bigtakilla said:
"I'm saying the hybrid would be $250 ... for a device that can be used as a console in the house (can output to a TV), but also be played outside of the house." This isn't a hybrid though, it's a handheld that can be hooked up to a TV. Which may be fine with the advancement in tech, but still, I'm really trying to grasp how it is supposed to change the whole gaming world. I mean, this in essence has been done many, many times. And again, when one encourages the user of the handheld to upgrade being that they can get the next teir at a lower cost (roughly $100 - $150 lower if the controller has a screen) at a later time and the other consists of buying an even more expensive piece of tech to get the same exact games that look a bit better when both can be played on the tv it's clear to see which would bring in the higher profits. |
Has it really been done before? I don't recall very many portable devices that could function as a home console.
You can't exactly put your PS4/XB1 in your backpack or coat pocket and take it around with you.
If they have some miracle idea controller that's 100x more innovative, great, build the platform around that, I'm kind of skeptical that they do though.







