From the PC thread I saw this and It got me thinking.... It's not as simple to just "make better consoles" multiple times a gen aaaaand it's pretty stupid to think it's a feasible feat.
Honestly, I think this line of thinking is absolutely stupid for multiple reasons. Consoles aren't made for guys like you.
First of all, having multiple console sku's is a pipe dream that just isn't grounded in reality.
To whom would these boxes sell to?? The extremely vocal minority that care about why their version of Call of Duty has dynamic resolution and/or mostly stable 60fps?? This is a small market and it would be stupid to manufacture millions of consoles multiple times a generation just to sell to very few people.
Consoles are supposed to be simple and straightforward. A Larrybox or Nogamestation 4 will be the same thing 8 years later. Devs can make games for that specific platform years later and it'll work for pretty much everyone who bought it day one.
Secondly, to assume that a hypothetical $600 console with "decent" power would be good enough is an anemic thought process. Did you forget new GPU's and CPU's are constantly coming out?? What about the R&D phase?? I doubt the console manufacturers just decide overnight what GPU they want and get it out in stores a few months later.
Now the people complaining about the games taking long to come out would further be irritated because now devs are developing for PC, PS4(X) and Xbox(X) which would take up WAY more time and resources and obviously they'd still target the lowest spec. It's a lose lose situation. No real return on that.
No real optimized version, waste of time developing games for MULTIPLE sku's per console AND it's mostly a minority install base. Having one box that devs get familiar with is what allows console games to have games that come out during it's generation that look balls to the wall amazing despite running on "puny" hardware. Despite the endless mocking of consoles by PC gamers, I know deep down they'd love if a dev like say Naughty Dog could develop for PC's targeting specs like a GTX 970 minimum. I would love to get shyt looking like this on PC but it is what it is.
The average gamer doesn't care about all that extra shyt PC gamers be talking about. You have dudes thinking the average gamer is worrying about Anti Aliasing and textures and whatnot. The average gamer just looks at "graphics" and calls it a day. I built a PC for my friend and his first thing he utters when a new game is out is "put the graphics up" with absolutely no regards for performance or anything.
That's the type of person console gamers primarily are. The vocal crowd on forums that talk about fps and resolution and DF this and that are a SMALL minority. The average person doesn't care about that shyt.
Talk to me.
i agree. gpu's in the xb1 and ps4 are on par with a gtx 660.
lol if they stretch this gen for 8 years.
at the progress being held back on the PC side.
Honestly, I think this line of thinking is absolutely stupid for multiple reasons. Consoles aren't made for guys like you.
First of all, having multiple console sku's is a pipe dream that just isn't grounded in reality.
To whom would these boxes sell to?? The extremely vocal minority that care about why their version of Call of Duty has dynamic resolution and/or mostly stable 60fps?? This is a small market and it would be stupid to manufacture millions of consoles multiple times a generation just to sell to very few people.
Consoles are supposed to be simple and straightforward. A Larrybox or Nogamestation 4 will be the same thing 8 years later. Devs can make games for that specific platform years later and it'll work for pretty much everyone who bought it day one.
Secondly, to assume that a hypothetical $600 console with "decent" power would be good enough is an anemic thought process. Did you forget new GPU's and CPU's are constantly coming out?? What about the R&D phase?? I doubt the console manufacturers just decide overnight what GPU they want and get it out in stores a few months later.
Now the people complaining about the games taking long to come out would further be irritated because now devs are developing for PC, PS4(X) and Xbox(X) which would take up WAY more time and resources and obviously they'd still target the lowest spec. It's a lose lose situation. No real return on that.
No real optimized version, waste of time developing games for MULTIPLE sku's per console AND it's mostly a minority install base. Having one box that devs get familiar with is what allows console games to have games that come out during it's generation that look balls to the wall amazing despite running on "puny" hardware. Despite the endless mocking of consoles by PC gamers, I know deep down they'd love if a dev like say Naughty Dog could develop for PC's targeting specs like a GTX 970 minimum. I would love to get shyt looking like this on PC but it is what it is.
The average gamer doesn't care about all that extra shyt PC gamers be talking about. You have dudes thinking the average gamer is worrying about Anti Aliasing and textures and whatnot. The average gamer just looks at "graphics" and calls it a day. I built a PC for my friend and his first thing he utters when a new game is out is "put the graphics up" with absolutely no regards for performance or anything.
That's the type of person console gamers primarily are. The vocal crowd on forums that talk about fps and resolution and DF this and that are a SMALL minority. The average person doesn't care about that shyt.
Talk to me.
that's a lot of words up there. Didn't read all of them. But I will say, this blaming console gamers for devs making scalable games is complete missing the point.
