| KBG29 said: As far as out of touch is concerned, I see that completely. However, I say what I say because, I see that to having a console launch today at $300 like so many want means doing absolutely nothing for the consumer. A $300 new console right now equals, out of date processing power, transfer rates, and storage tech on day one. It means a system that has developers hitting walls, and drudgingly pushing out the same tiered mechanics year after year, because the tech gives them no where to go. All a $300 console does is put big sales numbers up early in the cycle, and line the pockets of the console manufactures with cash. For the rest of the industry it is a trail of red ink, and a door slammed shut in the face of Intel, amd, IBM, and nvidia.
|
You're assuming that outdated processing power is a disadvantage though. And certainly, in terms of pushing graphic fidelity and spectacle, the more processing power the better, but neither of these are in any way essential to gaming. I personally don't see a great need to really push graphical boundaries at the moment. The current HD consoles are quite capable when it comes to animations, lighting, etc., and I don't personally see reason to push graphical boundaries much. If the next generation consoles can play current gen games at 720p with 4xMSAA, 60 FPS and no screen tearing, I'll be more than happy.
Gameplay is much less bounded by processing power, and I don't see how $2000 worth of PC hardware can provide a significantly enough difference in gameplay to give merit to the investment. Certainly, investing in something like Kinect or the Wii U is going to make a much greater difference in gameplay.
