• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

If Sony and Microsoft stopped caring about graphics and made consoles innovative in other ways, would you still buy consoles?

Would you buy an extremely underpowered console from Sony and/or Microsoft?

  • Yes, games and gameplay matter the most, not the graphics.

    Votes: 116 52.7%
  • No. I would simply stop playing games altogether if that happened.

    Votes: 25 11.4%
  • No. I'd migrate to PC gaming instead.

    Votes: 79 35.9%

  • Total voters


Let's say by 2027 when the next generation gets released we get consoles that are barely an upgrade over current gen (maybe 20% better). For some reason, they include a cool gimmick with their new console so the games aren't compatible with current gen anymore, meaning you'd have to upgrade to keep playing the latest exclusive games. Let's say whatever gimmick they come up with really enhances gameplay in a different and innovative way. Both machines launch at $349.

Would you still buy Playstation and/or Xbox consoles if they followed Nintendo's strategy?
Last edited:


Gold Member
its not like graphics have take a huge leap forward with Series and PS5. Diminishing returns.

At some point you have to buy them if you want to play new console games, better graphics or not.


Elden Member
...didn't this happen with the Xbox One at launch? Forced gimmick of Kinict in the box, forced TV tunner in the system, forced "media and innovation" focus. Scaled back on the graphic power making PS4 unquestionably the more power system at launch.

I recall that not doing well.
Last edited:


I see where you’re going with this thread lol

Nintendo fanboys be like.

Last edited:


I think if I only cared about cutting edge visuals, I would game on PC. I can have just as much fun on the Switch as I do on the PS5 or Series X, so whilst I admire impressive visuals, I definitely sit more on the side of fun and engaging gameplay. I think the things I’ve appreciated the most, on the PS5 at least, are the faster loading times, 3D audio and the dualsense controller, rather than any spangly visuals. It’s why I tend to shake my head at folk arguing over 2 extra frames per second, or a small percentage higher res. If those things matter so much, you should get a PC.

So to answer the question, yes, I would still buy consoles - and the more gimmicks the better. Bring on PSVR 2. Gaming to me is all about escapism and experiencing new things.
Sony's bread and butter are big budget/high production value games, it makes no sense to develop these games in a platform that is too underpowered. They are untouched when it comes to AAA single player games like that, no other publisher comes close.

Nintendo games have a different sort of appeal and although I like some of them like Zelda BoTW, I don't get excited about their games anymore.

As for MS, I don't care for their hardware, I already play on PC. Still, I would wish it to be powerful and close enough to what Sony is offering so that multiplatform titles don't end up being made with the weaker machine in mind.
Last edited:


Gold Dealer
I'm not sure what are you trying to ask here. It's like asking if someone can stop eating but can be fed in other innovative ways like shoving food up the ass.

Graphics aren't the only thing that GPU's/CPU's need to calculate.
Last edited:


Gold Member
Two things: why give such ridiculous options? It hurts the question and puts unnecessary stress on the individual answering. I came in here to answer a simple question but was faced with this stupid do or die 'no' option of giving up gaming altogether or switching to pc. It's a common theme with polls on gaf. Just give a yes or no option and allow the answerer to explain themselves further in the thread. It's a terrible problem on the site.

Second, underpowered? Fuck right off with that!


I'm a PlayStation player. I've never felt that SONY gives enough care and enough content to justify the price of admission to their 'add ons'.
So if its an optional innovation, nah...i stick to mainline PS consoles now.

If it is something integrated that cause a lack of backwards compatibility, i'm fine with that..I keep my old consoles, so I'd still go ahead and buy the new console.

As for MS...would never buy their console but their history with Kinect doesn't seem positive to me.
Last edited:


after getting my first pc about 10 or so years ago i havnt been interested in consoles, the ps5 seems alright though


You need better CPU/GPU/memory architecture to keep doing more complex/realistic physics, AI calculations/modelling (and more of them) to make games for immersive. As others already said. This is the common "budget", and will hopefully keep increasing. Developers will still have to chose how to split it for their games.
Last edited:
It depends if they locked their exclusive games that i want to play to it and i have no other way to play it than yeah i would buy
There's so many unknown factors there that end in "depends if...". I honestly don't want my future console to struggle to play games like the Switch is. Not that it's a knock on it, it's really nice for what it is I just value more performance than portability.


I hate Nintendo’s strategy. Their consoles are hit and miss and when they miss, they miss big big time. Having to reinvent the wheel every generation also comes at a cost - poor product design choices, cheap materials, and underpowered tech.

No thanks.


Well sure since PS5 games look and run quite well.

There’s diminishing returns beyond.
Last edited:


Nintendos's strategy: pump shit out that doesn't innovate in any way, preferably not new IPs but always the same 30 old ones, with outdated graphics and barebones online features that are laughable for 2022+, that run like shit because your hardware is also shit, and put it a premium price tag on it. Then wait for all your loyal and mindless fanboys to buy your stuff despite spitting into their mouths.


I was expecting a Nintendo avatar.
Just because we are at the early stages of the gen, doesn't mean it isn't innovative.
Once devs drop the crossgen titles, people will be surprised by what will come next, not only in graphics.

Then again, what innovation did Nintendo brought to the table, besides a portable that you can hook up to your tv? PSP did this and the sega Nomad prior to it.

Nintendo focus on cheap hardware is due to their lack of R&D money, not by choice.


Were at a point now where Graphics need to officially take a back seat. PS5 Series X and PC can do whatever a developer puts the time into them to do. Maybe minor graphical improvements but the matrix demo shows me exactly where we are at and its a good place. I think they need to focus on gameplay and story telling as we have barely even scratched the surface of what these current consoles are capable of.
Bad poll question. No machine going forward will be "extremely underpowered" The baseline for the next gen consoles will be much better than an RTX 3090... Stop and think about that one for a second.


Gold Member
If it really enhances gameplay then, by definition, it's not a "gimmick".

But yeah I'd be totally fine with that. I like nice looking games but with each gen it's becoming less of a factor to me. A lot of my favourite games from recent years weren't graphically impressive.


Bad poll question. No machine going forward will be "extremely underpowered" The baseline for the next gen consoles will be much better than an RTX 3090... Stop and think about that one for a second.
By 2027 something only 20% faster than current gen consoles will be considered underpowered.


That depends.

I bought a Series S and I am happy with it. I The games play well and other than some graphics/perfomance differences from the Series X, everything is the same. I would definitely buy a cheaper PS5 if it was similar to the Series S.

I also still play old games. I never cared much about graphics. As long as the games are fun to me... I honestly don't care if it runs at 4k or 720p.

However... If that would mean less complex games, like imagine Red Dead Redemption 2 being ported to the ps2... Well...

GIF by Zack Kantor
Last edited:
And that's the whole point of this thread, it's an hypothetical question.

If it did happen I'd be totally fine anyway because games will improve due to more than just a massive boost in raw power. These architectures also become more efficient at the things they do with time and benefit from increased developer knowledge of various techniques. More importantly, the games being designed, characters, worlds, the style of gameplay and interaction that's present, all of that is what defines the game more than the hardware specs, so I suppose my answer is that I would be entirely fine with it, just so long as what they're doing is the mainstream, and not somehow odd guys out with a new mainstream console player that has risen the level and has the software support to back it up.
Top Bottom