Do we really want one games console?

dazza74

Distinguished Member
Thinking the other night, I've spent quite a bit of time over the last few months on this forum listening to some of the real hate directed towards the PS3 in particular and I thought to myself do people really want a brand like playstation to go out of business?

Because let's face it what good would that do if that was the case and Microsoft did rule the roost (I'm excluding Nintendo as they are working to a different strategy IMO). Without competition from another format the game prices could go through the roof, you want an example of monopoly look at how much it costs to watch a premiership football match on tv these days. And more importantly there would be no pressure to bring out any updates, add extra facilities basically raise the bar. And lets face it we've already seen it happen with Sega, and although we still benefit from their games I always felt the Dreamcast was a pretty good piece of kit, and the gaming community in general was more the richer for having a Sega Console.
 

Moogle

Distinguished Member
Mod Comment

Again like I have mentioned in one of the threads earlier let's keep this discussion civil. At the first sign of it turning into a 360 vs PS3 arguemnt or if anyone takes it upon themselves to be rude or insulting the thread will be closed or deleted immediately. Thanks.

:lease:
 

Dave

Distinguished Member
It's one thing I've never understood about hardcore console supporters.

The incredibly fierce competition that this market breeds is fantastic for gamers. If it wasn't for the competition we wouldn't have consoles or games that are anywhere near as good as they are now.
 

beowulf

Banned
Thinking the other night, I've spent quite a bit of time over the last few months on this forum listening to some of the real hate directed towards the PS3 in particular and I thought to myself do people really want a brand like playstation to go out of business?

Because let's face it what good would that do if that was the case and Microsoft did rule the roost (I'm excluding Nintendo as they are working to a different strategy IMO). Without competition from another format the game prices could go through the roof, you want an example of monopoly look at how much it costs to watch a premiership football match on tv these days. And more importantly there would be no pressure to bring out any updates, add extra facilities basically raise the bar. And lets face it we've already seen it happen with Sega, and although we still benefit from their games I always felt the Dreamcast was a pretty good piece of kit, and the gaming community in general was more the richer for having a Sega Console.

re the dreamcast . couldn't agree more

what a stunning bit of kit that was - and thanks to ebay STILL IS !!! :)
 

iddqd

Active Member
I don't want a one console future but I still want exclusives that can take advantage of each consoles strengths.
 

Tigerblade

Distinguished Member
Another Dreamcast fan here! Was the nuts and was actually more powerful than the PS2 if I remember reading correctly?? The power of advertising eh? Still play the Capcom fighters on it to this day, can't beat a bit of SF3 or Marvel vs Capcom 2 now and again :thumbsup: Thinking of sticking mine in an arcade cabinet and slapping an X-Arcade on it, do it some justice.....

Regarding the topic tho, healthy competition is only a good thing, but money talks which is why the big N took a totally different route this gen as they don't have anywhere near the financial muscle of Sony or MS I'd say. After Sega so famously went down in flames when trying to beat Sony at their own game I very much doubt any other company would try and muscle in now. I'd love to be proven wrong and a Dreamcast 2 to be thrust from nowhere but that just ain't gonna happen really is it.
 

Wigandave

Active Member
Couldn't agree more. Throughout the last 20 years consoles have thrived (and I expect will continue to) through competition. From Speccys-v-Commodores, Nintendo-v-Sega to Xbox-v-Playstation the threat of a comptetitor has meant that the consumer has to be the focus, though that's not to say we don't get left behind in the European community somewhat.

Personally I enjoy the rivalry and from my schooldayz when we argued over the merits of SNES over Megadrive (and really it wasn't a competition) I hope it may long continue. As far as the current state of things I'm a little underwhelmed by the majority of 'next-gen' games, FPS just doesn't do that much for me, but have tons of optimism for the coming 24 months which is really the timescale that should be given to judge these machines (am thinking PS3 really). Have had the PS3 since launch day and am still a bit giddy like a kid with the thoughts of what could be made of the machine.

Let's enjoy what's on the market, make our choices if you can only afford one brand (which is all each console is) and enjoy the top quality games. :thumbsup:

Lets
 

Reuben.F

Banned
It's one thing I've never understood about hardcore console supporters.

The incredibly fierce competition that this market breeds is fantastic for gamers. If it wasn't for the competition we wouldn't have consoles or games that are anywhere near as good as they are now.

Totally agree, and really don't understand all the fuss about the PS3 in its present state, its such a new system and i think there will be many changes and superb games ! in the next 12 months and beyond.

One things for sure, Sony can't win right now, i recently heard a bunch of people on the street complaining about the lack of games,etc etc on the PS3 to the local radio station, hold on ! the console's only been out a matter of months !

Sony try to meet the demand by releasing games "before their time" (judging by some recent games and demos !) and we have outcry yet again !

Honestly, i'm really happy with the system and is used on a daily basis, if not gaming then streaming music or watching dvd or blu-ray, this thing ROCK'S !!! its almost the holy-grail of home entertainment, c'mon people get with it !

"Do we really want one games console?" only if its called Playstation :arty:
 

Mark Botwright

Distinguished Member
Personally I enjoy the rivalry and from my schooldayz when we argued over the merits of SNES over Megadrive (and really it wasn't a competition) I hope it may long continue.

Same here. If the gaming community was full of mutual apreciation then it just wouldn't be the same. Oh and for the record the SNES ruled.
 

Hornet2112

Active Member
Let's face it, people like to knock a winner. This reaction is not limited to just consoles and PlayStation had been on top for a long time.

I think a lot of people forget what Sony did for this hobby of ours, before they entered the market, games consoles were thought of as only fit for spotty teenage boys. The chances of an adult playing one... and admitting it, let alone (gasp) a female were pretty rare indeed.

Sony didn't pitch it as simply a toy for kids, instead they put demo pods into nightclubs and suddenly the trendy 20something brigade were playing Wipeout, a whole new audience was hooked and gaming became far more socially acceptable.

Did Sony deserve the bad press they received in the 18 months prior to launch? I think at least some of it was, that level of arrogance isn't going to win over many new fans but they have expanded the market more than they are often given credit for.

I think this is the most interesting time for console gaming and I really have no idea who will eventually come out on top over the next five years, but it's going to be fun playing the games until we find out! :smashin:
 

Kahled

Active Member
I do agree with the OP that it would be very bad for us all with only a single party in control of the games industry but I will admit I would not bat an eyelid (in fact I would probably even have the odd chuckle) if the PS3 did fail completely. No secret that I prefer the Microsoft solution these days for console options as much as I used to prefer the PS1 in the face of the competition. Just my preference and one that some will find as incomprehensible as I find their absolute devotion to their own choice. I'm not saying I want to see the PS3 fail (hell I bought one so that would be really dumb) but there is a preference without a doubt.

I don't think there will ever be danger of only a single solution really though because if it's not console supplier vs console supplier it will be PC vs console supplier.

It's just the nature of people to compete though isn't it. Car choices, clothing choices, teams supported, consoles preferred (it is a rare situation that anyone would own all consoles or support all teams with a completely level scope of enthusiasm even if they are open minded enough to even consider such a thing). And what is gaming after all? It's beating the stuffing out of some computer AI construct or human online opponent, your driving better than theirs, your army bigger than theirs, and so on. I don't think anyone would really like to see a single party in control (and especially not a Sony or Microsoft) of gaming, but gamers especially are going to not only be playing the games on the consoles but console wars too... it's the sheer nature of the beast. Last week I sat back in amazement at someone working themselves into such a hissy fit that it contributed to a banning simply because I posted that anything multi-format would be a 360 purchase... it's mad and it's the choices we are free to make but it's also understandable that there is the constant lurking tendancy to beat the opposition especially in the gaming environment (which these forums are a direct correlation to). Plus it's easy to target and attack the great opponent in the amorphous entity that may be Sony or Microsoft... it's not personal and it's just another form of game really (the hard part is for people such as Dave W, Moogle, and co who have to tread the line between the game moving from impersonal to personal as tempers flare across the 'battle lines').

Really would be suprised if anyone did genuinely want only one entity to have sole control over the gaming industry (and quite frankly anyone that does think that would deserve the outcome that would bring) but I would be equally surprised to ever find a complete oasis of gaming where the chance that one console version is superior does not result in some hissy fit *rotf*

Atari ST FTW!!! Nuff' said!
 

FunkyMonkey

Active Member
Let's face it, people like to knock a winner. This reaction is not limited to just consoles and PlayStation had been on top for a long time.

I think a lot of people forget what Sony did for this hobby of ours, before they entered the market, games consoles were thought of as only fit for spotty teenage boys. The chances of an adult playing one... and admitting it, let alone (gasp) a female were pretty rare indeed.

Sony didn't pitch it as simply a toy for kids, instead they put demo pods into nightclubs and suddenly the trendy 20something brigade were playing Wipeout, a whole new audience was hooked and gaming became far more socially acceptable.

Did Sony deserve the bad press they received in the 18 months prior to launch? I think at least some of it was, that level of arrogance isn't going to win over many new fans but they have expanded the market more than they are often given credit for.

I think this is the most interesting time for console gaming and I really have no idea who will eventually come out on top over the next five years, but it's going to be fun playing the games until we find out! :smashin:

I totally agree with this. However, Sony didn't expand the gaming market to give us (former) teenage boy gamers a better image, but to maximise its own revenues by maximising its consumer base.

I think the way things stand now is really good. You have the Wii for the casual/quick-fix/party gamers. The Xbox 360 and PS3 for serious gamers. And the PS3 has introduced a one-box-does-it-all mentality into the living room. If only the general public were more aware of its capabilities.
 

Hornet2112

Active Member
I totally agree with this. However, Sony didn't expand the gaming market to give us (former) teenage boy gamers a better image, but to maximise its own revenues by maximising its consumer base.

Absolutely. That is what good marketing is all about! Of course the down side to this new wider audience is sometimes we get watered down or easier gameplay, fit for the new, wider demographic. How many of the old 'twitch' games do we see these days? Perhaps with XBLA's Space Giraffe and PSN's Everyday Shooter means we can see a return of these, whether my old reflexes are still up to the challenge, only time will tell!

Nintendo seem, for the most part, to be abandoning its core market of traditional old skool Ninty fan in favour of the new 'family gamer', and for now at least, the strategy seems to be working very well indeed.
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
To answer the title question of this thread....God No!

I love a hardware launch and having three to look forward to every 5 years or so is great! They all bring something different to the industry and having three different successful console brands is great for competition.

In an ideal world having one machine that plays all games, where devs have to just master the one system seems like a great idea. We live in a capitalist society however where development is fueled by competition and there will always be another company wanting to challenge what already exists. If we moved to a one console situation and say the three companies merged, there would always be another company that would set up in competition. Who knows, one of the giants like Siemens, Samsung, Hitachi, Hewlet-Packard or Matsush*ta (or a merged proposition from 2 or 3 of those companies) could enter the market.

I feel that the technology may become more standardised as time goes on, but even that will most likely remain independently developed as the various companies try to outdo each other on the technology front.
 

Fifty

Active Member
Personally - No.

But I was thinking last night, as I swapped Resistance with Motorstorm in my PS3 - why hasn't there been a games console with an integrated multi-disc changer ????

Ideal for lazy gits like me, it could store, say 6 discs, like current in-car changers. As I very rarely have more than 6 games at once, I'd only ever need to put disks in when I bought and sold / traded them in.

I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why not, but I think the idea's a winner.
 

Andyblizz

Active Member
Ideal for lazy gits like me, it could store, say 6 discs, like current in-car changers. As I very rarely have more than 6 games at once, I'd only ever need to put disks in when I bought and sold / traded them in.

I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why not, but I think the idea's a winner.

I agree with you on that one.

Cause my misses moans(Or my 20 month old son tries to play with then) if i leave all the boxes around the TV stand. So i have to put then in the cupboard in the other room. That is one of the reason i purchased Warhawk on download. So i can keep Everybody's Golf in the drive and still play all my downloaded stuff.

But the only downside would be the addtional space it would need. As people already moan about the Size of the next gen consoles already.

Andy
 

Smiffy 2

Well-known Member
I never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever thought I would buy a PS3.
But it now sits under the telly and I love it

:clap::clap::clap:
 

CAS FAN

Distinguished Member
Personally - No.

But I was thinking last night, as I swapped Resistance with Motorstorm in my PS3 - why hasn't there been a games console with an integrated multi-disc changer ????

Ideal for lazy gits like me, it could store, say 6 discs, like current in-car changers. As I very rarely have more than 6 games at once, I'd only ever need to put disks in when I bought and sold / traded them in.

I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why not, but I think the idea's a winner.

I guess that it's just something else to break to be honest. Also it would increase the size of the console somewhat as you not only need the space to store the discs, but also the room required for the mechanics and for the changing mechanism to work.

Makes much more sense to allow games to be fully installed to the HDD, but I guess that has piracy issues. I guess that some sort of code that must be redeemed online to gain access to an installed game would be an option.
 

eternaldark

Active Member
I guess from a convergence point of view 1 games console would be nice as less kit under the telly!! but its nice to be able have a variety.

The only way I could see a single console being sucessfull is for sony/MS/Nintendo to give it their full backing but no chance of that:D
 

doopydug

Active Member
I never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever thought I would buy a PS3.
But it now sits under the telly and I love it

:clap::clap::clap:

ditto

Before I got one, I thought it was overpriced. Now that I have one, I realise it represents extremely good value for money given its flexibility and quality
 

grimoor

Active Member
Interesting as said competition helps keeps prices low and perhaps helps in the long run for better software to be written. However do you include PC's as competition to the consoles? So if there was only one console maker there would still be competition from the lastest PC setups.
 

redmarkred

Active Member
Long live the PS3, 360 and the Wii. Fanboys who will only buy Sony or Microsoft or Nintendo are narrow minded! It's games fans who will benefit from this competition :thumbsup:
 

The latest video from AVForums

LG CX Best Picture Settings
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Latest News

Samsung rumoured to be buying OLED TV panels from LG Display
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Netflix signs with Sony for first streaming rights in U.S.
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Audio Pro launches C10 MkII speaker
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
THX launches Onyx MQA supporting DAC/Amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Cambridge Audio introduces Evo all-in-one audio system
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom