Conina said:
What a bad analogy! I'm not the one who wants a software monopoly for 1 manufacturer... and just the one least interested in pushing the envelope of technological progression. I would be happy if some ambitious projects would also take good use of 10 GB or 20 GB RAM in a high end PC. But at the moment consoles with 5 GB free RAM are affordable for most gamers, so developers should feel free to use that resources if it enables their vision and/or if they think that it enhances the quality of their games . |
Me neither. A monopoly would be terrible for the industry and gamers.
There are basicaly two different development philosophies in place here. One supports the most recent technology available in hte name of progression, while the other follow a lateral thinking with withered technolgy to reach a larger audience. There is no right or worng pgilosophy here, they're just different and dependent in one another. If Sony and MS didn't use more updated tech we would have withered technology forever. If Nintendo didn't use withered technology, nothing would Sony and MS's prices to skyrocket.
In all what I wanted to say is that we need these differences for the good of the industry. It's what maintains an healthy competition. And yes, I totally agree that some developers rwquire a lit more power to enable their vision, it's always been that way. Neveretheless, there will always be limitations, whether be it on consoles or PC, and the thing that makes me not worry about it is that a game's quality is not entirely dependent on the amount of power available.
I game on Sony and Nintendo since the PS1 era, and I've never had a problem with what both companies had to offer on the hardware side. When I was a kid, the only thing that got me playing were the games, and I'm glad tha now as an adult this is still what keeps me going back.
TL;DR: Monopolies are bad for the industry. We need Sony/MS and Nintendo to coexist for the good of all gamers.
