Slashdot Mirror
EA Says 'Next-Gen' Is 'Now-Gen'
Via GamesRadar, a Reuters report noting that the 'next generation' consoles are now more-or-less broken in. Sales for the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Wii have transitioned to the point where software sales are going to be well worth the effort for development houses. "'[Black] Friday marked one of those points where you can say something's changed," [EA CEO Riccitiello] said. 'Around the world, based on the data I've got, it was pretty clear that the transition is now over. Key to that was Sony Corp's recent price cut for its PlayStation 3, which should ensure the struggling console hits the company's fiscal-year sales target of 11 million units.'"
And so the number of sales is indicative how? I'd say that when you've got three consoles that were sold out immediately after release, you've made the transition. The market may not have been able to accomodate the demand, but three consecutive sell-outs - especially when followed continuously by extremely strong sales for the Wii and 360 - indicates that the transition to next-gen has been made. I mean, two years to decide that developing for the 360 is a good idea?
So what we have now is as good as it is going to get for the next five to ten years? That's unfortunate. That's where the PC gaming will always be superior. PCs were already outperforming consoles by the time the newest gen of consoles were released. And while my console systems will be performing about the same in five or ten years as they were last year, my PC will be performing perhaps twice as well next year as it is this year.
Console gaming companies need to come out with a different model. These are videogame systems; not car stereos toasters. Perhaps they need to introduce some sort of leasing model where gamers lease the consoles and then they come out with a more advanced console (or upgrade the current ones) after a year or two. It obviously isn't reasonable to release a $500 console every other year because gamers won't spend $500 every year (per gaming system) just for the hardware.
I really have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea that a gaming system that provides essentially the same experience and quality is sufficient for five or ten years. I mean, think about it -- would you want to have been gaming in 2000 on a rig that was built in 1995 or even 1990?!
The problem with the PS3 WAS the price tag. Considering that they are now cheaper than the going ebay cost of a Wii the verb tense is important there.
But honestly, and here's where you really failed - my point was that your anecdotal evidence has no fucking place in any discussion. The fact that you said "informally" only underlines the fact that you already understood that your anecdotal evidence was completely fucking worthless but still chose to bring it up. That means you're not a moron but instead, just an asshole. Too bad, I would have liked you better if you were a moron. Now fuck off and die, asshole.
The $280 Xbox 360 is so badly crippled it might as well not exist.
Actually, it's a shame it *does* exist.
Game developers have to target the *lowest common denominator.* That means they have to target the non-HDD 360. That meanst they can't count on streaming game data, or anything else. So, the non-HDD version not only is crippled itself, but it cripples the potential of the games themselves.
Same thing with the lack of HD-DVD. Game data is at the point where it fills a DVD to capacity. Game developers have to over-compress textures, reduce level complexity, reduce the amount of cinematic content, and whatnot. (Yes, this is already happening. Check out comments by some of the Unreal Tournament 3 devs.)
I think this is the 360's biggest weakness. It gives Microsoft an early advantage, but as you pointed out, the price advantage is essentially gone. Now we'll see if the early lead is enough to overcome the technical deficiencies in their most-crippled console.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.