• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Ever thought about Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo getting together? (1 console future)

Look at what blu-ray players cost when they released, and look at what they cost now.

People really need to stop perpetuating this "one console future = one console maker," "omg no competition" bastardization of the One Console Future ideal. It should work the same way as video formats; One standard industry format that many companies could manufacture hardware for. There would be more, and far more direct, competition. Not less.

How does the cost and price fixing involved with blu-ray players provide any conclusive evidence to your previous conclusion? Can you explain in detail a hypothetical scenario where your example parallels a situation where this would happen?
 
I don't pay $700 for a blu ray player today... and under the model I listed there would still be hardware competition and they would still try and drive the price down, much like blu-ray players and dvd players work. Yes, the initial cost of devices would be high, but there would definitely be a race to the bottom so to speak, much more so than this generation where price drops have been rare and insignificant.

A games console isnt a blu ray player. It's a pc.

Your argument is based on pixie dust and fairy tales.
 
would prefer google to handle the OS or else it kinda just becomes a microsoft PC, why not get a "computer" then?

honestly though isn't it funny that all nintendo is good for are their old franchises...

and don't we have a "One" console? it's called Apple, where crowd sourcing is the new first-party.

I do think down the line though consoles, tvs, and computers will all be 1 machine. with multiple displays around your house.
 
would prefer google to handle the OS or else it kinda just becomes a microsoft PC, why not get a "computer" then?

honestly though isn't it funny that all nintendo is good for are their old franchises...

and don't we have a "One" console? it's called Apple, where crowd sourcing is the new first-party.

I do think down the line though consoles, tvs, and computers will all be 1 machine. with multiple displays around your house.

lol, get the fuck out.
 
blu-ray player prices were driven down by competition with hd-dvd players.

Yes, and that's why Blu-Ray prices went through the roof when HD-DVD went away.

Wait, that's not what happened at all. The prices continued the same downward trend because of the competition between manufacturers.
 
Street_fighter_movie_image_1994_raul_julia_as_m_bison_1_.jpg


M. Bison: Had you worked together instead of against each other, you might have been successful.
 
I have no interest in such a situation. The one area I would like to see the three parties come together would be for cross-platform online play for 3rd party games and really that's it.
 
Yes, and that's why Blu-Ray prices went through the roof when HD-DVD went away.

Wait, that's not what happened at all. The prices continued the same downward trend because of the competition between manufacturers.
you want to pretend competition with HD-DVD had no effect on Blu-Ray hardware prices? of course prices didn't spike through the roof after HD-DVD failed. it would have angered consumers.

and last i checked, Blu-Ray was still far from being the only video format these days. far far far from being the only video format.
 
A games console isnt a blu ray player. It's a pc.

Your argument is based on pixie dust and fairy tales.

Hahah, definitely right on that. It is just a hypothetical situation anyway. However, I would like to point out that a game console and a blu ray player are first and foremost entertainment consumption devices, hence my comparisons.
 
you want to pretend competition with HD-DVD had no effect on Blu-Ray hardware prices? of course prices didn't spike through the roof after HD-DVD failed. it would have angered consumers.

and last i checked, Blu-Ray was still far from being the only video format these days. far far far from being the only video format.

Blu-Ray prices didn't go down any faster than DVD prices when that format launched - which had no direct competitor like HD-DVD. As it turns out, Sony, Samsumg, LG, Sharp, Panasonic, et al, are all interested in making their products look attractive against each other's offerings.

Prices on this equipment actually goes down much faster historically than games consoles, because there's no price-fixing coming down from the format holder.
 
a little off topic, maybe deserves a thread of it's own, but why don't any of the big 3 jump on the bandwagon mobile devices/computers/cars are on and put out new hardware every year or 2.

I geuss they kinda do already, but it is done with patches....but still other companies are releasing completely new hardware,dimensions, OS's, etc...

edit: and i'm not talking about a slimmer machines either im talking new internal hardware
 
a little off topic, maybe deserves a thread of it's own, but why don't any of the big 3 jump on the bandwagon mobile devices/computers/cars are on and put out new hardware every year or 2.
They either are already or tried and failed in the past.

But it's also not as easy as just jumping into anything and everything. If that was the case we'd have Microsoft cookies and Sony condoms. Actually, I can see Nintendo getting into making condoms before Sony.
 
Blu-Ray prices didn't go down any faster than DVD prices when that format launched - which had no direct competitor like HD-DVD. As it turns out, Sony, Samsumg, LG, Sharp, Panasonic, et al, are all interested in making their products look attractive against each other's offerings.

Prices on this equipment actually goes down much faster historically than games consoles, because there's no price-fixing coming down from the format holder.

and DVD wasn't competiting with anything when it came to market? that's a weird suggestion to me.

the price on things which just have to play a couple of video codecs is always going to drop much faster than the price on something which has to be able to play all the same video games as their competitors. creating a chip to run a graphics API to exact performance specifications no less, is not going to be cheap or easy.

we would likely have a situation like 3DO where a single company creates the graphics chipset (likely AMD or Nvidia) and that single company would be under little pressure to drive down the costs of making that chipset, because it would be incredibly difficult for another company to make a chipset that could perform the same complex tasks equally well.
 
They either are already or tried and failed in the past.

But it's also not as easy as just jumping into anything and everything. If that was the case we'd have Microsoft cookies and Sony condoms. Actually, I can see Nintendo getting into making condoms before Sony.

i'm not suggesting they get into other markets, i'm talking about releasing new consoles every 1-2 years. they kind of did it this past gen, but it was only a half hearted effort. M$ attempted it the most as can be seen with several dashboard revisions and skus. but it was only a half attempt
 
Competition is good for business, though. I wouldn't want solely one console.

Even if the companies did make a one console future... A competitor would inevitably emerge that would tout something that may possibly be even better.

A single console would reinvent the industry, not just 'innovate' it. That's what will save it from becoming stagnant.
 
Even if the companies did make a one console future... A competitor would inevitably emerge that would tout something that may possibly be even better.

A single console would reinvent the industry, not just 'innovate' it. That's what will save it from becoming stagnant.
That sounds poetic but I just don't see the logic behind it.

Tell me how it will do all this.
 
and DVD wasn't competiting with anything when it came to market? that's a weird suggestion to me.

the price on things which just have to play a couple of video codecs is always going to drop much faster than the price on something which has to be able to play all the same video games as their competitors. creating a chip to run a graphics API to exact performance specifications no less, is not going to be cheap or easy.

we would likely have a situation like 3DO where a single company creates the graphics chipset (likely AMD or Nvidia) and that single company would be under little pressure to drive down the costs of making that chipset, because it would be incredibly difficult for another company to make a chipset that could perform the same complex tasks equally well.

DVD was competing with VHS, which was a last-gen product, and obviously movies and TV. a Single console would be competing against last-gen products (much as current consoles do) and would be competing with PC gaming, casual web gaming, phones and handhelds.

The potential issue with a chipset maker is definitely a hurdle which would need to be overcome. The consortium would probably have to include them as well so a chipset could be agreed upon that any of them could fab, with a set of API specs (Such as a set of DirectX requirements) to match it.
 
How so? The cost of building a competent PC has also gone way, way down in the past decade.

So much wrong here.

Are you seriously questioning the dichotomy of PC and Blu-Ray player and how a gaming console is one but not the other?

How are you coming to this conclusion? Also, I'm not sure if you've taken dollar value into consideration but that doesn't matter so much because you never established the definition of competent.

Furthermore, you didn't answer my previous question in post #102:

"How does the cost and price fixing involved with blu-ray players provide any conclusive evidence to your previous conclusion? Can you explain in detail a hypothetical scenario where your example parallels a situation where this would happen?"
 
DVD was competing with VHS, which was a last-gen product, and obviously movies and TV. a Single console would be competing against last-gen products (much as current consoles do) and would be competing with PC gaming, casual web gaming, phones and handhelds.
i don't think video formats really have 'gens' in the same way consoles do. VHS and DVD both played the same films. you didn't have to buy a DVD player to watch the latest movies.

DVD doesn't look to be going anywhere even though the next 'gen' has been going on for years.

it's not an equivalent situation. people only seem to move onto a new media format in large numbers when something more convenient shows up. it's never seemed to be about the quality of the picture or sound that the new media supports for anything more than the AVS crowd. that's not the case with console gaming at all.

as i keep harping on about, while in 2005 there was essentially only one video format, in 2012 there are a bunch, with no sign of consumers settling on one over the others yet. until there's evidence that consumers want it, it's not going to happen, and nothing i see in 2012, from computers, to smart phones, to how close the console war this gen is, to the situation with DVD, Blu-Ray, streaming and downloading, seems to suggest that consumers want ONE standard in any sizeable number.

or another way of looking at it, if the entertainment and technology industry have failed to make a standard format for films, why does anyone expect they could do it for games?
 
This is a child's view of the video game world.
Personally I find the current model inadequate and I know some people here don't like the idea out of company cheerleading.

Since my first priority is the games it would be totally fine by me if there was only one box and would help software companies make a profit.
 
i don't think video formats really have 'gens' in the same way consoles do. VHS and DVD both played the same films. you didn't have to buy a DVD player to watch the latest movies.

DVD doesn't look to be going anywhere even though the next 'gen' has been going on for years.

it's not an equivalent situation. people only seem to move onto a new media format in large numbers when something more convenient shows up. it's never seemed to be about the quality of the picture or sound that the new media supports for anything more than the AVS crowd. that's not the case with console gaming at all.

as i keep harping on about, while in 2005 there was essentially only one video format, in 2012 there are a bunch, with no sign of consumers settling on one over the others yet. until there's evidence that consumers want it, it's not going to happen, and nothing i see in 2012, from computers, to smart phones, to how close the console war this gen is, to the situation with DVD, Blu-Ray, streaming and downloading, seems to suggest that consumers want ONE standard in any sizeable number.

or another way of looking at it, if the entertainment and technology industry have failed to make a standard format for films, why does anyone expect they could do it for games?

I see where you're coming from, and the truth is that even if there was only one console coming out that featured all the games from all of the current manufacturers, it still wouldn't be the only way available to play games. PCs would still exist, phones would still exist, handhelds would still exist, previous gaming consoles would still exist.

It would just be a situation where if you wanted to play the latest and greatest games on a box that sat under your TV, (and you didn't want to set up an HTPC) you'd get a "VP" console, much as if you want to watch the latest and greatest movies in 1080p on a box that sits under your TV, you get a Blu-Ray player.

It could never be a be-all, end-all system without systematically obliterating everything that came out before, and getting some kind of international ban on phone and PC games. But as an early adopter, even a $1000 box at launch is still cheaper than the status quo. I bought a $400 360, a $500 (20GB) PS3 and a $250 Wii at launch, for a total of $1150, ($1250 if you count the HDD upgrade I had to buy for the PS3. that 20GB HDD was slooooowwwwww) and I don't expect that the next generation will be any cheaper on my wallet. Those that jump in later would get better prices than late adopters do now, as well.
 
The one-console future is inevitable. As time moves on, dedicated hardware is going to slowly become a thing of the past. But, I don't think it'll be one console that dominates the market. Rather, I think we're going to see a transition towards full-fledged gaming PCs that are designed to hook up to an HDTV, and run on Steam/Origin/Amazon. Then, everybody either plays third party, or makes marginally better versions of the same product (much like the current market for DVD/Blu-Ray players).
 
The combined might of the 3 would be too much for any reasonable business model to justify

They would spend all their time fighting over percentages and IPs

no thanks
 
I would like to see a dominant player each generation because smaller developers seem to have trouble with market fragmentation but not as a result of collaboration between the hardware makers as that would never work out for reasons already stated.
 
This runs diametrically counter to the major players' long-run goals. They want exclusive control of games and experiences as leverage to establish more power as gatekeepers over content that's already standard-agnostic. They're actively seeking fragmentation and division, not unification.

Also, you'll never see a Nintendo and Sony partnership ever again, no matter what happens.
 
Top Bottom