sony and Microsoft down to their core. Add to it Ubi-Soft titles and the momentum picks up.

And now that EA has Peter Moore, who has overseen two console launches (was he invovled with the original XBox launch?), they have the know how of pulling it off.

The only stumbling block is Japan, same as Microsoft. If EA were to buy up some Japanese devs that would increase cred.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Quote
Originally posted by: bustin98
While it wouldn't hurt Nintendo all that much, imagine if EA created their own machine and did not release their titles on any other. The Madden freaks would pick it up instantly. And other titles like Bioshock, and now titles from Bioware and Pandemic... It could quake Sony and Microsoft down to their core. Add to it Ubi-Soft titles and the momentum picks up.

And now that EA has Peter Moore, who has overseen two console launches (was he invovled with the original XBox launch?), they have the know how of pulling it off.

The only stumbling block is Japan, same as Microsoft. If EA were to buy up some Japanese devs that would increase cred.

If EA entered the market I think Sony would be shoved out. I could see a Nintendo vs MS vs EA war.

[ShyGuy]

EA doesn't benefit from making a console, MS and Sony have made it so their is no money in hardware. I don't think the saved licensing fees is enough to offset it.

[that Baby guy]

Well, I think theres a problem with how things are done now.

I mean, DVDs VS. DivX, DVDs won easily.

Video Tapes VS. Betamax, VHS won fairly easily, as well.

But here we are with Blu-Ray and HD-DVD and Videogame consoles not being able to wok itself out.  It's aboot as ridiculous as Canada having two official languages.  Except it doesn't make any sense, unlike Canada in the off-season.

The losers in a race like this are the consumers.  It forces at least an extra couple hundred dollars each time a new format is released.  If a format upgrades, there's always a power struggle to overcome.  But that's the thing: traditionally, in movies, someone wins out, right?  So why not now?  And why not in video games?

I think the answer is that formats are being upgraded too constantly.  There's too much improvement in the field over such a low rate of time, that it's senseless to stick with one for too long of a time.  In this respect, I understand the "proposed" idea of the PS3:  There is a machine that will not need to be updated for ten years.  The problem is that this isn't true, it's a lie to get us to buy it until Sony unveils PS4, and we see through it.  However, if it weren't a lie, the PS3 would be in a much higher status.  If we knew that HD DVD or BD would be around for a long time, we'd settle with one, but neither will, so we won't.

I don't know, I just lost my train of thought in this one.  I'll have to come back to finish it up.

[Ian Sane]

I don't really want a single platform because I just don't TRUST anyone to do it in such a way that all existing games can be easily played on it.  They'll just throw the dual-shock on there or something without putting any serious thought into it.  Nintendo is quite good at designing controllers but look at how the classic controller handles N64 games.  It lacks the six buttons so we have to use the second analog stick which isn't an ideal solution.

Hell I've seriously thought about what a universal controller on a single standardized console would have to look like and what I've thought of doesn't even cover the Wii because I can't think of way for the remote functionality to fit.  You think I trust a bunch of business who don't play games?  Stuff like the Up-start code not working for the Mortal Kombat games in Midway Arcade Treasures 2 or the infamous Mega Man button reversal shows what kind of slack attitude corporations have about this stuff.  This isn't like movies or music where it just has to play sound or show a moving picture.  Games are so much more complex and need more attention to detail.  If Nintendo can't even make a controller that plays N64 games correctly, a console THEY MADE, then what chance does anyone else have?

Plus I figure a standarized console should work with solid state media as load time issues could screw up historic games.  The problem with this is the solid state has to be affordable and capable of holding probably a maximum of 9 gigs, likely more if Sony is filling those Blu-Ray discs.

I do think however that one standard console that doesn't get replaced every five years and isn't owned by one company would bring games in the mainstream more than anything.  Imagine if games were just like DVDs or CDs.  You just go to the store and buy a game and that's it.

Though we'll never truly have a universal standard because we also play games on non-gaming hardware like PCs.  A game is a program so they can't "block" games from being made on a computer.  The "standard" immediately fails.

[that Baby guy]

I'd rather buy three controller shells than buy three three hundred dollar systems.  Make sense?  

[Mashiro]

The problem with this is that it eliminates any competition with system makers.

What's the push then to advance the gaming genre in any specific way? There is none. If it's one company and only one company that dominates things they will give us what they want and we have to like it.

No competition is a horrible horrible idea.

EA fails AGAIN.  

[AgentV3]

I think is less about EA trying to build a box more than EA begging console makers to agree on a standard of hardware to make cross-platform development easier.  Imagine if the successor to the Wii, XBOX360 and PS3 all used AMD Athlon X2 CPUs and nVidia GeForce 8-series GPUs, that's what he's talking about.  It would still be like it is now, you wouldn't be able to play Halo 4 on the Nintendo system or Gran Turismo 6 on the Microsoft system or Zelda on the Sony system, they would just all use a commonly-derived hardware architecture so development across platforms could be easier.

[bustin98]

I think game makers look at it like dvd players. Essentially they all do the same thing. But some have more bells and whistles than others. But those extra benefits don't extend the benefits of movies unless they have content specifically for that feature.

We all know that Nintendo would never ever go with the idea because they want to control every aspect.

So should we imagine playing a 360 game on a PS3, only you can't connect to Live? Or play Liar on the 360 but find it unplayable due to the lack of the 6axis controller?

I think EA is getting to the point that Nintendo is at: a stable of IPs that has worldwide recognition and a desire to streamline a process. There is more than licensing fees involved with making games for multiple systems. They could create one company wide engine and cut costs of development dramatically. Nintendo has shown you can make a profit on hardware. And with prices always coming down EA could create a box similar to the 360 in power but sell it for above cost.

I wouldn't bet against EA making their own system, or they will join a number of 3rd parties to create a standards and then we'll see non-traditional manufacturers coming in with their own machines. Its a sweet pot, this video game market and others are looking to see how they can get their fingers in it.

[Ian Sane]

"Or play Liar on the 360 but find it unplayable due to the lack of the 6axis controller?"

How is that any different than playing it on the PS3 but finding it unplayable due to it requiring the 6axis controller?

"We all know that Nintendo would never ever go with the idea because they want to control every aspect."

I figure such a major change would kill Nintendo off.  They would want to make their own console and literally no one else would support it.

One potential problem with this is the whole Atari 2600 issue where anyone could make a game for the console and thus tons of total crap showed up.  That helped contribute to the industry crash.  With one standard there would have to be no limits and this same problem would come up.  Would it have a similar negative effect?

[Strell]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
look at how the classic controller handles N64 games.  It lacks the six buttons so we have to use the second analog stick which isn't an ideal solution.

God, Ian.  So much fail for one little man.

[UltimatePartyBear]

The only way I think it would work is if things go the way Microsoft wants and we all have smart homes with powerful computers helping us with every mundane task of our lives.  I'm talking about the cheesy SciFi scene where you come home from work and tell your wall to bring up the Red Sox game.  We're talking a computer powerful enough to handle helping with dinner in the kitchen while looking up sports statistics to go along with the game in the den while letting the kids play Duke Nukem Forever and Ever in the game room while maintaining perfect ambient temperature and humidity in every inhabited room and scanning for hazards, deterioration, and outside threats continuously and generally fulfilling every want or need of its human masters.  We have to go beyond such notions as system requirements so that games can be written in a completely platform-agnostic language that the home computer can easily run as a background process without even hiccuping as far as anyone can tell.  Because what this guy at EA thinks he's asking for would turn out to be something more like the PC games market, which isn't one platform, but 10,000,000 very similar ones.

[bustin98]

Yes, the concern of a flood of crap on a universal gaming system crossed my mind. Again though, look at the DVD market. There is a flood of crap, only most people don't know its crap until its too late.

The game market would change, and for the worse. I agree, but that's from our point of view. Look at it from a PL spreadsheet and all of a sudden there's a potential goldmine just waiting to be dug up.

[Spak-Spang]

I could see EA becoming a player in the hardware console market.  

They would just partner with a company like Microsoft to help design the system of their desires and release all their games on that system exclusively.  

I am sure they could partner with Microsoft to get no licensing fees.  Or if EA really wanted to shake things up, develop the console themselves and promise 3rd party developers zero licensing fees.  Wait until it can launch its new system with an exclusive sports lineup of Madden, Baseball, Basketball, and Modern Warefare 2, and you would have a killer launch lineup...specially if you make all those games exclusive.

That is what is really scary...EA is so big that it could pull so many must have AAA titles to become exclusive on their system.

The bad news is, that would open real competition against EA in the Sports Gaming market again, because Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony would all have to fill the void the EA games left.  It could hurt them more than help them.

[Ian Sane]

"God, Ian. So much fail for one little man."

I'm not little.

Do you have anything to actually contribute or did you just join the discussion to dump on me?

Buttons - any combo of them can be pushed together
Analog stick - can only push the diagonals for combos.  Can't push up and down at the same time.  Can't push left and right at the same time.  Can't push three or four buttons at the same time.  It is missing functionality of what it is trying to replace and thus is not ideal.

[Strell]

So you I guess you shoot arrows and play the Ocarina at the same time a lot then, eh?

Or try to change the camera both up and right all at once?

The majority of games that used the C buttons used it for the camera.  Hence "c buttons."  And the stick replicates that just fine, if not better than buttons.  

You're just doing some more of your sensationalism.

[Mashiro]

Quote
Yes, the concern of a flood of crap on a universal gaming system crossed my mind. Again though, look at the DVD market. There is a flood of crap, only most people don't know its crap until its too late.

There is a vast difference between the DVD market and gaming market.

DVDs primarily consist of either TV shows or movies being put onto the retail market. Outside of the "straight to video" releases, the content is pretty much ready made and good to go.

Games are completely different.

[bustin98]

The straight to dvd market was what I was considering, and there are more and more selections to choose from. Though my main thought is with the extras and video quality of dvds in general. Some are top of the line purchases with tons of extras, crisp video, sound thats not compressed, the whole ten yards.

Then there are the releases that are looking to cash in on a name. No extras, the video has not been cleaned up, sound has been left in mono hell with pops and background hiss.

I concede its a limited comparison but its enough to show the direction games can go in.

[Ian Sane]

"The majority of games that used the C buttons used it for the camera. Hence 'c buttons.' And the stick replicates that just fine, if not better than buttons."

Doesn't matter.  You make assumptions like that and then certain games you didn't think about stop working.  It's the simple logic that a joystick being used to replace buttons provides less functionality than buttons themselves and thus is not an ideal solution.  Okay solution?  Sure.  But not IDEAL.  Was only four face buttons a GOOD idea?  The best arguement I've heard is that's not that bad.  Defense of it seems more like "how dare you be negative about Nintendo" stuff.

And in this case we're not even talking N64 where maybe we're safe.  If you were making a big universal console this short-sighted method would start falling apart because the Saturn, Xbox, N64 and six button Genesis controller all use six face buttons which increases the possibility of certain games not controlling well or some not working at all.

A six button layout is also very Gamecube friendly since the Gamecube button arrangement is "hidden" within the two rows of three buttons.

[Strell]

Start naming the games then.

I want a full list, you're so smart.

[Ian Sane]

I'm not going to look up every game ever made.  It's simple logic.  If you have six face buttons 100% of all six buttons games that used one of the standard controllers for existing consoles will work.  With substitutions and workarounds and "maybe that's good enough" assumptions then there's potential of less than 100% of them working.  It's just good planning.  Why make an assumption and go half-assed when the alternative that you KNOW is fool proof is right there?

This sort of talk is exactly why I don't trust anyone to make a decent game console standard.  Cutting corners on the assumption that it will work out okay is a dumb way to design it.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

The best game console standard is Color TV.

[ShyGuy]

I hate Street Fighter for six buttons.