This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

"We Really, REALLY, Don't Need New Consoles." ~ Yahtzee

#181jorgestevensonPosted 4/24/2013 5:27:45 AM
Mutant1988 posted...


There's enough on PC to occupy my time until I can pick the consoles and games up cheap.

5-10 years? I'd say a significant price drop for the system within 2 years, and about 1 year after the release for any given game.

Consoles have a place. Just not a full price place, not any more. Make it backwards compatible and scrap any always online crap (Ownership isn't an obsolete concept to me), and we might have a deal.

As is, it doesn't really do anything that I can't do with a PC (And what it does that I dislike, is easier to get past on PC).

But to each his own, it all boils down to preference and specific games anyway. But I do believe strong arguments can be made for and against PC or consoles respectively.

Consoles right now seem to do everything besides games. Social networking, content streaming, digital distribution... All geared towards selling you more things. So seriously, how is it any different from a PC but with less choices and static hardware? Oh, the games? Yeah... What games? Not the old games, barely any new games... Do we even own the games any longer?

Oh well, still plenty of games to get for the PS2 and PS3, I'll play the bigger releases on the PC and then pick up one of these systems in a few years (Unless they really screw up something anyway). Seems like a good plan to me.


^^ This is my attitude as well. I think it's completely reasonable to state that PC gaming gives you the best bang for your buck, and that console-only gaming is for people who don't mind paying a premium for their particular genre of choice (there is nothing wrong with this, btw). Also I think it's reasonable to say that a heading into next gen with a gaming PC allows you to tread water for a few years, evaluate the landscape, and make an informed choice without resorting to blind faith in a particular console manufacturer.
#182Sez6Posted 4/24/2013 6:48:59 AM
Raycon posted...

A $400 console or $400 in memory/video card every 5-10 years, what's the difference? It seems like expenses are level either way; in the end it would all come down to personal preference.


Wrong. PC's have other parts that over time and extreme use tends to fail. In my history I have 2 motherboards broken, 1 ram, 1 processor, 1 monitor and 4 hard drives. All of that besides natural replacements with time. Not to mention wasting hours formatting the system regularly, etc.

And if my brother grabs the PS3 nothing bad will happen. If he grabs the PC you have to deal later with a lot of trash, having to format the system again, etc.
#183DragonyeuwPosted 4/24/2013 6:57:40 AM
To be honest I've missed so many games from this gen that I'm more interested in tracking down some cheap PS3 exclusives than worrying about the next gen. Maybe I'm just getting older/changing priorities or whatever but I'm really not excited about PS4/Durango right now.
---
Current systems owned: 8gb Wii U, PS3 slim,xbox 360 GOW model, Wii, PS2,Dreamcast, SNES, White PS Vita, Red 3Ds, PSP3000, PSPGo,
#184methosagainPosted 4/24/2013 8:04:49 AM
He is totally right about the BC issue, especially in an age where DD and DLC is pushed so much. Why should I invest in such things if you cannot give me some assurance that I can still play my digital stuff in the future? This issue has infact pushed me to doing something have never considered, and go the PC route. Why why wait for the consoles when I can get a more powerful device and with Steam, buy all my favorite games now and never have to worry about BC issues?
---
Law of the universe states the strong shall survive and the weak fall by the way, I don't give a damn what idealistic plan is cooked up, nothing changes that
#185jorgestevensonPosted 4/24/2013 8:36:24 AM
Sez6 posted...
Raycon posted...

A $400 console or $400 in memory/video card every 5-10 years, what's the difference? It seems like expenses are level either way; in the end it would all come down to personal preference.


Wrong. PC's have other parts that over time and extreme use tends to fail. In my history I have 2 motherboards broken, 1 ram, 1 processor, 1 monitor and 4 hard drives. All of that besides natural replacements with time. Not to mention wasting hours formatting the system regularly, etc.

And if my brother grabs the PS3 nothing bad will happen. If he grabs the PC you have to deal later with a lot of trash, having to format the system again, etc.


Nothing bad will happen?

So strange. I bought a 360 elite in 2007 and it RROD'd twice. The second time, it was out of warranty so I had to buy a new console. I also had all of my play & charge kits essentially become useless pieces of junk, and I had my original 360's power brick go by the wayside. In fact, if you add up all the money I have spent on JUST HARDWARE, my console cost more than my PC (2 consoles + wifi adapter + play & charge kits + power brick + hard drive upgrade > my $800 PC).

Let's not pretend like consoles are some maintenance free, "it just works" type of deal. They fail alot. And parts go bad. Just like PCs.
#186shinra35800Posted 4/24/2013 8:43:41 AM
Don't need new consoles because WiiU is current gen and it is no reason to try to top them considering it is not bringing anything new to the table.
#187RollingCradlePosted 4/24/2013 8:49:48 AM
I went and got me a gaming PC in January for 2013 new year's, and been loving it, emulation is boss and while compatibility is not at 100%, I get to play most of my old games at 1080p minimum, which is something the original consoles will never be able to do!

And I don't have to keep buying the same games over and over offa whatever ripoff DD PSN store every single gen just because a new console came out and the old consoles are at 480p or 720p or whatever crappy resolution thats under 1080p.
#188Seifer_usPosted 4/24/2013 5:48:29 PM
king_madden posted...
I tihnk the way people are buying now is how it should be "im going to buy this console because it has what I want, and the games I want."


See, the trouble I have with this is that I see a ton of gamers who own two or more consoles solely because of this kind of thinking. Is there really any good reason to own the other console besides those couple of games you like? I won't lie, buying a Wii when I knew that later on I was going to buy a PS3 was a stupid decision. Even now, that new Monolith Soft game on the Wii U is tempting me, but I'm not falling for it this time. If you want your games to sell, put them on a superior piece of hardware. There's no reason any of these games can't run on another companies hardware, it's all about trying to get you to pay for an inferior product purely on the basis of exclusives and it's about time everyone stopped just begrudgingly accepting it.

Can you imagine if they had released 20th Century Fox movies exclusively on HD-DVD and Disney Movies exclusively on Blu-Ray? You think customers would be willing to buy two different pieces of hardware just to be able to see all those movies? As it is, we know that consumers made a choice, and the choice was Blu-Ray. That's how it should be with games too.

For some reason, people seem to think that because there have always been console wars, that there always will be and we all might as well just deal with it. This is complete and utter bull****, and if people would just stop caving in to this manipulative system, we could all have one single format to enjoy. In point of fact, I'm not buying ANY new consoles until this happens. This is the end for me until the industry gets its **** together and learns that it's better for everyone involved to have a single format. Hell, they can sell different players if they want to, just like Sony and Panasonic sell different electronic brands; but keep everything playable across the board.

as for BC its irrelevant, if you want to play old games on your new system because your new system library isnt where you want it yet, then you shouldnt be buying that new console. keep the one that has the big library, and when the new ones have the games you want THEN buy it.


In a circular way, you've basically agreed that no one should buy new consoles and that BC is relevant. Since it was introduced with the PS2, it has become a major selling point. The ability to upgrade and get rid of an outdated, bulky piece of hardware that takes up outlet space and space in your entertainment center, while still having access to your older media is a huge selling point, provided it's not overpriced (PS3's initial mis-step). Why do you think when home stereo systems were introduced with tape decks, they often included record players? Hell, my parents had one with two tape decks, a record player, and a CD drive. My parents aren't tech savvy at all, but they recognize the benefit of saving space while also keeping their old media from becoming completely obsolete.

Also, if you didn't live in a country with a lot of space, you'd quickly realize what a precious commodity it is. I live in a tiny apartment in Japan, and any more than two systems would be a complete cluster**** at my house. There are lots of great arguments for why backwards compatibility is not only relevant, but should have already become an integral part of every new console.

Honestly, if companies don't get it together and start working harder to offer options to customers rather than continued limitations, I fully anticipate another industry crash within the next five years. The bubble is about to burst.
---
PSN ID: Shawnji
Trophy List: http://psnprofiles.com/Shawnji