The Changing Face of the Console Wars

An article at Gamasutra explores the decisions by Microsoft and Sony to launch significant hardware additions — their respective, upcoming motion-control schemes — in the middle of a console cycle, rather than waiting until the next generations of their systems are ready. It's indicative of a change to the established pattern of console wars; nowadays, it's more about adding features and gadgets to improve existing products than developing entirely new ones. Quoting: "... for Sony and Microsoft, motion controllers are their next-gen consoles. And it's a damn sight easier than launching Xbox 720 or PS4. They can debut these peripherals without needing to engineer completely new boxes for consumers, potentially bundle them over time, and they have a much better chance at getting exclusive games, thanks to the specificity of the hardware (something that's happened a lot for the Wii). Thus, both hardware manufacturers and publishers like EA see these controllers sparking new interest in Xbox 360 and PS3, which will delay the next dreaded console transition for another few years."

Comments

Re:You're geniouses among men Sony, MS

[KDR_11k]

Honestly if just pointing at the screen is too much work for you you're either a cripple or so fat you can barely walk up a set of stairs. Pointing takes almost zero effort, less than handling a mouse even. Wrist on the lap, small movements to move the cursor, how exactly can you get tired with that little activity? Obviously games that make waggle equate to the attack button and require you to do roughly 500 attacks per minute are just retarded but not just because it's tiring, also because it's just stupid to map the movement sensor to a button like that, either make use of the analog input that the sensor represents or use it for stuff that doesn't deserve a button (e.g. reloading in an FPS works really well with movements).

Also the casuals don't want stupid minigame compilations so if that's all that MS and Sony offer them they won't get any.

Re:Graphics no longer; gameplay it is.

[Blakey Rat]

Half-Life doesn't even have a story, it has a "setting" maybe.

Here's the so-called story in Half-Life: an experimental teleporter malfunctions, making aliens randomly appear in a science lab. In the course of escaping the lab, you repair approximately 26 generators. Then some guy we know nothing about takes you into a magical space subway car and the game ends.

THAT'S better than Halo 2? It's the same fucking story as DOOM.

Deux Ex, I'll give you. But Half-Life is nothing but over-rated stacked atop over-rated.

And you (assuming you're the same anonymous coward I was talking to before) never even bothered to answer the question. Examples aside, do you agree with the *point* of the post?