Support NeoGAF

[crimnos]

Most definitely out. I can understand the appeal for folks who maybe can't afford an equivalent PC and/or the upgrades, or don't have the means or desire to hook their PC to their TV, but I've already fully integrated my PC into my living room setup.

On top of that, iterative consoles lose a lot of what makes consoles unique and worth it even when you have a PC. I'd much rather be able to "choose my own adventure" when it comes to hardware upgrades.

 

[GamerMax73]

I'm just trying to look from a consumer perspective and only see compatibility as something that of benefit to me, and that is only because it's a problem solved that was only created by iteration.

Compatibility, or lack of, is the status quo. It's solved by iteration not created by it. As for benefits to the consumer. If you've already invested in the platform as a whole (not a model specific statement) then you have security of the platforms continued existence, something outside of Nintendo (GameCube/Wii/Wii-U) we haven't really had in the console space before.

As someone who has not yet invested in either the Xbox or PS4 I don't see how this concept would appeal to me. I've been waiting for enough exclusives to drop and for the price to do the same. If we went into iterative consoles then that period of waiting becomes redundant as by the time I'm ready to take the plunge there will be a newer, better, and more expensive model out. I'd rather keep my PC up to spec and ignore exclusives.

Ah this is different. Iteration shouldn't concern you in anyway if you haven't bought into the platform. As an outsider the choice to buy into the platform or not is based on experience and exclusives. If we ain't got the exclusives you want move along it don't matter. If we do, you choose the level you want to buy in at.

Edit: As a further thought, wouldn't this just kill/punish the early adopter? Why buy new when a better console is coming out and the launch library is crap. It only makes sense to buy when you have the 2nd or 3rd iteration unless you can't be patient

It's the iPad model. There's no such thing as an early adopter. Instead there's 'position in the current supported range' . Sometime your up, sometime your down. You choose when you want to change your experience. As for launch library - it's a thing of the past. There's just the library. And when a new model comes along early games should be better because devs are targeting an already established known quantity instead of writing the rule book from scratch again.

Why does it only make sense to buy on the 3rd iteration? The model has no right or wrong time to buy. If models come every 3-4 years and you wait for the 3rd model, what do you do 3-4yrs later when the 4th model comes out? and then the 5th 3-4yrs later? Do you upgrade immediately? hit every other iteration? or wait until your model is no longer supported with new games (probably around 8yrs after release depending on manufactures chosen release frequency and number of iterations they want to support in a cycle).

 

[eXistor]

I'm in, but begrudgingly so.

It's not something I'd like to see happening, but if it is the case, then I pretty much have no choice if I want to keep gaming.

 

[Chezzymann]

I'm out. I don't like the pressure of upgrading in order to keep up with the latest graphics and never being sure if the machine you bought will be able to run the latest games well years down the line. I get consoles because I know they will be able to run all the latest games well for the next 5+ years at a low price. With iterative stuff things like terrible optimization on older models due to focusing on the latest hardware and exclusives for newer versions come into play and I really don't like that. Just look at some 3DS games like Hyrule Warriors Legends that have terrible experiences on the original hardware and decent experiences on the new 3DS. Essentially Hyrule Warriors Legends is a new 3DS 'exclusive' because of this. I'd imagine scenarios like this could happen on iterative consoles as well. So if this is true and I basically will have to accept it, I'll just go all out and get a PC + nintendo console (assuming they dont go this route) whenever I have the money to afford a decent rig.

 

[MrGerbils]

In x 1,000, IF they give us a significant spec bump. If it's just a little bump like a $400 machine with a 960 equivalent in it then it likely won't be enough of a bump to tempt me. If they offer a $600+ rig with a 980 or better equivalent then I'm totally in.

If they offered a subscription like apples iPhone upgrade program where I could pay $30 a month and get a cutting edge machine (980ti) and swap it out every year for the new version I would absolutely do it.

 

[SlickShoes]

Depends on how much of a bump it actually is and how much money it costs.

If there is no decent trade in your old unit route then, I'm probably just all the way out and will stick with building a GOOD PC for £700 every 6 years.

 

[RedSwirl]

People saying this brings things too close to PC do kind of have a point that consoles are getting closer and closer to being locked-down PCs these days. When you think about it, iOS devices are really just locked-down computers with an alternate input method. If you extrapolate the definition far enough, consoles were really always locked-down "computers." The difference between the past and now is that the main advantage of consoles has disappeared.

In the 90's consoles and arcade boards could use exotic architecture to achieve a price/performance/wattage balance that PCs and other devices couldn't. Thus, you had a lot of games that only ran certain proprietary machines. The architecture advantage disappeared for reasons probably both business and technology-related. Development business has reached a point where it not longer makes sense to release a game for just one machine. PCs caught up to the point where for console manufacturers it just makes more sense to use off-the-shelf PC parts. The last remaining advantage of consoles is that they are cheap compared to comparable PC gaming hardware. Uncharted 4 is probably the last game I can see right now that's a sort of symbolic standard-bearer for a proprietary console, and I'm sure it would be technically achievable on a PC today, though perhaps at prohibitive cost.

And I'll repeat this: A lot of people in this thread need to let go of the need to have the very latest model. Just because a new version came out two-years later doesn't mean your machine is irrelevant. There's no way publishers and developers would stop supporting it. I know that anxiety is there when first buying into a platform that iterates like this, but you have to jump in at some point which is inevitably going to be a mid-point. I'd just take the same mentality I do with computers and phones: hold off upgrading until there is software I want that absolutely doesn't run on my current model. I don't even own a New 3DS yet because I'm not hugely interested in portable Xenoblade, Hyrle Warriors, or Monster Hunter.

 

[MogCakes]

And I'll repeat this: A lot of people in this thread need to let go of the need to have the very latest model.

A lot of people don't want to have to deal with that temptation in the first place. That's part of the appeal of consoles for many. If that's gone, why not just go full PC from then onward?

 

[GamerMax73]

Let go of the need of having the very latest model

A lot of people don't want to have to deal with that temptation in the first place.

Sorry but that kind of attitude makes me wonder how we ever left the stone age?

 

[GamerJM]

So, for those of you who are in, how often do you plan on upgrading?

Personally I'll buy every single edition of the Nintendo consoles and handhelds (which will run me a lot of money x_x). For the Sony and Microsoft ones I'm not sure. It depends on whether this would prompt me to move more towards PC or not. I feel like it probably would, though in theory if they handle this really, really well then it might not. If it does like I expect then I'll probably buy at least one iteration of the PlayStation and Xbox within a six year cycle or so, for the exclusives, though I might stop buying Xboxes entirely. If they don't then I guess it'll depend, but I'll probably buy whichever one (Playstation or Xbox) is more powerful at the launch of each "iteration," and then for the other one I'll wait and see.

A lot of people don't want to have to deal with that temptation in the first place. That's part of the appeal of consoles for many. If that's gone, why not just go full PC from then onward?

Also I agree with this. This might seem extremely childish but even just seeing Slim versions of consoles in advertisements makes me want to buy them even if I already own the "fat," versions of consoles. This is part of why I bought a 360 Slim despite owning a fat 360. I imagine that feeling will be even worse when those later versions of consoles actually have a tangible effect on the performance of games.

 

[MogCakes]

Sorry but that kind of attitude makes me wonder how we ever left the stone age?

By siding with the tech that works better -> in this case, it would be PCs if consoles go iterative. I'm sure someone tried to invent the square wheel to counteract the round one.

 

[RedSwirl]

A lot of people don't want to have to deal with that temptation in the first place. That's part of the appeal of consoles for many. If that's gone, why not just go full PC from then onward?

Because PCs would still be a good deal more expensive and complicated than consoles. You still won't have to deal with drivers and graphics settings. Trading in your old model towards a new one for many consumers would be significantly less intimidating than researching, buying, and installing a new GPU. Maybe for $200 after trade-in you could end up with an upgraded CPU, upgraded GPU, and upgraded memory. I don't think you can do that on PC. Even iterative consoles would still have more of a "it just works" guarantee than PCs, it would just work differently depending on what model.

Do you seriously think developers would drop support for two-year-old machines with 30m install bases? Or that they wouldn't explicitly highlight which models a piece of software is compatible with?

I know hardware cost is looking like the last advantage consoles have, but it's still there.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

Iterative models will basically do what the pack in n64 did imho. Certain games will require this upgrade but the grand majority will work fine.

 

[Astery]

I'm out. I don't buy a console for another PC and phone money maintenance

 

[see5harp]

I think "depends" is the right answer. We were fine with them selling newer slim models with improvements (or downgrades in the case of the PS3). My issue is that my ps4 and xbox one work perfectly as is for the most part. Developers aren't going to go back and patch old software to take advantage of the new stuff so at the end of the day I'm stuck with this software library that is running games at pathetic resolutions and framerate.

At this point, it's hard to deny the strengths of the PC platform seeing as I'm still able to play my entire library of software dating back to Half Life 2. I'd just hold onto my existing consoles and spend the money on a video card upgrade.

 

[Brashnir]

By siding with the tech that works better -> in this case, it would be PCs if consoles go iterative. I'm sure someone tried to invent the square wheel to counteract the round one.

You haven't lived til you've driven on square wheels.

 

[Hahs]

It seems like a real cluster-phuck

But as long as it doesn't hinder how me/make my hobby suck, I could care less

 

[tomhan]

I'm fine with it if they do or don't start to iterate on consoles but either way it is going to be a fascinating experiment to watch. If even one of the console manufacturers go this route it's going to fundamentally change the console landscape.

I see legitimate arguments for both sides and at this point I'm not sure whose I find more compelling.

 

[Raylan]

I'm in. Why? Because I'm a console gamer.
I have a gaming PC, but only because I'm a tech-geek + I need my RTS fix.

 

[Boombox On]

A lot of people don't want to have to deal with that temptation in the first place.

It's not like Sony's going to make a PS4 more powerful than a $1500 PC in any case, so I don't see where the "temptation" would exist anyway.

 

[Guardian Monkey]

I would stay away from Nintendo in this case. The new Zelda old 3ds issues and snes only on new gba is disgusting. I would expect more of this to continue if they continued releasing new consoles. All this will end up speeding up the console cycle till it destroys itself because people are sick of it. I mean, do you really think that EA is going to continue support on a new console of a 2 year old game. Hell they dont even keep servers up for some games that long. Its just going to fragment the console industry which is pretty much the many reason that consoles can survive so long with the same architecture.

 

[adamantypants]

You know, there ARE PC gamers that don't buy every top of the line card as they come out. In fact, most people bought 970s because they a fantastic price/performance card that they expect to last for several years.

If this plan came to fruition, you're not being forced to buy the new console. If you're the type who must have the newest hardware, guess what, you're an enthusiast. That's who the iterative consoles are for. Give in and enjoy the enthusiast life.

 

[Guardian Monkey]

You know, there ARE PC gamers that don't buy every top of the line card as they come out. In fact, most people bought 970s because they a fantastic price/performance card that they expect to last for several years.

If this plan came to fruition, you're not being forced to buy the new console. If you're the type who must have the newest hardware, guess what, you're an enthusiast. That's who the iterative consoles are for. Give in and enjoy the enthusiast life.

Eh? 970 is still a top end card at this time. Affordable good card.

 

[ps3ud0]

Im out on the basis I dont see permanent cross gen as really healthy for gameplay innovation nor for forcing developers to be as efficient optimising a games performance. That and the reality is that a PC just already covers iteration far better than what seems to been discussed for consoles with the caveat of higher initial cost (you could probably maintain a decent PC for the investment of buying each console iteration).

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Brashnir]

Im out on the basis I dont see permanent cross gen as really healthy for gameplay innovation nor for forcing developers to be as efficient optimising a games performance. That and the reality is that a PC just already covers iteration far better than what seems to been discussed for consoles with the caveat of higher initial cost (you could probably maintain a decent PC for the investment of buying each console iteration).

ps3ud0 8)

LOL gameplay innovation.

Have you seen the state of the AAA console industry?

 

[FStop7]

It depends on the games. It depends on if major releases make full use of the latest hardware iterations or if they aim for the broadest audience.

 

[ps3ud0]

LOL gameplay innovation.

Have you seen the state of the AAA console industry?

Yeah probably be even worse when developers have to consider if its worth putting in mechanics that cant be supported by the previous iteration which are likely to have the most sold/largest audience at any point of the model.

Well now we have gotten to a point that most mainstream games that are 3rd party also get concurrent pc game releases. This a big step from where we were just a few years ago.

Yep its a positive push for PC - feels like a decision thats already ready to be made.

ps3ud0 8)

 

[Guardian Monkey]

Im out on the basis I dont see permanent cross gen as really healthy for gameplay innovation nor for forcing developers to be as efficient optimising a games performance. That and the reality is that a PC just already covers iteration far better than what seems to been discussed for consoles with the caveat of higher initial cost (you could probably maintain a decent PC for the investment of buying each console iteration).

ps3ud0 8)

Well now we have gotten to a point that most mainstream games that are 3rd party also get concurrent pc game releases. This a big step from where we were just a few years ago.

 

[MogCakes]

Do you seriously think developers would drop support for two-year-old machines with 30m install bases? Or that they wouldn't explicitly highlight which models a piece of software is compatible with?

I know hardware cost is looking like the last advantage consoles have, but it's still there.

It isn't about dropping support, but that in terms of investment part of the appeal was what you bought was the best for a set time. The manufacturers could combat this by opting not to call their hardware refreshes mid-cycle names like the PS4.5 but instead just the PS5 and that may alleviate some of the mindset, but the shorter 3-4 year cycles will have people making comparisons to an investment in PC gaming if they feel their money isn't worth spending towards a short-cycle console before the next refresh. In short, many people just aren't interested in an iterative model of business, supported or not, when it comes to a specialized-use device such as a games console. Marketing them as entertainment centers didn't work, and people responded to the console that claimed itself as games first. Switching it upon them will just drive them to PC. Not everyone of course, but a substantial number (IMO).

As far as PC gaming goes, the costs are much lower today than they used to be, and it's extremely easy to get into. You just buy the game, download it, install it, and it will automatically patch itself and be ready to play, the same as consoles. Especially so with Steam. Graphics settings are very easy to get used to, they're just sliders that you play around with for five minutes until you understand which does what. On hardware complexity, many pre-built gaming PC options exist, ranging from low to high tier, that would have you set for at minimum the rest of the console generation and in many cases beyond. The hardware entry cost is still in consoles' favor, and I hope it stays that way, but iterative consoles will nullify this to an extent given the low cost of PC games that quickly make up for the initial entry price.

That all being said, ease of use is still on consoles' side at the moment, the margin is just lower than it used to be. For them to still be viable longterm they need to establish or maintain the identity they've forged. What that entails, I don't know. I just don't believe going iterative helps it.

 

[GamerMax73]

Graphics settings are very easy to get used to, they're just sliders that you play around with for five minutes until you understand which does what.

I'm out

 

[Version 3.0]

Sorry but that kind of attitude makes me wonder how we ever left the stone age?

Progress has come along just fine with non-iterative products. No one is saying there shouldn't be a Playstation 5.

Actually, maybe someone is: you. With iterative consoles, maybe there wouldn't be a PS5. There would just be endless slightly better versions of the PS4.

 

[MogCakes]

I'm out

¯\_(&#12484_/¯

 

[Lionheart1827]

Depends on how much its gonna cost, but generally, this is the kind of shit that is gonna push me to make the PC as my primary gaming platform. Seems theres so much more value there. The problem though is most of my friends play on console, and I like playing with my friends rather than randoms.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

While I'd love this idea, and wish the US all the best, we must remember (along with the download vs physical argument) that consoles are international devices. Here in the UK we have Satellite, Cable, Free Satellite, Free Terrestrial, Free Terrestrial with IPTV options. Building a compelling built in TV experience is not so easy for us.

Well my quote did say specifically the US. I'm sorry that you have a more complicated system but that doesn't really affect me in the US.

 

[therapist]

Nope , as a pc gamer i already upgrade every 4 years or so and thats all i need

i do have all the current gen consoles and barely use them , so definitely no for me , but i wouldnt be their target audience anyways

 

[Skinpop]

Because PCs would still be a good deal more expensive and complicated than consoles. You still won't have to deal with drivers and graphics settings.

dealing with drivers almost never happens on the pc these days. pcs are only complicated if you aren't used to using computers at all. We are talking about a few days at most to get accustomed to playing on the pc.
Games are much cheaper on the pc, over the course of a normal generation say five years, if one were to buy say 20-30 titles the price difference for the whole package is down to zero if not less and if you factor in that most people will own a pc anyway the extra cost for getting a decent gaming system is probably cheaper from the get go. For a lot of gamers like myself the only reason I even own a console is because of exclusives and the value proposition of owning a console for those takes a steep plunge with this model.


If you hate the pc and value multiplats and graphics over all I guess this an iterative model make sense.

 

[RedSwirl]

dealing with drivers almost never happens on the pc these days. pcs are only complicated if you aren't used to using computers at all. We are talking about a few days at most to get accustomed to playing on the pc.
Games are much cheaper on the pc, over the course of a normal generation say five years, if one were to buy say 20-30 titles the price difference for the whole package is down to zero if not less and if you factor in that most people will own a pc anyway the extra cost for getting a decent gaming system is probably cheaper from the get go. For a lot of gamers like myself the only reason I even own a console is because of exclusives and the value proposition of owning a console for those takes a steep plunge with this model.


If you hate the pc and value multiplats and graphics over all I guess this an iterative model make sense.

I think people who would to go PC over something like iterative consoles already have, or already should anyway. I did, but I still don't think iterative consoles would deter the average consumer from choosing consoles over PC. People who already perceive consoles as too complicated are perfectly fine discerning different iPhone versions. The "casual" crowd in my opinion doesn't care about always having the latest iteration of the box and doesn't really care about exclusives. No first party exclusive game so far this generation has been a massive hit or moved a significant number of consoles. The closest thing is maybe Splatoon. Casual consumers will still choose to buy a box, sit it in front of their TV, and install Minecraft or Call of Duty on it. Those casual consumers would just look at whatever options are available at the time they decide to get that box.

I also still think there are a lot of more enthusiast gamers who would still pick the $400 console over spending even $800 on a gaming PC, especially if that console ran games better than the lowest-common-denominator model.

As for Xbox losing its exclusives to Windows, I think Xbox is in a state right now where that's starting to matter less and less to Microsoft. If you buy a game on UWP that's no different to Microsoft's bottom line than if you buy it on Xbox. They'll soon be one platform essentially. Microsoft is probably banking on some consumers still deciding to buy the $400 Xbox rather than the PC you'd need to run Quantum Break. The issue on Microsoft's end though is convincing other developers to support UWP.

One caveat I will admit in regards to the phone comparison is that phones don't really have a stronger competitor in their space. Right now a smartphone is the best in-your-pocket experience you can get with that particular kind of software. Consoles on the other hand do have to measure up against PCs which are now offering pretty much all the same functionality. I just think that price and usability difference still matters to some people.

 

[User Name Here]

I haven't picked up any of the current gen consoles, but if I where picking up one I would just pick it up every five years.

 

[BinaryBear07]

I am in. I think this has the chance to be amazing for us.

 

[lynux3]

I'm in for sure.

 

[G-Bus]

Give me forward and bacowards compatibility than sure. Bring it on.

 

[Zia]

I think I've moved on from consoles but if anything will bring me back it's iterative consoles.

I said this gen would be the last for traditional consoles, which frankly is a stupid, anti-consumer and outdated market, and here we are "halfway" through this gen hearing rumblings about PS4.5 and XB1.5. Yay.

 

[The Abominable Snowman]

Depends on how the iterations go. right now, our assumption is just that they'll be the same form factor but with more power, but what if the PS4.5/XB1.5 turns out to be something different? Or if they include added functionality to replace another device in the house?

It'd be pretty nice if Sony crammed the PS4 in a VR headset, similar to AMD's own partnership for the Sulon Q with similar power under the hood.

I'd also be interested in a tablet Xbox One, or even a smaller set top box similar to Apple TV. Maybe a drop in card for desktop PC?

 

[anothertech]

Tech is moving too fast for the 6-7 year console cycle of old.

What the big console owners need to do is make their services available and compatible on all future devices. With x86 architecture they are on now, it's a perfect time for it.

 

[Gattsu25]

5+ years is just way too slow.

PS4 was good when it came out. It's already getting long in the tooth.

Developers would have to code for variable performance, however. And the online storefronts would have to get better at showing requirements for games.

I'm out, and I'm done with this hobby.

What a shame.

I expect this will become more and more common.

 

[Yoday]

I think people who would to go PC over something like iterative consoles already have, or already should anyway. I did, but I still don't think iterative consoles would deter the average consumer from choosing consoles over PC. People who already perceive consoles as too complicated are perfectly fine discerning different iPhone versions. The "casual" crowd in my opinion doesn't care about always having the latest iteration of the box and doesn't really care about exclusives. No first party exclusive game so far this generation has been a massive hit or moved a significant number of consoles. The closest thing is maybe Splatoon. Casual consumers will still choose to buy a box, sit it in front of their TV, and install Minecraft or Call of Duty on it. Those casual consumers would just look at whatever options are available at the time they decide to get that box.

I also still think there are a lot of more enthusiast gamers who would still pick the $400 console over spending even $800 on a gaming PC, especially if that console ran games better than the lowest-common-denominator model.

As for Xbox losing its exclusives to Windows, I think Xbox is in a state right now where that's starting to matter less and less to Microsoft. If you buy a game on UWP that's no different to Microsoft's bottom line than if you buy it on Xbox. They'll soon be one platform essentially. Microsoft is probably banking on some consumers still deciding to buy the $400 Xbox rather than the PC you'd need to run Quantum Break. The issue on Microsoft's end though is convincing other developers to support UWP.

One caveat I will admit in regards to the phone comparison is that phones don't really have a stronger competitor in their space. Right now a smartphone is the best in-your-pocket experience you can get with that particular kind of software. Consoles on the other hand do have to measure up against PCs which are now offering pretty much all the same functionality. I just think that price and usability difference still matters to some people.

Well said. The idea that console gamers may as well just get a PC if this happens is absurd and shows a real disconnect from what people like about consoles. Having iterative consoles doesn't make them more complicated devices, which PCs will always be.

I think a lot of people are having a hard time coming to terms with this new business model because we are so used to how it has been for decades, and we don't have all of the details yet. I personally can't see a negative based on what MS had been talking about. They seem to be putting in a hell of a lot of work to make sure that games work across multiple devices, and to make sure that your games go with you from device to device. However, I am far less confident that Sony can deliver on this new model, as it is going to require a massive undertaking on the software API side of things. If Sony does put out more powerful hardware, I don't see it being as smooth of a transition as what MS is talking about simply due what MS has going with UWP and DX12, and I don't see it being an end of the traditional generation cycle for Sony like it seems to be for MS.

 

[MogCakes]

PS4 was good when it came out. It's already getting long in the tooth.

Meanwhile, us FFXV and KHIII fans are still hanging on, waiting for them to release. For jRPG fans, this year is the first time the PS4 is really hitting its stride.

 

[Ranmo]

Depending on how frequently they upgrade to a new console. I'd probably be out. Will have to see prices and how frequently iterations come by to fully have a decision. I'd assume only AAA games would take advantage of each iteration to the max. So skipping iterations would potentially be viable for a lot of people.

 

[Gattsu25]

Meanwhile, us FFXV and KHIII fans are still hanging on, waiting for them to release. For jRPG fans, this year is the first time the PS4 is really hitting its stride.

Didn't Tales of Zestiria, Disgaea 5, and Bloodborne come out last year?

 

[curiouscharles]

i'm so fucking in.

if it's zero fragmentation, and completely optional [as all indications have been it will be], then again - so fucking in.

like PC gaming, but less expensive - like duh.

Meanwhile, us FFXV and KHIII fans are still hanging on, waiting for them to release. For jRPG fans, this year is the first time the PS4 is really hitting its stride.

yeah, and a ps4.5 won't change that - you'll still be able to enjoy those games [along with every other ps4 owner].