By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - How long til the end of Console Gaming?

 

So, how many more years before the need for a console goes away completely?

5 Years 7 9.33%
 
8 Years 6 8.00%
 
10 Years 5 6.67%
 
15 Years 9 12.00%
 
Never! 47 62.67%
 
Total:74
bigtakilla on 16 October 2014
ktay95 said:
17 weeks 4 days 5 hours 52 minutes and 17 seconds as of posting this


So spring next year. WOW, a LOT sooner than I expected...



Around the Network
sterner on 16 October 2014

As for streaming from publisher owned servers, it's just not gonna work. If you have device with GPU which can decode 1080p/60 FPS stream you can just use it to run games locally.

So far streaming couldn't even kill market for mobile apps which is pretty much a joke and literally asks for some kind of remote desktop instead. And gaming is not like MS Office, you need 1 GPU per user and near to user, you then need to first encode the video and then decode it locally, ruining all potential economical benefits from scalability.



fluky-nintendy on 16 October 2014

I hope it never becomes a service! I love my hardware too much and there's nothing to compare to the sound of a disk getting inside the console!



...Let the Sony Domination continue with the PS4...
bubblegamer on 16 October 2014
Anfebious said:
ktay95 said:
17 weeks 4 days 5 hours 52 minutes and 17 seconds as of posting this

So February 16 of 2015?  Isn't that a bit too soon?

You're right. He forgot Bloodborne releases this February which will easily sustain the industry for a couple more months.



Intrinsic on 16 October 2014
Landguy said:

You can't assume that every person on erth is a realistic target audience for a console.  It just isn't feasible.  So, when the decision of whether to make another console is made by Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft, they aren't tabulating the villagers in the remote location and trying to figure out if they will have internet or power for that matter.  Like it or not, those people are just removed from the equation.  Companies design products for the mass audience of POTENTIAL BUYERS.

Just my opinion.

Yes, you can't assume that every person on earth is a target audience for consoles. But its even worse to assume that every person on earth has an internet connection capable of handling game streaming.

Its easier to assume that more people can buy a box and connect it to their tvs to play games than to assume that they would have an internet connection good enough to sign up to a service, and stream games to their phones and display it on their Tvs. As funny as it may sound, the hardware required for that costs moe than just buying a dedicated console. And another thing people fail to remember is that consoles prices aren't fixed. Its not like a PS4/5/6 will be $400 for ever. Chances are 3 years into its life it could cost as little as $200 or less.



Around the Network
Erwin-VGC on 16 October 2014

Well, hopefullly never, if they go away, and it will be fully digital/streaming, then I will become 100% pirate or quit my hobby.



Lafiel on 16 October 2014

let me be the first to say:

Soony



bubblegamer on 16 October 2014
Lafiel said:
let me be the first to say:

Soony

I'm sorry to tell you this, but there have been thousands before you



Landguy on 16 October 2014
Intrinsic said:
Landguy said:

You can't assume that every person on erth is a realistic target audience for a console.  It just isn't feasible.  So, when the decision of whether to make another console is made by Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft, they aren't tabulating the villagers in the remote location and trying to figure out if they will have internet or power for that matter.  Like it or not, those people are just removed from the equation.  Companies design products for the mass audience of POTENTIAL BUYERS.

Just my opinion.

Yes, you can't assume that every person on earth is a target audience for consoles. But its even worse to assume that every person on earth has an internet connection capable of handling game streaming.

Its easier to assume that more people can buy a box and connect it to their tvs to play games than to assume that they would have an internet connection good enough to sign up to a service, and stream games to their phones and display it on their Tvs. As funny as it may sound, the hardware required for that costs moe than just buying a dedicated console. And another thing people fail to remember is that consoles prices aren't fixed. Its not like a PS4/5/6 will be $400 for ever. Chances are 3 years into its life it could cost as little as $200 or less.

I agree with everything you said, as I never said that everyone has internet.  But, based on how the latest generation of consoles were designed and assuming that the next gen will cater to online only more, the internet connected household are the only real targeted buyers of the future.

 I agree the biggest limiting factor of streming is the internet connection.  If people would look back 10-15 years and understand that internet was at best 256k for almost anyone(consumers anyway).  Now, people are using gigabit services in thier homes.   10-15 years from now, the target audience will need to be connected to the internet for their consoles to work.  The internet of today will be the slowest of connections.  People without internet will still be able to buy consoles, but they will be this generation or older.



It is near the end of the end....

Landguy on 16 October 2014
Ka-pi96 said:
Landguy said:

Wow, Never is a long time.  Let's assume that the remote village or small town is not part of the market they are going after today anyway.  Heck, China has over a billion people and only 5% can even afford to buy a console, let alone pay for a streaming service.  So, you thought that because the # of people that will have good enough internet will stop things?  Areas with limited or no internet that have any substantial amount of gamers that can afford to buy consoles or pay for streaming are becoming less and less every day.  Remote areas with no internet either have too few people to bring it there or people too poor to buy a console anyway.  Areas that have people that can afford consoles/streaming and big enough populations will have interenet access within the next 10-15 years.  As the poorest areas population demands it, internet will make it there.

You can't assume that every person on erth is a realistic target audience for a console.  It just isn't feasible.  So, when the decision of whether to make another console is made by Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft, they aren't tabulating the villagers in the remote location and trying to figure out if they will have internet or power for that matter.  Like it or not, those people are just removed from the equation.  Companies design products for the mass audience of POTENTIAL BUYERS.

Just my opinion.

Except internet access alone isn't enough. It also has to be fast enough, cheap enough and also reliable enough for any kind of streaming only device to be successful. This isn't about remote villages or whatever, there are even some parts/people in some of the most devloped western countries that wouldn't be able to use a streaming only device. Not everyone in western Europe and the US have internet, and not all of those that do have high speed internet. Some live in areas that just can't get it, some can't afford it and some don't even want it. Not only that, in some countries there are useage caps on internet as well further making streaming only difficult.

Also, that wasn't even my whole argument, while there are people that would prefer an actual console to streaming because streaming just isn't feasible for them, there would also be a significant number of people that just prefer having an actual console regardless.

How many people do you think there are that want a console for the sole purpose of just having one?  THe percentage of people buying game systems to just have the device has to be less than 1%.  If they could do all of the functions of the console without the actual console box, what would the attraction to it be?  



It is near the end of the end....