| Darwinianevolution said: With all those NX threads going around this site, I saw a pattern on many comentaries. They think the NX has to have more power than the PS4 if it wants to compete with both this gen and next gen. And that made me think of one thing. With developing costs growing faster than consoles and PC's userbases, we might reach a moment when there's no point on making more powerful hardware (at least, not in a long time) because very few developers are going to spend the cash recquired to use all that power properly. Imagine if games need three times more power to work and they cost three times more to produce, but the userbase has grown only 50% more. How many games would still be finantially succesful? Just look at PS360. Those consoles have been around for a very long time and they're still kicking. I'm sure they will survive more years than the PS4X-Bone. Their power and developement costs are now very efficient, and with a 160m userbase between the two, most games on them now could be finantially succesful. When will we reach a point when that equilibrium is broken? And what will happen if we ever reach it? |
Power and cost aren't directly related. You can decrease costs by providing a better architecture and better dev tools. That's what PS4 and X1 did. They are similar to also drive costs down. Sony and MS included devs early on to listen what they wanted, and that's what they delivered to them.
What you are proposing is that we stop the development of CG technology instead of finding better approaches to cut costs down. I imagine when the first car was created that someone probably said "my god, it costs the price of 50 horses! Let's just keep the animals!". You can't hold progress. You solve a technological problem with more tech and better tech, not with worse tech and less tech.
