Slashdot Mirror
Should Next-Gen Game Consoles Be Upgradeable?
MojoKid writes "Historically, console add-ons that boosted the performance of the primary unit haven't done well. Any attempt to upgrade a system's core performance risks bifurcating the user base and increases work developers must do to ensure that a game runs smoothly on both original and upgraded systems. The other reason is that a number of games rely on very specific hardware characteristics to ensure proper operation. In a PC, swapping a CPU with 256K of L2 for a chip with 512K of L2 is a non-issue assuming proper platform support. Existing software will automatically take advantage of the additional cache. The Xbox 360, on the other hand, allows programmers to lock specific cache blocks and use them for storing data from particular threads. In that case, expanding the amount of L2 cache risks breaking previous games because it changes the range of available cache addresses. The other side of the upgrade argument is that the Xbox 360 has been upgraded more effectively than any previous console; current high-end versions ship with more than 10x the storage of the original, as well as support for HDMI and integrated WiFi. It would also forestall the decline in comparative image quality between console and PC platforms."
Isn't the point of them to be simple? n00bs use them. ;)
Step up to PC gaming if you want to able to upgrade your stuff.
-americamatrix
The entire point of game consoles is that developers at least have a chance at a homogenous platform where they can make sure the game mostly runs the same everywhere. If you allow upgrading CPU, GPU, etc. then it's just PC gaming with a weird OS and components that will most likely cost more just because they can.
I believe that if you want an upgradable gaming/HT platform, then you should build a PC. Consoles are specifically manufactured to run on a set hardware specification. Adding and/or changing the predefined hardware of a console will only add to the development cost of games, which will eventually be passed on to the consumer in the form of even more expensive games. Although the concept seems cool, I don't want next-gen xbox games to cost $100 each.
Unless you mandate that older hardware works just as well as newer hardware, no.
People will rush to point out things like Kinect, or PSMove, or WiiMotion Plus... Those are accessories. Often cheap too, relatively speaking. The CPU is still the same, the RAM is still the same, game compatibility is still the same(more or less; there are bizarre examples across the board). Having upgradable mass storage or expandable accessories doesn't break the underlying assumptions.
I think that consoles should be "good enough." Big deal, Battlefield 3 looks amazing on PC. Surprise, it also looks amazing on Xbox and PS3. Increased levels of detail do improve immersion a LOT. But when there's a huge trade off between bleeding edge graphics and stability and compatibility, I'll lean towards stability and compatibility.
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
Now would be the dumbest time to start making consoles upgradeable. The long lifespan of current-gen consoles shows that the hardware is no longer improving very rapidly in any way that people are willing to pay for. The low cost yet low sales of desktop PCs confirm the same fact. The next-gen consoles ought to be designed to run a generous poly count at 1080p resolution at 120hz (i.e. 60hz in 3d). Do that, and people will be happy for quite some time.
Upgradable in anything more than a trivial way, HD or Optical for example, basically an add-in card, blows the console economics out of the water. Socketed ram adds cost and drops speeds vs soldered. Same with CPU, and then we get to cooling issues..... Given MS's ability to keep the bumps on the 360 from shattering, would you want people to start mucking with that?
Part 2 is pointed out well above, console = fixed platform = cheap software testing. Upgrades = not fixed platform = testing nightmare.
While I haven't read the article (yeah, shame on me), I know more than enough about console development, economics and programming. I also talk to people doing the 'next gen' consoles almost every week. Having written for a console, I can tell you directly that 'upgrades' are, and will always be a non-starter. Anyone who posits it seriously is the walking equivalent of a flashing neon 'N00B' sign, complete with arrows. :)
-Charlie
Not to cut in on the OMG-PROPRIETARY-PLATFORMS rant, but benefiting the company is kind of the point of running a business. And the console business is doing extremely well, much better than the PC gaming market, so mainstream customers are clearly okay with it. The fact that people on Slashdot still rant about PS3 Linux as if any significant share of the PS3 user base even bothered with it is illustration enough how out-of-touch many of the posters are.
You're referring to the PS3, the most standards-using (basic USB, standard hard drives, etc) popular console in history?
Yep, the only console that I know of that removes features in firmware updates. It doesn't matter that the hardware was standard, Sony believes its their hardware to do with as they wish, regardless of what you want.
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
You basically said what I was going to say.
Essentially, allowing them to be "upgradeable" removes the last barrier that effectively makes them computers with odd user interface devices. So I must say to anyone who wants upgrade-able consoles, it is okay. You don't have to be in the closet. PC gaming isn't so evil you need to hide it under a hipster like charade. We understand.
by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
Absolutely Not, and here is why:
With non upgradable consoles, you never go to buy a new game, and wonder 'wait, will this run on my machine?' That is the appeal of consoles over PC gaming, for the most part, 'it just works' you put the disc in, and play the game, and it is the same for everyone. No wondering if your graphics card will be able to make it look like the videos you saw online, no wondering if it will lag during action sequences, no wondering if you're going to need to drop another 50$ on more ram to play.
I've decided to Diversify my Holdings. I've divided my cash between my left and right pockets, instead of all in one.
And my favorite, a built in power supply that uses the same power cord as most desktops (original PS3) or notebooks (slim PS3). Despite being larger than the Wii, it is a lot more portable.
They're consoles. The whole point is to have a consistent hardware base, so developers can custom tailor their code to the platform, leading to simplified testing and improved stability. One CPU, one memory spec, one GPU... the key parts are consistent.
You want to upgrade your console ? Trade it in for a new one! Or, if you're like me, you put it away and take it out from time to time for nostalgia.
-Billco, Fnarg.com
The point was to be able to circumvent import rules on game consoles rather than computers. Officially it was something like "playstation computer entertainment system". Sony was saying 'look it even runs linux like a regular computer!'. That tack of course did not work.
The main users of linux on PS3's were research and development places that were buying PS3's, at a subsidized rate, but then never buying games. Which was just costing sony money.
Now, as a practical matter they shouldn't be allowed to remove the functionality from the device once sold. That's illegal, but they also shouldn't feel any obligation to offer further PS3's with linux support because as you say, it's a non market, and their "the PS3 is really a computer" didn't pan out.
It wouldn't be that nice. Only approved upgrade kits would work, every 6 months a new $100 kit would come out, and developers would be forced into an SDK that automatically keeps any game's minimum requirements lock-step with the console upgrade schedule. The upgrades would be nothing more than unlock codes for clockspeed and features already built into the machine.
Apple would sue them for ripping off their business model.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it!
Er, isn't the PS3 the least popular of the big 3?
No
Mod parent up.
The great thing about console programming is that you know every last detail of the target machine. You know what works, what doesn't. You can budget everything right down to the last clock cycle and squeeze out 100% performance from the chips.
If you take that away then it's game over as far as optimization is concerned.
No sig today...