Fungi Forums
Video Games => Video Game Chat => Topic started by: HolyAarom on October 27, 2007, 10:49:53 AM
-
Someone on another forum posted a theory that someday Micro, Ninty, and Sony will all join together to form one huge gaming platform that will end the Console Wars.
I remember having an issue of Tips & Tricks that talked about something like this, and I lost it. I want to show some stuff that is wrong with putting all companies into one console, so I'm asking, is it a good idea to have all companies work on one console?
-
No competition means a stagnant market and terrible games.
In short: No, it is a very very terrible idea.
-
Boy, have I heard this one before... I don't think it's a theory, so much as a suggestion. Granted, it would mean you could play ALL the games, but that's like siamese triplets right there; they'd all have to have the same controller, same online setup... see how different the Wi/PS3/360 are now? If they merged, it wouldn't last long.
-
This is kind of eerie to me, since I was just about to make a topic about console exclusivity when I saw this.
-
That wouldn't be a good idea, in my opinion, for reasons stated above.
-
No competition means a stagnant market and terrible games.
In short: No, it is a very very terrible idea.
Boy is this ever true.
Miyamoto compared game consoles to dinosaurs once, I believe... You have the big top-of-the-line predators with superb graphics, and then the little cunning ones that survive by other means (the Wii's motion sensing and stuff).
Not to mention it would be far too expensive.
-
No competition means a stagnant market and terrible games.
In short: No, it is a very very terrible idea.
There still would be competition: between games.
Were PC games horrible before consoles stole the majority of gamers? Heck no! They were totally awesome.
Just imagine how much more effort could be put into making the actual game awesome if a company didn't have to use resources porting between three completely different platforms. Imagine how pr0 all the programmers would get at the one platform.
Imagine how much money the current multi-platform buyers would save.
Imagine how much larger the userbase of online games would be, which for consoles is currently split, even though everyone's playing the same game.
One console: the future. (Or the past, because it's the PC.)
-
I can't imagine how anyone could ever think that would be a good idea.
-
I just told you.
-
I doubt most of the world's governments would allow it.
-
I doubt most of the world's governments would allow it.
Please explain your reasoning. I don't see why any government wouldn't allow it.
-
someday Micro, Ninty, and Sony will all join together
Monopoly, anti-competition, etc.
-
Well, there are both good and bad sides to this issue. I mean, it would be the end of developers intentionally doing a crappy job on one system to promote the next-gen version (for example, Splinter Cell: Double Agent and Spider-Man 3). Furthermore, it would mean you would only have to spend money on one system. Plus, there would be no rabid fanboys for one system or another. On other hand, yeah, it would also be pretty bad, what with the monopolies and the lack of competitions and the whatnot.
-
Miyamoto compared game consoles to dinosaurs once, I believe... You have the big top-of-the-line predators with superb graphics, and then the little cunning ones that survive by other means (the Wii's motion sensing and stuff).
Superb graphics doesn't make a console top-of-the-line. Little cunning ones that survive by other means? The Wii is not "little." It is perhaps the most popular gaming console of this generation. It's motion sensitivity isn't the only reason it is surviving. Please correct me if I am wrong about this Bird Person, thanks!
Onward to the topic... I do not believe that having one console will be the best idea, but it isn't the worst either. There might be trouble with the developers, however. Some might believe that they did more work then others. Then there comes games. Since the developers have no competition in consoles, they might not work as hard to create entertaining games for the crowd.
-
By popular you mean prevalent, yes?
It wasn't that great of analogy, but I think this comparison was referencing the beginnings of mammals just before the dinosaurs were wiped out. Now, similar rodents are extremely prevalent.
-
Superb graphics doesn't make a console top-of-the-line. Little cunning ones that survive by other means? The Wii is not "little." It is perhaps the most popular gaming console of this generation. It's motion sensitivity isn't the only reason it is surviving. Please correct me if I am wrong about this Bird Person, thanks!
That's exactly what the simile is supposed to mean.
But if you compare the three current-gen consoles one next to the other, the Wii is, in fact, little. ;D
-
Also, if you compare the three current-gen consoles one next to each other, you have to place the PS3 and Wii at opposite ends, and place a cat between the PS3 and the 360 so that the 360 doesn't get bombarded by lol radiation.
Superconsole = bad, for the same reasons that Max gave.
-
Wow, Bird Person. So many people you've jumped on for the improper use of language, and you mistake your own example as a simile...for shame. It's a metaphor.
-
Eheheh... I should have checked back at what I had typed before...
You must admit I've chilled out on people though. Like the misused preposition in your post--I'm not even going to mention it.
-
Whatever. I just wish it was like the old days, when it was nintendo vs sega vs atari, so nintendo could stay on to p without having to try too hard.
-
Versus Atari? Atari was long past its heyday when NES came out.
Not having to try too hard = not having to make good games or have new ideas? Why do you want a stagnant game industry?
-
Atari made a new console every once in a while, such as the Jaguar then. But what I mean by not trying to hard, I meant an easy win, since nintendo made better games than Sega and Atari, and were more popular overall.
-
Yeah, like I just said. Why do you want a stagnant game industry? I own systems from Nintendo, Sega, Atari, Sony, and NEC, and I own very good games for all of them. Without having to try to be good, games won't be any good at all.