Are console bolt-ons the next step?
The console life cycle has started wobbling in the last couple of years; there's barely been the faintest hint that a new home console is on the way, and if the Kinect is anything to go by then Microsoft, at least, is more interested in shoring up the 360 than moving on to another console. And let's be honest here, exactly what point would there be to a new console? The Wii is suffering from an image problem rather than a lack of horsepower; a HD upgrade and an enormous GUI overhaul would be a better option than dropping the console entirely. And as for the PS3 and 360, what would a better model offer? Once upon a time you could look to the ever-advancing PC and arcade markets to see where better capabilities would improve the play experience, but what do either of them offer that consoles don't? Crysis 2 does little new in raw mechanics despite looking pretty as all hell, and the underlying physics aren't proving much of a problem for current gen consoles. And despite native support, console gamers still aren't giving a single shit about the potential of the keyboard and mouse combo. Most of the current innovations in gaming are coming through firmware patches, peripherals and the online arena; what part of that equation requires a new console?
There are two problems that are threatening to hamstring the next generation of home consoles: for starters, gaming has ballooned sideways rather than upwards in recent years, spreading its tendrils across smartphones, facebook and into different methods of control. It's not that current consoles are selling badly, but right now focus is on the delivery method and controls, not the horsepower. Secondly, consumer tech has taken a strange turn since the iPhone hit the scene; because it was so expensive yet so desirable (and followed by a succession of equally must-have upgrades), the status quo suddenly dictates that upgrading a part of your digital life means taking it to the bleeding edge, be it a top-class console, an ultra-fast smartphone or top-spec television. Why buy something obsolete when the tech marches on so fast?
The result is that gaming is increasingly seen as something suited for the tech you have rather than something that requires dedicated hardware of its own. The success of the Wii's casual market, not to mention Angry Birds and Cut the Rope on smartphone, are testament to this, and sales of 360 and PS3 were relatively sluggish in their first year given that they cost the same as (or less than) a brand new iPhone or iPad, the latter of which sold a "disappointing" 4.6 million units in 2010 according to Apple. If you can't win on price then diversity is key, and both Sony and Microsoft have expanded their online services and methods of play massively in response, from Netflix and digital comics to Move and Kinect. Where they go from here in order to change video games in a significant way is a mystery.
There were rumours some time last year that Sony were planning an add-on for the PS3 that would dramatically up the performance of the console, and although PlaystationLifeStyle talk about it as a PS3.5, I think that Sony could do a lot better by marketing it as a PS4. For starters there's the price; Sony contributed to the billions that went into the Cell processor, which was designed to easily link with other Cells and work together as one, much more powerful computer. The US army has already built a supercomputer using several thousand linked PS3s, and performance of the Folding@Home project on PS3 over PC is well documented. Performance upgrades aren't a new concept for consoles, with the Sega Saturn and N64 both sporting expansion bays, but the PS3 remains unique in its architectural make-up, meaning that an expansion unit could provide an all-round performance boost equal to that of a whole new console, rather than adding a little extra memory and doing little for the basic capabilities of the console itself.
And such a unit needn't be as expensive as a full-priced console; with an enormous amount of components taken from the equation, including ports, fans and circuit boards, it would be a cheaper upgrade than a fully fledged console. It wouldn't even be taking consoles down the route of PCs; there would still be only one set of specifications to code for if the unit is specced properly and creating the console from an existing model would smooth the development process, while putting less pressure on devs to learn a whole new architecture.
When the next generation of consoles does arrive, offering the choice of a standalone console and a cheaper upgrade bolt-on would be a definite first-day incentive for those who already have the hardware they need hooked up to the television. If Sony can step back from their obsession with power for the sake of power and see clearly what gamers need from their hardware, then they are in the best position to take this idea forward. And they'd be doing us all a favour - themselves included.
The console life cycle has started wobbling in the last couple of years; there's barely been the faintest hint that a new home console is on the way, and if the Kinect is anything to go by then Microsoft, at least, is more interested in shoring up the 360 than moving on to another console. And let's be honest here, exactly what point would there be to a new console? The Wii is suffering from an image problem rather than a lack of horsepower; a HD upgrade and an enormous GUI overhaul would be a better option than dropping the console entirely. And as for the PS3 and 360, what would a better model offer? Once upon a time you could look to the ever-advancing PC and arcade markets to see where better capabilities would improve the play experience, but what do either of them offer that consoles don't? Crysis 2 does little new in raw mechanics despite looking pretty as all hell, and the underlying physics aren't proving much of a problem for current gen consoles. And despite native support, console gamers still aren't giving a single shit about the potential of the keyboard and mouse combo. Most of the current innovations in gaming are coming through firmware patches, peripherals and the online arena; what part of that equation requires a new console?
There are two problems that are threatening to hamstring the next generation of home consoles: for starters, gaming has ballooned sideways rather than upwards in recent years, spreading its tendrils across smartphones, facebook and into different methods of control. It's not that current consoles are selling badly, but right now focus is on the delivery method and controls, not the horsepower. Secondly, consumer tech has taken a strange turn since the iPhone hit the scene; because it was so expensive yet so desirable (and followed by a succession of equally must-have upgrades), the status quo suddenly dictates that upgrading a part of your digital life means taking it to the bleeding edge, be it a top-class console, an ultra-fast smartphone or top-spec television. Why buy something obsolete when the tech marches on so fast?
The result is that gaming is increasingly seen as something suited for the tech you have rather than something that requires dedicated hardware of its own. The success of the Wii's casual market, not to mention Angry Birds and Cut the Rope on smartphone, are testament to this, and sales of 360 and PS3 were relatively sluggish in their first year given that they cost the same as (or less than) a brand new iPhone or iPad, the latter of which sold a "disappointing" 4.6 million units in 2010 according to Apple. If you can't win on price then diversity is key, and both Sony and Microsoft have expanded their online services and methods of play massively in response, from Netflix and digital comics to Move and Kinect. Where they go from here in order to change video games in a significant way is a mystery.
There were rumours some time last year that Sony were planning an add-on for the PS3 that would dramatically up the performance of the console, and although PlaystationLifeStyle talk about it as a PS3.5, I think that Sony could do a lot better by marketing it as a PS4. For starters there's the price; Sony contributed to the billions that went into the Cell processor, which was designed to easily link with other Cells and work together as one, much more powerful computer. The US army has already built a supercomputer using several thousand linked PS3s, and performance of the Folding@Home project on PS3 over PC is well documented. Performance upgrades aren't a new concept for consoles, with the Sega Saturn and N64 both sporting expansion bays, but the PS3 remains unique in its architectural make-up, meaning that an expansion unit could provide an all-round performance boost equal to that of a whole new console, rather than adding a little extra memory and doing little for the basic capabilities of the console itself.
And such a unit needn't be as expensive as a full-priced console; with an enormous amount of components taken from the equation, including ports, fans and circuit boards, it would be a cheaper upgrade than a fully fledged console. It wouldn't even be taking consoles down the route of PCs; there would still be only one set of specifications to code for if the unit is specced properly and creating the console from an existing model would smooth the development process, while putting less pressure on devs to learn a whole new architecture.
When the next generation of consoles does arrive, offering the choice of a standalone console and a cheaper upgrade bolt-on would be a definite first-day incentive for those who already have the hardware they need hooked up to the television. If Sony can step back from their obsession with power for the sake of power and see clearly what gamers need from their hardware, then they are in the best position to take this idea forward. And they'd be doing us all a favour - themselves included.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I have a hungry ego to feed; please give generously