RolStoppable said:
Cerebralbore101 said:
So the PS5 could potentially be another attempt at dominating the living room, like the PS3 with Blu-Ray, and the XB1 with "sports, tv, sports"? That does not bode well for the future of games.
If both MS and Sony have the same grand ambitions of doing more with their games division, than just games, then the next logical step would be to move towards "games/tv/movies as a service". So MS would try to get more people paying for XBox Live, and Sony would push the hell out of PS Now. Eventually you wouldn't be able to buy a game anymore, physically or digitally. Instead you would be paying a monthly fee to have access to said games in the same way that you pay a monthly fee to have access to other media. Except games are more costly to make, so the monthly fee would be much higher. Maybe $15 a month for the games, and $10 a month to play online. That way they'd be able to milk a good $300 a year from a consumer that only buys three games at $60 a year.
Why is every corperation's main strategy for profit to just screw the consumer over?
|
You are overly pessimistic in your post. I did mention a convergence box PS5 as a possibility, but it would take a high level of arrogance to make such a console. The PS4's success could lead down that road, but it's still only a remote possibility.
As for games as a service, that will be a gradual shift like sales of physical vs. digital copies. But I can't share your view here, because physical copies of games will continue to exist. If there's no reason to believe in an all-digital future, then there's even less of a reason to believe that there will be no game ownership whatsoever eventually.
|
I'm talking about the next 15 to 20 years. Obviously not going to happen overnight.
