Slashdot Mirror
On Game Consoles As Multimedia Devices
Thanks to GamesAreFun for their editorial discussing whether the next generation of consoles should have multimedia capabilities, such as DVD playing and TiVo-like functionality, or whether the manufacturers should stick with "a console that just plays games." The author argues that these extra features "...add to the overall cost in the end [through licensing and production costs], to both the manufacturers and to consumers (especially at the launch of the consoles)", suggests that there's "more to worry about insofar as breaking down of moving parts", and concludes, definitively: "Personally, all I want is a dedicated gaming machine."
If I was on the fence of buying a console would having a DVD player built in push me over? Maybe if I didn't have one. If I didn't really want an X-Box and didn't have a DVD player, would having it be able to play DVDs make me more interested in buying it? No, I don't think so.
So basically, I think it's good to have the DVD paying aspect, but it doesn't effect my purchasing (other than owning a PS2 has stopped me from buying a "real" DVD player becasue I don't need one). I like the way the PS2 did it better than the X-Box. With the PS2 it was free, no $30 extra (I later bought the PS2 remote when it was onsale for $10 just for convience sake).
As for the extra costs, what extra costs? Both the PS2 and X-Box have built in hardware MPEG2 decoders that games can use, and store data on DVDs so they both have DVD drives. All they had to do was add a little piece of software and get it licensed. I personally doubt that the licensing fee added anything significant to the cost of my PS2 or X-Box, maybe $1 at most.
Now as for TiVo functionality, that would be interesting too, but I don't think it would push me over the fence. Neither would playing MP3s (although that would be very nice) or anything else. Before I bought a TiVo, I might have used the feature (like I used to use my VCR to record programs that I couldn't watch) but it wouldn't make a big difference (I had that VCR after all). Now that I HAVE a TiVo it means even less to me.
I guess, in summary, these "extra" features won't get me to buy the device, but it might make me like it more or use it more (I'm very fond of my PS2, because I use it so often for DVDs).
And while this all may seem new, is it? We've seen the various CD consoles (Saturn, SegaCD, PS, etc) play audio CDs, and some (like the white Asian PS) could play VCDs too. There are examples of previous consoles that have added things in, and I doubt it makes any difference in sales.
To prove my point: How many of you who didn't own a Dreamcast bought ne to use as a web-browser and game machine? No one? That's what I thought. You bought your DC for the games (or, as /.ers, to run Linux/BSD :)
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
Because that's not what people want... people want convenience generally above all else. Why carry around a PDA, digital camera and a cell phone when you can get a cell phone that doubles (triples?) as a PDA and a camera?
I know god exists. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
For the same reason that I don't buy one of those stupid Fax/Scanner/Printer deals either.
You end up with a machine that can do all three but can't do any of them that well.
I'm not willing to sacrifice on quality and end up with something that's the jack of all trades and king of none.
Is there any reason for the next generation of game consoles to also be DVD movie players? If you bought a PS2 or Xbox, you have a DVD player. DVD players can be purchased for very little nowadays. Most everyone who wants one, has one.
When this generation of hardware was released, a built in DVD movie player was a big advantage for a console...when nobody had a DVD player. I envision TiVo-like functionality to be the next "It also plays DVDs!", but would Sony, Nintendo or Microsoft build this type of functionality into a game system? And would such a system stay around the $300 price point that seems to be the new standard?
What does everybody else think?
The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
As far as complaining about potential cost increases due to multiple functions, why don't we burn that bridge when we get to it? In this most recent generation, it's unreasonable to blame DVD playback for more than $20-30 (licensing and software development) of the cost for PS2s, and the Xbox shifted that cost over to an optional add-on. There's no indication yet that the next consoles will cost any more than they did in this past generation and we all know that people will be less likely to buy the consoles if they cost more, so they'll probably debut again at $300. If I end up getting some extra potential functionality for that money, what is there to complain about? If the argument is against the inclusion of hard drives in consoles because of increased failure rates, well, I'm not buying that either. I've had the same 20-GB hard drive in my Panasonic Showstopper (ReplayTV) since purchase (at its debut several years ago), running for several hours per day, and I don't have problems outside of wanting more space and being too cheap/lazy to replace it with something bigger.
I read nothing in that editorial that makes me think that adding functions to consoles is a bad idea on its face. It only made me think that the writer, like so many people on the Internet, is a curmudgeon who enjoys hunting down things about which to complain.
Featured on
For example, your cellphone probably has a calculator function, right? Is it as good as a proper scientific calculator? No. But it wasn't hard for the cellphone OS manufacturers to add one in, and it is useful. If you need a real calculator, you'll go buy one.
The same is true of game consoles. These are computers that were designed to play games, but it's not too hard for the manufacturer to add features that only require software (like CD/DVD playback, or net access). It doesn't matter that playback is as good as a Denon, or net access isn't as good as on a PC. But it does increase the value of the machine to some people, so it's worth putting in.
"I like the way the PS2 did it better than the X-Box. With the PS2 it was free, no $30 extra (I later bought the PS2 remote when it was onsale for $10 just for convience sake)."
You paid for that feature. It's just that you paid by not having an 8gb HD in your system. The dongle that plugs into the Xbox is not just an IR sensor, it's the complete DVD playback program. The features in it are more complete than the "console only" features in a PS2. The PS2 requires you spend that same US$ 30 on a memory card that's 8megabytes in size, rather than a nice 8gigabyte HD. Failing to acknowledge this is just deluding yourself.
"I personally doubt that the licensing fee added anything significant to the cost of my PS2 or X-Box, maybe $1 at most."
On the Xbox, maybe, but on the PS2, wrong. The DVD CCA licence is more than US$ 1 -- you're deluding yourself.
There are plenty of people who won't acknowledge that the GameCube is a viable console choice because it won't play DVDs. Even though it's 110$ cheaper than PS2 or Xbox, and you can buy for 60$ a superior DVD player that also does video CDs (which no current consoles do), MP3 cds (ditto), and Kodak picture CDs (ditto), among other things.
The DVD player feature was fine when decent DVD players cost a fair chunk of change. Since they now cost the same as a new release video game, it's not a big deal. Only people who don't know anything about DVD players will convince themselves it's worth the extra expense.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
A wallet is a single device that exists for one purpose.
A credit card is as well, it's more like consolidating all your creditcards into one card with 1/3 of the total credit-limit, all your debit cards into the same card but it costs you two dollars for every dollar you spend, all your grocery cards into that one card but it's only good for 3 uses, and all your gas cards into it, but they only work on tuesdays.
Now you have one card, it doesn't work NEARLY as well as the individual cards did, but hey it's only one card. oh yeah, and the plastic is less durable, it biodegrades in less than 3 months sitting in your wallet, the magnetic strip is lower quality as well, it's only good for a few reads.
Although not like a multi-function device, there is truth to what you said before as well. Not even old farmers who refuse to use banks are stupid enough to carry all their cash, cards, id, etc in their wallet. By using a bank you are recognizing that putting all your eggs in one basket is a bad idea. Surely you wouldn't carry ALL of your cards in your wallet either unless you only have one or are incredibly fscking stupid. You carry a small traveling subset, maybe $50, one credit card with sufficient limit in case of an emergency, your debit in case you need more cash, etc.