By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
happydolphin said:
Mnementh said:

The purpose of a new console is to bring gamers to put dollars on the table. Point is this: at some point most gamers have a device to game on. The sales of the old-gen machines dwindle in result. The console-manufacturer starts a new gen to force the people to pay for a new machine. Naturally people need at least an perceived value from the new machine, to consider to buy it. So the console-manufacturer try to sell new features. That may be advances in graphics, controls, network-capabilities or the like. But the best and most used argument is: if you want to play the new Mario/Final Fantasy/Halo/God of War/Tekken/whatever you have to buy the new machine.

And, what is with PS2? Your argument basically says that the PS2 is gen 5 and gen 6 was won by the Xbox.

@bold. That can all be done on the same console. It's purely about marketing if technical upgrades are totally out of the picture.

If a competitor offers the updates on the same console, doesn't that invalidate the need for a brand new console, unless there's some other considerable upgrade that requires a new machine (such as a performance upgrade due to better computer components)? So a console in your perspective is purely artificial and has no reason of being, since a competitor in that case could easy cut over your offering by making it an add-on and saving people the need to buy a whole new console.

This basically puts the nail in the coffin.

im with you on this one, but some people dont get it. Sales and support have nothing to do with what a system could. Sony released a their version of the wiimote without the need of having to release a new console and as many people pointed out, the Move is just a black wiimote. MS did something similar and I dont know why he was even comparing a damn add-on to a new console.