Comments on: Wouldn’t a single video game system be better for everyone?

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:23:17 +0000

That’s region coding, the standards the same.

By: greatslack

greatslack — Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:20:09 +0000

Single console? No.
Single format? Yes.

By: Chuck

Chuck — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:52:13 +0000

Nicholas,

Spend an evening reading up on natural selection, and capitolism.

By: Katchoo

Katchoo — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:58:28 +0000

I agree on the ‘horrible idea’ track. Nothing breeds innovation like competition. Microsoft releases the 360, which blows the PS2 out of the water, forcing Sony to come out with the PS3. Nintendo would be thrilled to still be selling the cheaper Gamecube, but it paled in comparison to consoles put out by Microsoft & Sony. Sure, the Wii still can’t compete graphically, but as innovation goes, the Wii beats Sony & Microsoft with something other than just a graphical boost.

Life is a competition. Roll with the punches or go down for the count.

By: Luke Noel-Storr

Luke Noel-Storr — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:15:48 +0000

Ridiculous. Do you think we’d have the Wii or the DS or other innovations with a standard format. I highly doubt it.

OK, I don’t see a big deal of difference between the PS3 and XBox 360, but if it wasn’t for competing platforms then Nintendo wouldn’t have felt the need to re-invent the video game experience, and we’d all just be playing dull games that could be on a Playstation/XBox/PC.

Also, I’m confused as to in what sense “all TVs can receive all TV signals” there are a multitude of TV signal formats, and broadcasting formats, and a great difference in the technology necessary to receive them. It also depends on what you define as a “TV Signal” – no TV’s I know of can receive a satellite or cable signal without an external box, and not all even have built in DTT receivers. Then there are differences between NTSC and PAL, SD and HD, etc, etc, etc…

By: AlbertoP

AlbertoP — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:47:07 +0000

wouldn’t be better if we only had one blog. it is content after all we want. a single blog would lead to increases competition on the writing level…..

By: mathew

mathew — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:39:09 +0000

It’s also wrong to state that DVD and TV are universal single standards. Try buying a foreign DVD and watching it on your US TV and DVD player.

By: Trae Dorn

Trae Dorn — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:14:03 +0000

One word for why this won’t work: 3DO.

On the other hand, I love my 3DO.

By: Nicholas Deleon

Nicholas Deleon — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:45:37 +0000

I was going to make the PC comparison, but even though there’s a single gaming platform (Windows, though Vista has somewhat mixed things up), developers still have to program for the lowest common denominator; there’s no unifying standard for them to program for. One gamer could have the latest $600 video card with XYZ feature, but then the next gamer could only have a $200 card. Unless companies are willing to say “tough luck” to the second game–and his money–they’re in a bind.

-nd

By: Estefania

Estefania — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:34:09 +0000

great
Fabiana Panda Security dice:
Mi idea era ya transferirles el dinero
Alvaro dice:
eso es lo de menos

By: Cyber Akuma

Cyber Akuma — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:32:59 +0000

Terrible idea.

There would be no competiton, no reason to ever lower prices, to offer cheaper/better online services, nothing.

This happened in the NES era. Nintendo was practically the only game in town, and they had no plans to change. They had forced exclusitivity contracts, if you wanted to make games for Nintendo, you ONLY made games for Nintendo, you coulden’t make games for another system.

Then Sega came out with the Genesis, and on top of having their own developers, quite a few companies that were tired of Nintendo’s vice grip chose to move to the Genesis instead of renew their exclusitivity contract, Nintendo was eventually forced to make the Super Nintendo because of the Genesis.

If there was only one system, say hello to a $800 system that dosent receieve a pricedrop in years, has a $20 a month online play fee, does not receieve any updates or plans for a new system for over a decade, and has many behind-the-scenes conditions for publishers and developers that drive them crazy.

Also, because this will raise the cost and frustration of making games, say hello to $80 games being the norm and more shovelware and less innovative/original games as developers and publishers will be less willing to take a risk with something new instead of a guaranteed sell like Madden (insert year here)

By: PhilK

PhilK — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:22:12 +0000

That’s a terrible idea. How do you avoid stagnation in hardware? How do you determine the online service to rule them all? How do you decide what development platform it will use?

What would be best is a standard for compatibility. Still a PS3, Xbox, and Wii but you can run any game on any platform. Then the platforms would have to compete on, “We can run Gears of War at 30fps”, “Well we can run it at 60fps!!”. This would be great, except that I just described the PC platform.

By: Gabriel Jordan

Gabriel Jordan — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:19:37 +0000

The last line or Mark’s reply gets it. This system already exists… it’s called a PC, and its market share is shrinking in gaming terms.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:14:20 +0000

Having a single console wouldn’t be bad at all, I totally agree. As long as it continues to get improvements through versions since it wouldn’t be competing against other companies to be better anymore. I think one of the biggest reasons that we’ve advanced so much in gaming technology over the past few years is because of that competition between companies.

Also, I don’t think the big 3 (Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft) would want to drop out or even work together to make just one game console. It’s very unlikely this would ever happen.

…Though I’d be fine if there were no consoles at all and all games came out on PC.