Support NeoGAF

[Link]

Fair enough.

A less confrontational topic - why do Nintendo fans settle for what Nintendo gives them instead of expecting more? I'm a fan of Nintendo games, but I really, really wish I could enjoy them in HD resolutions with better graphics and good online support. Why are Fortune and the hardcore Nintendo fans giving Nintendo a free pass here?

Quite frankly, because it means we're not stuck paying prices that a lot of us can't/won't pay. I don't need my hobby being marginalized.

 

[Duckhuntdog]

Elite Money Agent!!

 

[Evlar]

To be fair, the breakdown doesn't seem to take into account a number of factors:

* Various plastic molds and components
* Cost to assemble and quality test
* Research and development

And don't forget that the Sixaxis comes with a rechargeable battery, which is one great thing that Sony did that Nintendo and Microsoft should copy (although I still want access to the battery).

Yeah, that breakdown is a little misleading. Buttons and such are surely cheap but they aren't free, so I would expect the manufacturing cost of the remote (and the sixaxis) to be a little more than that. The battery probably makes the sixaxis costlier to build than the controllers from the other two.

 

[Pureauthor]

People really need to drop the graphics line with the casuals.

To a casual, a gun is a gun, a tree is a tree, a building is a building. they don't give a damn how real it looks. If they an identify that something is something, then they're satisfied.

I'm a casual now?

 

[PS360]

When my family visited America, my dad and my mum ordered a steak, and then told the waiter to cut it in two and serve half to each of them.

It was still too much for them.

Why didn't they just ask for a 2nd plate?

 

[bengraven]

Just noticed this thread.

Oh shit, it's over already? *sells 360 and waits by empty Wii for the megaton*

 

[Pureauthor]

Why didn't they just ask for a 2nd plate?

Because they could've just made the waiter/kitchen staff do the work of cutting up the portions instead?

But that's beside my point, which was that American food portions are wayyyy big.

 

[theBishop]

Sony re-doubling their PS2 efforts would KILL the PS3. Sony wants to transition the PS2's successes, not continue with them.

it wouldn't be redoubling their efforts at all. once the controller is in place, its a matter of a team of about 20 people putting out one PiiS2 game a quarter. From there, 3rd parties can pick up the slack.

But its not just a profit center, its strategic. It keeps 3rd parties from developing seriously on the Wii as long as they can continue using PS2 technology.

A relatively small amount of effort with a lot of different payoffs.

 

[dammitmattt]

Maybe it's because only 17% of U.S. households have an HDTV?

As for online... well, perhaps it's more to do with the fact that the majority doesn't find online play all that compelling. Hell, Microsoft recently admitted that there are only 3 million Live Gold accounts -- and the 360 is hardcore central.

And that 17% will only continue to grow thanks to continued price drops. I already said that it will be more of a problem for the Wii in the future than it is now. Just a few years ago, 0% of people had HDTVs.

Tell the millions of housewives who play online games every day that online isn't compelling. Tell that to roughly half of the 360 userbase who are playing online. That argument is old and outdated, and if the current trends keep up, the majority of gamers will be playing online by the next generation. In fact, online will be so integrated into the experience that there will be little differentiation between online and offline.

You are too fixated on the present.

 

[LCGeek]

Fair enough.

A less confrontational topic - why do Nintendo fans settle for what Nintendo gives them instead of expecting more? I'm a fan of Nintendo games, but I really, really wish I could enjoy them in HD resolutions with better graphics and good online support. Why are Fortune and the hardcore Nintendo fans giving Nintendo a free pass here?

Bad question

The real question is why do some hc gamers want more and expect to pay less? A console is a closed box environment more so it's meant to be an accesible form of computing in comparison to other ways. Nintendo typically sells their product at a reasonably mainstream price. You can't stuff HD tech of any type into a product that you want to be under 250$, this is considering the gpu, cpu, and ram alone. Add an HD it's going to cost you a fixed rate permanently. Add wifi and usb that will jack up your cost a little more. On top of that the cost to shrink all that to the size nintendo wanted alone would've been a nightmare and this is not considering how you would cool it an affordable level. Wii is largely the way it is because of size, power consumptation, and backward compatibility concerns nintendo had. We didn't settle we got cynical and realistic about a company who tries to earn buck on everything they sell. HD with full bc would've costed us about 450$ and I doubt that would be selling at the moment.

As for Free Passes all 3 of them get it from me especially PS3. If anything my habit is to go after devs not the manufacturers. They know what they are getting into with any console from the get go yet usually love to whine about the lack of power or ram consoles have regardless of platform.

 

[dammitmattt]

People really need to drop the graphics line with the casuals.

To a casual, a gun is a gun, a tree is a tree, a building is a building. they don't give a damn how real it looks. If they an identify that something is something, then they're satisfied.

Then why aren't we still playing N64 and PS1 games? This argument does not hold up.

it wouldn't be redoubling their efforts at all. once the controller is in place, its a matter of a team of about 20 people putting out one PiiS2 game a quarter. From there, 3rd parties can pick up the slack.

But its not just a profit center, its strategic. It keeps 3rd parties from developing seriously on the Wii as long as they can continue using PS2 technology.

A relatively small amount of effort with a lot of different payoffs.

Yeah...that's not going to happen. Sony is PS3 or bust on the new console side, and will continue to milk the PS2 as long as they can (as they should).

 

[Pureauthor]

Then why aren't we still playing N64 and PS1 games? This argument does not hold up.

Um, the most popular system on the market right now is a portable N64.

 

[Link]

Then why aren't we still playing N64 and PS1 games? This argument does not hold up.

Because developers stopped making them. Just look at how popular the DS is in regards to graphics not really mattering.

 

[mcgarrett]

Tell that to roughly half of the 360 userbase who are playing online.

It's actually less than a third, especially when you consider all the Xboxes that are still out there.

That argument is old and outdated, and if the current trends keep up, the majority of gamers will be playing online by the next generation. In fact, online will be so integrated into the experience that there will be little differentiation between online and offline.

Playing games online and playing multiplayer games online are two entirely different things.

You are too fixated on the present.

Silly me. Maybe I should go out and lay down $600 for a PS3 now, even though there are no games I want and I have no HDTV, just for the sake of the future!

 

[castle007]

it is all over.

 

[hyp]

yay and all that shit. let's see some game announcements instead of the cock waggling.

 

[v1cious]

I love when juinior members talk what does that say about the other two systems which are already imploding because of Wii, some how they are magically gonna get a nice boost in sales eat crow it suits you.

fall lineup says otherwise, especially with a price cut.


??? why do my images keep vanishing?

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

it wouldn't be redoubling their efforts at all. once the controller is in place, its a matter of a team of about 20 people putting out one PiiS2 game a quarter. From there, 3rd parties can pick up the slack.

But its not just a profit center, its strategic. It keeps 3rd parties from developing seriously on the Wii as long as they can continue using PS2 technology.

A relatively small amount of effort with a lot of different payoffs.

And what of the PS3?Would the "PiiS2" as you call it eat into the PS3's successes?

 

[dammitmattt]

Bad question

The real question is why do some hc gamers want more and expect to pay less? A console is a closed box environment more so it's meant to be an accesible form of computing in comparison to other ways. Nintendo typically sells their product at a reasonably mainstream price. You can't stuff HD tech of any type into a product that you want to be under 250$, this is considering the gpu, cpu, and ram alone. Add an HD it's going to cost you a fixed rate permanently. Add wifi and usb that will jack up your cost a little more. On top of that the cost to shrink all that to the size nintendo wanted alone would've been a nightmare and this is not considering how you would cool it an affordable level. Wii is largely the way it is because of size, power consumptation, and backward compatibility concerns nintendo had. We didn't settle we got cynical and realistic about a company who tries to earn buck on everything they sell. HD with full bc would've costed us about 450$ and I doubt that would be selling at the moment.

As for Free Passes all 3 of them get it from me especially PS3. If anything my habit is to go after devs not the manufacturers. They know what they are getting into with any console from the get go yet usually love to whine about the lack of power or ram consoles have regardless of platform.

For $75 more ($50 price difference + $25 memory card to save games), you get everything you mentioned above with the Xbox 360 Core system. It doesn't cost $150 to condense the Gamecube components into the Wii form factor. If that were the case, why didn't the PS2 slimline cost more than the PS2 did at the time?

The fact that Nintendo is probably the first mainstream console to profit immediately out of the gate in this razor/razor blade business should tell you that Nintendo could've done much, much more, but they made a very specific decision not to. Apparently, most people don't care and are buying up Wiis left and right, but that doesn't mean that I don't care.

 

[theBishop]

And what of the PS3?Would the "PiiS2" as you call it eat into the PS3's successes?

I don't think it affects anything. The person who is going to buy a PS3 at $500 (xmas price drop hopefully...) is mostly separate from the person who is buying a PiiS2 for $100-$150. And if the PS3 customer wants to play PiiS2 games, well, that's the magic of backward compatibility.

By the time PS3 is cheap enough that the $100 customer is going to buy one, the PS2 (in any form) will be dead and PS4 will be on the horizon.

 

[felipeko]

I think it could have a huge impact... if Wiis were on the shelf.

If a potential Wii buyer has to go to a gaming message board to track down rumored Wii shipments, drive to the store before it opens and stand in line, that person is not a casual gamer.

Well, you're wrong.

This is from a brazilian mag, talking about a brazilian tv show hoster, and she is talking when she gone to New York.. and i will translate for you the red part: "and we got up early in the morning to buy another controller for our console Wii. Was a line of 400 people, in the rain, just to get a number. And we were there. (laughs)"

I really dont think she is a gamer, and damn, she has money, she could have bought it here (not sold out). But well, she stood in the line to buy a wiimote (probably because she wanted to play with more people, and wanted it now)..

I really think you're understimating the wii appeals. People don't need to be a gamer to want a Wii, and if they want it now, they will stand in line before store opens to buy it.

 

[dammitmattt]

Um, the most popular system on the market right now is a portable N64.

What looks like shit on a TV looks fine on a 3" screen, plus most of the popular DS games are mostly 2D anyway.

Besides, it doesn't make sense to compare portable and home console technology.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

For $75 more ($50 price difference + $25 memory card to save games), you get everything you mentioned above with the Xbox 360 Core system. It doesn't cost $150 to condense the Gamecube components into the Wii form factor. If that were the case, why didn't the PS2 slimline cost more than the PS2 did at the time?

The fact that Nintendo is probably the first mainstream console to profit immediately out of the gate in this razor/razor blade business should tell you that Nintendo could've done much, much more, but they made a very specific decision not to. Apparently, most people don't care and are buying up Wiis left and right, but that doesn't mean that I don't care.

Um, the money loss on hardware only really started with the PS2.

Also, you're missing Wi-Fi, which Wii has out of the box and the 360 does not. The 360 wi-fi adaptor is an exhorbitant 100 dollars, might I add.

 

[Link]

For $75 more ($50 price difference + $25 memory card to save games), you get everything you mentioned above with the Xbox 360 Core system. It doesn't cost $150 to condense the Gamecube components into the Wii form factor. If that were the case, why didn't the PS2 slimline cost more than the PS2 did at the time?

The fact that Nintendo is probably the first mainstream console to profit immediately out of the gate in this razor/razor blade business should tell you that Nintendo could've done much, much more, but they made a very specific decision not to. Apparently, most people don't care and are buying up Wiis left and right, but that doesn't mean that I don't care.

Corporations are not obligated to lose money for your benefit. This industry wasn't like this before huge conglomerates like Sony and MS came into the fold anyway. They can afford to lose money on consoles because it's only a small part of their overall business.


EDIT -

I don't think it affects anything. The person who is going to buy a PS3 at $500 (xmas price drop hopefully...) is mostly separate from the person who is buying a PiiS2 for $100-$150. And if the PS3 customer wants to play PiiS2 games, well, that's the magic of backward compatibility.

By the time PS3 is cheap enough that the $100 customer is going to buy one, the PS2 (in any form) will be dead and PS4 will be on the horizon.

Are you going to reply to my post or just continue to pretend it doesn't exist? I'm curious as to your position.

 

[Phife Dawg]

Will that pipe dream of Sony screwing over Nintendo with a PS2 relaunch + WiiMote controller now haunt every Wii thread? As if the discussions weren't retarded enough before.

 

[Pureauthor]

What looks like shit on a TV looks fine on a 3" screen, plus most of the popular DS games are mostly 2D anyway.

Besides, it doesn't make sense to compare portable and home console technology.

Let's break this up:

What looks like shit on a TV looks fine on a 3" screen

So on a 3" screen, N64 level 3D suddenly looks on par with PS2 3D. O...kaayyyy...

plus most of the popular DS games are mostly 2D anyway.

Animal Crossing. Brain Training. Nintendogs. Pokemon. New Super Mario Bros.

The defense rests.

Besides, it doesn't make sense to compare portable and home console technology.

Why? Enlighten me.

 

[dammitmattt]

It's actually less than a third, especially when you consider all the Xboxes that are still out there.

No one knows exactly how many Xbox 360s are in consumer hands.

Playing games online and playing multiplayer games online are two entirely different things.

Huh? So when I play Yahoo Spades with three other people, what do you call that?

Silly me. Maybe I should go out and lay down $600 for a PS3 now, even though there are no games I want and I have no HDTV, just for the sake of the future!

That is not what I was saying at all. I didn't say buy a Wii now because Mario is coming this fall. My point is that trends change over time and you can't apply what's happening today with online and HDTV to how the market will look 2-4 years from now.

COMPLETELY missed that point.

 

[Wyndstryker]

Then why aren't we still playing N64 and PS1 games? This argument does not hold up.

Ask the console manufacturers. They're the ones who decided to bring out stronger machines. i'm guessing the devs wanted more power but who's to say what the market cared about. Only a small segment of people (the hardcore) asked for more, not the resounding majority.

 

[mcgarrett]

That is not what I was saying at all. I didn't say buy a Wii now because Mario is coming this fall. My point is that trends change over time and you can't apply what's happening today with online and HDTV to how the market will look 2-4 years from now.

COMPLETELY missed that point.

As you did mine... people are buying Wiis to play them today, and today more people own SDTVs than not. Of course HD penetration will be higher in four years, but by then we'll be talking about Nintendo's next console, if it's not already out. The Wii doesn't have to last 4-5 years to be a success.

 

[Grecco]

Will that pipe dream of Sony screwing over Nintendo with a PS2 relaunch + WiiMote controller now haunt every Wii thread? As if the discussions weren't retarded enough before.

I know. Its the latest invention of Nintendo haters. Silly as it is.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

I don't think it affects anything. The person who is going to buy a PS3 at $500 (xmas price drop hopefully...) is mostly separate from the person who is buying a PiiS2 for $100-$150.

You keep saying this, but both would be fighting for the same dollars. What would the separation be? Casuals vs. hardcore enthusiasts? Sony would be taking quite the bath on the hardware if that were the case (Which it is RIGHT NOW with the Wii vs. PS3). Also, why would 3rd parties support the more expensive to develop for PS3 when there is the familiar and monumentally cheaper PiiS2?

And if the PS3 customer wants to play PiiS2 games, well, that's the magic of backward compatibility.

So then the Remote would work for the PS3 as well, effectively rendering the PiiS2 redundant.

By the time PS3 is cheap enough that the $100 customer is going to buy one, the PS2 (in any form) will be dead and PS4 will be on the horizon.

Again, why even bother with the PS3 if there is a cheaper alternative that is gaining more support?

See, this whole thing sounds like a half court hail mary for Sony to be successful instead of Nintendo. You didn't think this out.

 

[theBishop]

Are you going to reply to my post or just continue to pretend it doesn't exist? I'm curious as to your position.

You mean the one on page 4?

I didn't reply to it because i didn't see it. But now that i've seen it, i'm not going to reply to it because its offers nothing to the conversation.

 

[ziran]

Fair enough.

A less confrontational topic - why do Nintendo fans settle for what Nintendo gives them instead of expecting more? I'm a fan of Nintendo games, but I really, really wish I could enjoy them in HD resolutions with better graphics and good online support. Why are Fortune and the hardcore Nintendo fans giving Nintendo a free pass here?

Because graphics aren't why I play videogames, and by sticking to current gen tech, Nintendo is able to bring much need innovation to gaming.

If Nintendo went HD, dev costs would go up, therefore risk would rise, which would've resulted in conservatism, not just from Nintendo but also 3rd Parties. Nintendo has billions in the bank but, 'they can afford it', is a ridiculously simplistic view and doesn't take into consideration why videogame companies exist and why shareholders are so important.

Also, Nintendo wanted to take market share away from Sony, and MS, so having comparable dev costs to 360 and PS3, and an innovative controller, would've killed 3rd Party support, which every console needs. Bigger user base means more profit for 3rd Parties, more profit means more investment and more investment mean more good games.

I expect a lot more from gaming and, for me, Nintendo is delivering in a far more satisfying way than Sony or MS.

 

[Link]

You mean the one on page 4?

I didn't reply to it because i didn't see it. But now that i've seen it, i'm not going to reply to it because its offers nothing to the conversation.

Right. I think I got my answer.

 

[Wiitard]

it is all over.

And it kinda is.

 

[v1cious]

Why? Enlighten me.

handhelds are more like cellphones. they're not in the same demographic at all, whereas you expect to get the full experience out of a home console.

 

[dammitmattt]

Let's break this up:

So on a 3" screen, N64 level 3D suddenly looks on par with PS2 3D. O...kaayyyy...

Animal Crossing. Brain Training. Nintendogs. Pokemon. New Super Mario Bros.

The defense rests.

Why? Enlighten me.

Three of those games are 2D games with some 3D elements. I never said anything about the N64 > PS2 > whatever you made up. I said it's acceptable to look at on a small screen because what is a blurry mess on a TV becomes sharp on a small screen. And I am a DS fan who owns all five of those games, thank you very much.

Corporations are not obligated to lose money for your benefit. This industry wasn't like this before huge conglomerates like Sony and MS came into the fold anyway. They can afford to lose money on consoles because it's only a small part of their overall business.

Of course they are not, but that doesn't change the fact that I, as a consumer, expect more out of Nintendo for my $250 console.

Um, the money loss on hardware only really started with the PS2.

Also, you're missing Wi-Fi, which Wii has out of the box and the 360 does not. The 360 wi-fi adaptor is an exhorbitant 100 dollars, might I add.

Are you sure about that? I would very interested to look back in time to see how profitable the consoles were.

Anyway, WiFi is dirt cheap and Microsoft's decision to sell that piece for $100 is truly idiotic. However, Nintendo should've put an ethernet port on the Wii, too.

 

[Tobor]

Will that pipe dream of Sony screwing over Nintendo with a PS2 relaunch + WiiMote controller now haunt every Wii thread? As if the discussions weren't retarded enough before.

Blame Shane Bettenhausen. He started it. Hopefully they will expand on the discussion on 1upyours tomorrow. Shane can get a little excitable.

 

[mcgarrett]

Of course they are not, but that doesn't change the fact that I, as a consumer, expect more out of Nintendo for my $250 console...

... which comes with a $60 controller combo and a pack-in game.

 

[Pureauthor]

Three of those games are 2D games with some 3D elements. I never said anything about the N64 > PS2 > whatever you made up. I said it's acceptable to look at on a small screen because what is a blurry mess on a TV becomes sharp on a

You were the one who started the comparison with the N64 and PS1 not receiving dev support, so naturally the comparison had to be made to the other machines on the market that actually are still receiving dev support - of which PS2 is the weakest.

My point was and is that - hardware power has nothing to do with the choices made for development.

handhelds are more like cellphones. they're not in the same demographic at all, whereas you expect to get the full experience out of a home console.

Handheld = Dedicated gaming device

Cellphone = Not dedicated gaming device

Console = Dedicated gaming device

Which one of these three is the odd one out?

 

[theBishop]

You keep saying this, but both would be fighting for the same dollars. What would the separation be? Casuals vs. hardcore enthusiasts? Sony would be taking quite the bath on the hardware if that were the case (Which it is RIGHT NOW with the Wii vs. PS3). Also, why would 3rd parties support the more expensive to develop for PS3 when there is the familiar and monumentally cheaper PiiS2?

So then the Remote would work for the PS3 as well, effectively rendering the PiiS2 redundant.

Again, why even bother with the PS3 if there is a cheaper alternative that is gaining more support?

See, this whole thing sounds like a half court hail mary for Sony to be successful instead of Nintendo. You didn't think this out.

The separation is that one costs $500 and one costs $150.

By your own logic, Nintendo has no motivation to invest millions in huge games like Zelda when they can sell millions of copies of Wii Play. It doesn't really hold. There are legions of people who want to see gaming grow. We used to watch black and white silent films, now we have IMAX. Its just progress.

Every gaming generation has been more expensive and initially smaller installed base than its predecessor. But developers understand that you have to make these investments early on so you can cash in later.

 

[Tobor]

... which comes with a $60 controller combo and a pack-in game.

Exactly. Value is relative. Matt, you obviously should have waited. Maybe you over hyped it to yourself. I don't know what you were really expecting.

The Wii is exactly what I thought it would be, warts and all.

 

[Christoff Yurievich]

it wouldn't be redoubling their efforts at all. once the controller is in place, its a matter of a team of about 20 people putting out one PiiS2 game a quarter. From there, 3rd parties can pick up the slack.

But its not just a profit center, its strategic. It keeps 3rd parties from developing seriously on the Wii as long as they can continue using PS2 technology.

A relatively small amount of effort with a lot of different payoffs.

that's gotta be one of the dumbest ideas I've read here in at least a month. WHY would Sony start pushing the PS2 again like that? Do you really think third parties are sitting around and thinking, "wow, if only the PS2 had a controller like the Wii, then we'd really make some great games!" :lol

 

[dammitmattt]

Because graphics aren't why I play videogames, and by sticking to current gen tech, Nintendo is able to bring much need innovation to gaming.

If Nintendo went HD, dev costs would go up, therefore risk would rise, which would've resulted in conservatism, not just from Nintendo but also 3rd Parties. Nintendo has billions in the bank but, 'they can afford it', is a ridiculously simplistic view and doesn't take into consideration why videogame companies exist and why shareholders are so important.

Also, Nintendo wanted to take market share away from Sony, and MS, so having comparable dev costs to 360 and PS3, and an innovative controller, would've killed 3rd Party support, which every console needs. Bigger user base means more profit for 3rd Parties, more profit means more investment and more investment mean more good games.

I expect a lot more from gaming and, for me, Nintendo is delivering in a far more satisfying way than 360 or PS3 is.

Judging by the Wii's third-party lineup, having higher dev costs might have been a good thing

Also, don't kid yourself. Graphics have always mattered to everyone who plays games. People always want something bigger, better, faster, etc.

Historically, Nintendo fans have always praised graphics because the SNES looked better, the N64 sometimes looked better, and the Gamecube could be almost on par with the Xbox (hello RE4 and Rogue Squadron 2). However, now that Nintendo fans can't trumpet the graphics, they suddenly don't care about graphics? I've been interested in this industry so long that it's been interesting to see this shift.

 

[theBishop]

Blame Shane Bettenhausen. He started it. Hopefully they will expand on the discussion on 1upyours tomorrow. Shane can get a little excitable.

Actually... I started it:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136778&highlight=motion

But Shane's comment was definitely interesting

 

[Grecco]

Blame Shane Bettenhausen. He started it. Hopefully they will expand on the discussion on 1upyours tomorrow. Shane can get a little excitable.

yup a Sonybot

 

[v1cious]

You were the one who started the comparison with the N64 and PS1 not receiving dev support, so naturally the comparison had to be made to the other machines on the market that actually are still receiving dev support - of which PS2 is the weakest.

My point was and is that - hardware power has nothing to do with the choices made for development.



Handheld = Dedicated gaming device

Cellphone = Not dedicated gaming device

Console = Dedicated gaming device

Which one of these three is the odd one out?

i'm referring to userbase. even the most non-gamer people will have a handheld just to have something to do. why do you think they sell so much? no one expects raw power, just something fun that they can play on the go.

 

[Link]

Every gaming generation has been more expensive and initially smaller installed base than its predecessor. But developers understand that you have to make these investments early on so you can cash in later.

Except look at home many devs have either closed down or merged with another company over the last few years. The consolidation is getting scary.

EDIT -

Also, don't kid yourself. Graphics have always mattered to everyone who plays games.

No, they really haven't. I'm not sure how long you've been playing games, but you're dead wrong here.

 

[Tobor]

The separation is that one costs $500 and one costs $150.

By your own logic, Nintendo has no motivation to invest millions in huge games like Zelda when they can sell millions of copies of Wii Play. It doesn't really hold. There are legions of people who want to see gaming grow. We used to watch black and white silent films, now we have IMAX. Its just progress.

Every gaming generation has been more expensive and initially smaller installed base than its predecessor. But developers understand that you have to make these investments early on so you can cash in later.

MP3's were a huge step back for music, which until that point had always increased in technology. LP <<< Cassette <<< CD >>> MP3. Why did it work? The consumer was willing to trade down quality in exchange for something else, in the case of MP3s, convenience and portability.

Of course there are audiophiles who have scoffed at the inferior MP3 format, but they are niche and do not motivate the market.

 

[Pureauthor]

Also, don't kid yourself. Graphics have always mattered to everyone who plays games. People always want something bigger, better, faster, etc.

Graphics only matter to a vocal minority - incidentally, the minority that, while yelling the loudest, is in action generally the most compliant to the way the gaming industry turns.

Console sales have proven time and time again - graphics don't matter to the mass market.