Is Console Gaming Dying?

mr_sifter writes "PC gamers love to obsess over whether PC gaming is dying, but bit-tech thinks it's time to look at the other side and examine if console gaming is really as secure as publishers would have us believe. All three console manufacturers suffered from the recession — this year, Sony announced its first net loss in 14 years; a stunning ¥989.9bn, which includes record losses of ¥58.5bn in its gaming sector. Microsoft also announced its first loss since it went public in 1986 in the second quarter of this financial year, with a $31 million US loss coming straight from the Entertainment and Devices division, which is responsible for the Xbox 360. Not even Nintendo has escaped the financial plague either, with sales of the Wii dropping by 67 percent in the US, 60 percent in Japan and 47 percent in the rest of the world. In addition to reduced profitability, casual games and the rise of the iPhone further suggest the current model is not invulnerable."

Comments

No

[Anonymous Coward]

Next question.

Re:No

[interkin3tic]

The next question is: what exactly would the mechanism of "console gaming dying" be anyway? I would argue that the death of console gaming would/will have look like one of the following scenarios:

1. Most of the "major" games will be released for the PC and not the consoles.
2. New major consoles will not be released, eventually the consoles out there would lag so far behind PC that 1 would happen
3. All major consoles will become so PC like that they will be indistinguishable and it will be pointless to talk about PC vs console

1 doesn't seem to be happening, and I don't really see many signs that it will happen any time soon, there seem to be more releases of significant games for consoles than PC. I think everyone but the most ridiculous fanboys of a given console would agree that games -should- be released on all platforms that can support the game. I want to choose what platform to game on based on my needs and equipment, being denied a gaming experience because I don't have the right hardware, or having to choose hardware based on -artificial- game availability is not a good situation. (Emphasis on artificial. Obviously MS isn't going to release their Halo games on a nintendo console, and obviously I'm not expecting to run Crysis 2 on an NES.) So I hope that more games continue to be released on all platforms, PC and console.

2. Consoles obviously aren't as powerful as PCs, but again, 1 seems far from happening. Already, the idea with MS at least seems to be delaying the next console for longer. If the next generation (and I mean the -actual- next generation, not the current xbox 360/PS3/wii generation which is sometimes mistakenly referred to as "next gen") is still a loss for the console makers, I suppose they might decide to not release another one. Games would continue coming out for them for a while, but eventually enough customers would migrate away from the PC to where the consoles become obsolete. Games are to this day coming out for the PS2, and the next generation of consoles is undoubtedly going to be released, so it will be quite a few years before console gaming dries up completely.

3. Doesn't seem very likely to me. Consoles are aimed squarely at people who want to plug in and play immediately, without messing around with hardware or software configurations. I think MS is having enough headaches with the optional hard-drive in the 360 that they're going to move away from even that, back to "one console, one hardware configuration." I don't see any signs from nintendo that they'll start making games that can run on both their hardware and other hardware, and given the sales of the wii, even with this recent decrease, they'd be nuts to do so any time soon.

So I don't really see -how- console gaming could be dying. Slowing down temporarily, sure, but it's not like console gaming is a living thing, where if it's vitals (sales) drop low enough, the beast is going to die and not be revived.

For the next next question I'd like to propose one of the following: do game journalists feel the need to declare "X is dying" -entirely- because it gets attention they're not getting otherwise? Do even they think that a trend like "sales declining" should be extrapolated to ridiculous extremes like "IT'S GOING TO DIE COMPLETELY!!!" Is rational commentary on videogames dying or did it ever even exist in the first place?

Re:No

[morari]

If you have to spend "copious amounts of cash every year" to upgrade your rig, then you're doing it wrong. A well thought-out build should easily last several years, or, about the same lifespan of a similarly priced console. You're doing nothing more than throwing out the same tired argument that technologically impaired people have been using for the last decade. Consoles are a great option if you don't like to have control or options, that is it.

Re:No

[mattack2]

"Rise" of casual gaming now only further highlighted that gaming as many of us relate to it is a rather smallish niche of modern entertainment.

Small niche? Some of the biggest games are making more than movie releases nowadays. Would you consider movies a "smallish niche of modern entertainment"?

(BTW, I don't say this as a hardcore gamer... I'm just barely a gamer at all, I have a PS2 I got only a few years ago, and have I think way less than 20 games.)

Re:No

[subsolar2]

I doubt that he meant $400 (amount sited by person he replied to).

But he is right, if your upgrading every year, then you are doing it wrong by buying the cheapest components that will just barely play current games right now. I built my gaming system three years ago and spent about $1200 (system, keyboard, mouse, new LCD) and just now starting to feel some performance issues.

A 360 does not cost $300, it costs $300 + $50/year for Live + $10 extra each game over PC + $600 for HD TV + $50 for an additional controller + $30 x 2 for chatpads or about $1300 in three years.

Don't tell me console gaming is any cheaper as I happen to own both.

Don't say "well you can use your regular HD TV" and I say my wife & kids would like to watch their TV programs, or "you don't need a HD TV" and I tell you it sucks as I've had to suffer playing games that the text is unreadably small on a SD TV.

Re:No

[hairyfeet]

Well lets see....I gave my 2006 era PC (3.6GHz P4, 2Gb of RAM, 7600GT) to my oldest and he is currently playing L4D on it and it sure looks nice to him. Granted that's not Crysis, but he hasn't seen anything newer that he wants ATM so I can't answer how Crysis would run. But of course he also uses it to chat with his friends, watch Youtube, check his emails, etc. My 2004 era PC (Socket 478 2.8Ghz Celeron, 2GB of RAM, X1950) is currently playing MMOs for his little brother, AuraRose and Lunia I do believe, along with the Youtube and reading up on Wii games (cause the little twerp figured out he is getting one for Xmas)

See to me that is the big difference between the PC and consoles, in that after it is done with gaming duty it can just get passed along to another member of the family who will be quite happy with it. In fact my gaming PC from a decade ago (733Mhz Compaq with 384Mb of RAM and an MX4000) is STILL going and makes a perfect web surfing and video watcher for my mom. My current PC (AMD 925 quad, 8Gb of RAM, 750Gb HDD, ATI 4650 1Gb, Win7 HP X64) cost me $750 before rebates and probably around $625 after, and frankly since PCIe seems to be the standard going for quite awhile I figure it'll be probably 5 years or more before it gets to be a hand me down.

So considering the fact that I am not only able to game with it, but I am watching NCIS over a USB TV Tuner right now (The new Windows Media Center is reaaallly nice!) and checking my email after just ordering my GF's Xmas present (yes I know I'm a late shopper, but I went fast shipping and will get it here by Friday) and posting here on /. I really do think it is a good value for the $$$, don't you? Oh and let us not forget mods are actually FREE on the PC and can keep a game fresh for years, like the Freelancer I was playing last night. So much better IMHO than being nickel and dimed to death over every little addon....errr I mean DLC.

Re:No

[mister_playboy]

The point is that we do not need skills to enjoy movies or TV shows. And the learning divide, for as long as it would exist, would be making gaming business vulnerable.

I have to disagree with this point. I first began to avoid watching TV 7 years ago as a bet with a roommate in college, and it's been long enough that I have "unlearned" the attention span needed for the pattern of commercial breaks in a show. If I try to watch a show now with family, the (from my viewpoint) constant interruption is extremely irritating, but it's just normal to everyone else.

The skills for TV are so ingrained in most of us that we don't even know they are there unless we get rid of them.

Something wrong with the sales model?

[Bartles]

Perhaps if they charged less than $60 for a tier one new release, sales would go up.

Ridiculous analysis

[gzsfrk]

What an ignorant story. We're in the middle of the worst recession/near depression that has ever occurred since videogames came to be, and it's somehow an ominous sign that the companies behind videogames experienced losses either during the whole year (Sony), a single quarter (MS), or simply had lower sales than the previous year PRIOR to the recession? How about looking at it from the perspective that it's amazing that the videogames sector has done as well as it has over the course of the past year, despite a tremendously inhospitable economic climate?

Yes, console gaming is dying. That must be it.

[TaggartAleslayer]

Or it could be that we're in a global recession, it's been a rather lackluster year for gaming in general, and all of the consoles have reached the maturity/decline slope in their product life-cycle.

Anecdotally... no.

[Brandee07]

Consoles aren't in any danger in my house, because I have ceased to maintain a gaming PC. I've switched to console gaming entirely- at the cost of the superior control scheme of Dragon Age, the third-party mods of Oblivion, and the keyboard-and-mouse input that I'm so familiar with. I gave that all up in order to get a game that I know will work when I get home, that won't disagree with my video card or run like a slideshow cause I don't have enough RAM.

Console gaming is, in my opinion, stronger than ever. It just happens to be a recession and people are spending less on luxuries... like video games.

Re:Not for me

[Red Flayer]

I find it hilarious that people spend hundreds of dollars on a Wii and then even more money on games and controllers and other shit, only to do stuff they could, you know, do in real life.

What, like gripe in a real-live conversation instead of posting some stupid shit on slashdot?

Pot meet kettle...

console gaming will not die

[Vorpix]

there's two questions here:

1) is GAMING dying?
2) is CONSOLE GAMING dying?

1. no. people continue to want to play games. it will only grow as current gamers grow older and have kids who become new gamers.

2. no. while PC gaming will continue to have its niche market, especially in areas where keyboard and mouse have dynamic advantages (especially MMO and RTS games), console gaming makes modern games accessible to the masses who cannot (through lack of knowledge or lack of money) continually upgrade their PC's to keep up. Consoles give a consistent platform for several years where upgrading is not necessary, and games will "just work".

Sure during recession all forms of entertainment will suffer cuts, but gaming is far from being alone here.

Re:Not for me

[pluther]

I don't own a Wii, but I'm pretty sure there are several games available for it other than the "Wii Sports" to which you allude.

you ask silly questions

[Eil]

Is Console Gaming Dying?

No.

All three console manufacturers suffered from the recession -- this year

All car manufacturers suffered from the recession. Is driving dying?

Not even Nintendo has escaped the financial plague either, with sales of the Wii dropping by 67 percent in the US, 60 percent in Japan and 47 percent in the rest of the world.

The Wii has been out for quite awhile too. Wii games (and therefore licensing) can continue to be massively successful, even if sales of the console peter out. You left out the fact that despite falling sales of the Wii (which can actually be a good thing if it indicates market saturation), Nintendo is actually the only one of the three that posted an overall profit.

In addition to reduced profitability, casual games and the rise of the iPhone further suggest the current model is not invulnerable."

Are you an idiot? The iPhone is not going to replace anyone's XBox, PS3, or Wii. Mobile phones, PC games, and console games all serve entirely different markets. None of these are going to take over the other in the foreseeable future. Stop trolling the easily-trolled Slashdot editors.

Re:Not for me

[prockcore]

Instead of writing that presumptuous post chastising some random guy you don't even know, you could've gone outside and we wouldn't have had to read your condescending bullshit.

Re:Not for me

[pizzach]

• Some games can be used at training simulators, instead of forcing you to lose golf balls or forcing other people to go after miss-thrown frisbees.
• Not everyday is a sunny warm day. It could be raining, winter, etc.
• Some people don't have the health to.
• Some people like the tactile feel and required body dexterity compared to thumb games.
• There are other types of games.
• These is such a thing as matter of preference.

In other words, under any of this situations you would come off as a jack-ass if you said just what you wrote. There is no holy grail way to play games.

Re:I doubt it

[Toonol]

I think you hit it on the head. Hard core gaming is dying not console gaming.

I don't think that's true at all. "Hardcore" gaming (I hate that term) isn't declining, it's just being OVERSHADOWED by the massive growth in the entire gaming market. It's a smaller piece of a vastly larger pie. That may bother some egos, but isn't really a bad thing. Probably good for the industry.

Re:it's not dying

[windex82]

And you don't even have to leave your house to get the games.

And you'll never be able to resell them. And, if Steam decides to ban you, you lose access to your entire library. Even if you're banned because someone stole your credit card, you have no recourse.

No one I know resells their games anyway... PC or Console, if they didn't want to have it they would have rented it.

Since everybody has a computer anyway, a $100 graphics card will get you better graphics than a console at a lower price than a console.

On a much tinier screen, with a far less comfortable input device...and did I mention that your games will get progressively slower unless you plunk down $250 every year for a new video card? And if you have a laptop, you can't upgrade at all.

I have 46 inches of useable space on my desktop, its just a matter of what you plug your screen into...

And 250 a year? Not even close... try 250 everytime a console is release AND you get to play your existing games AND the new games. Too bad the console makes all your current games garbage....

smart ass answer = Unless you're playing a 2D scroller, joysticks are for losers.

Unless you're playing RTS or FPS, keyboards are for losers.

(which pretty much just leaves scrollers and sports)

Re:Larger problem

[Moryath]

Did you not note that I pointed out DVD was in the PS2 for the same reason?

Sony has a hand in the design of Blu-Ray. They, along with a set of other companies who also "contribute", gain a certain amount from the royalties on discs/players adhering to the blu-ray format, the same way they were connected to DVD.

Sony's setup has always been this way. They never implement an open, universal standard unless they absolutely, positively have to. Look at the amazing number of "standards" they've tried to develop themselves (Beta vs VHS, Compact Disc they had a hand in, DAT, Video8/Hi8, Minidisc vs Philips Digital Compact Cassette, Sony ATRAC vs MP3, Sony SACD vs DVD-Audio, MMCD vs SuperDensity till they gave in and "contributed" their patents to merge EFMPlus into the DVD standard with Toshiba, Memory Stick Duo vs SD, SDDS "Sony Digital Dynamic Sound" versus DTS and Dolby Digital, and of course the craptacular UMD format). Their goal is to make their proprietary "standard" the industry standard, and rake in the royalties, not unlike Microsoft's "embrace, extend, destroy" philosophy concerning open standards.

Re:Larger problem

[RedK]

The 3 1/2 floppy disagrees with you. Not to mention, like you say, a lot of companies are part of the Blu-ray association and as such, if every maker of Blu-ray devices is part of it, no one charges royalties. Like DVD, Blu-ray is very much design by committee with no one company controlling it. This is the exact opposite of proprietary.