| garretslarrity said: So when I buy stuff, I want to use it for a long time. I like the feeling of knowing that I've had something for a long time and it has always worked well. Technology, even though it moves so fast, is no exception. Consoles are a perfect example of this. Not only I want a console I buy to work for many years, but I want their lifespans to be long. I see a lot of benefits to consoles having long lifespans, such as: -The purchase is better justified. -A better library. -Developers learn the hardware very well and can create some impressive looking games. -A greater chance for smaller IPs to make it onto the system (this one mainly applies to Nintendo consoles)
So I can see all these benefits to longer console lifespans, but I can't think of any benefits to shorter lifespans. The only one I can see is that if a system is selling very poorly, ending its lifespan somewhat early can create greater profits. So are there other benefits? I named a benefit to the producer, are there any benefits to the consumer? |
From a consumer perspective, longer console lifecycles mean they get more bang for their buck. Publishers and developers prefer shorter console cycles because it allows them to plan ahead more easily. Learning the hardware is no longer much of an issue because the PS4 and Xbox One are basically stripped down PC's. There's also an unwritten rule in the industry where publishers should not introduce new IP's towards the end of a console's life cycle because of a lack of interest in older hardware. This goes into the development planning. This why when we had the unusually long console cycle last generation, publishers were etting frustrated because they did not know when the next console cycle would begin.
Check out my art blog: http://jon-erich-art.blogspot.com
