| vivster said: The games I really want won't get made regardless of what I do. |
You alone won't make much of a difference but those people who wanted to support the games you like will be discouraged from what you envision ...
| vivster said:
People are already shilling 600 bucks every year for the new iphone. The resistance of not wanting the pay the price is not because the money isn't there but because console players were lulled into thinking that it wasn't necessary. If phones and PCs can do it I don't see a reason why consoles can't adopt the system of quick progression of hardware. |
Phones are a necessity in this day and age, however gaming platforms are not. Hardcore gamers are the only ones with the bias of valuing gaming as a hobby over many other things so you can't just enforce your ideals to those who are not as dedicated as most of us are. Almost no one shills over $600 for a new PC every year and consoles can't do the same with phones because many people who buy consoles don't spend as much time as they like seeing as how the tie-in ratio is about 9 games for every console and a lot of people just see these platforms as a COD box or a FIFA box ...
| vivster said:
This naturally entails BC because the generations are closer to each other and the leaps in technology will be smaller. |
Backwards compatibility is a harder subject than you think. It's NOT just the CPU that you have to account for but the same applies with the GPU and the memory system. If ONE just ONE of those things are not the equivalent or a superset then backwards compatibility is either out of the question or troublesome. If AMD goes under the chances of Nvidia or others being able to deliver backwards compatibility could be very slim ...
