Roronaa_chan said:
That makes no sense at all for Sony and probably not for Nintendo either. Phone makers continue shurning out phones on a constant basis because that's where they get their money from. Most of them do not run stores where they get revenue, like Apple and Google do. So they have to do this quick cycle to keep the money flowing. Console holders don't get money from selling hardware, they get it from SW sales (and nowadays from subscriptions). There is no advantage whatsoever to trying to sell different devices on short cycles when the money they give you is tiny compared to the real revenue streams; if anything, it causes userbase problems, hurting those very streams. Why do you think last gen lasted so long; necessity. And after coming from the longest gen ever, why would anyone think we'd suddenly arrive at one of the quickest? The same necessities are still there. MS is the only one that could either benefit or at least not be hurt from doing something like this by unifying Xbox with W10 because reduction in revenue (for example someone buying a game on Steam instead of Xbox/W10 store) could be compensated through other means, like more XBL subscriptions (if online was still paywalled or if non-Xbox users subscribed for the "free games") or an increase availability of Xbox-specific content to traditionally-PC users. Still risky but much more believable. Sony and Nintendo? No. And the notion that games could potentially scale across these devices is laughable. Of course they could..at an even more horrifying optimisation than they do now. Remember how several games ran late last gen? It'd be even worse this time around. Nobody would get their money's worth; old device users would be gimped and new device users would not see the device's potential properly used either. Nobody benefits from anything. This is how Sony wants to make money = SW + Vue + Now + PS+ + Accessories Nowhere does risky HW revisions factor in here, specially when their current HW is selling so well. |
i dissagree there would be no point in Buying an Xbox over PC at that point.
PlayStation still would have the exclusive, different OS, different controller and so on to differentiate itself from the PC, it would be more like a Mac than a PC
Johnw1104 said:
First, lately they're pushing 6-8 years. Second, there's a big difference between buying a new console every half decade+ and having to buy updates or newer models for your console throughout that half decade. At that point it'd be silly not to just go full PC, as you can upgrade far more effectively there on your own time. This is certainly a poor precedent to set... I really thought old add ons like the sega cd/32x or the N64DD showed this sort of thing was a bad idea. |
all what these Add-Ons showed is that locking out entire games behind Hardware was a bad idea. This 6-8 years was the only Gen to be that long which was a mistake.
Why would it be silly to not go with PC? If you like consoles for having less options you should prefer having only 2 options over a billion options. I dont understand this logic?










