Some food for thought in this video which goes back to the idea that games consoles could be upgraded for better performance.
I honestly hope not. The whole point of a gaming console is you buy it once, and that's it. The developers have one set of hardware to work with, and the consumer doesn't have to worry about upgrading. If they do, then we all might as well buy PCs. That's exactly why the MOVE, while selling well enough, isn't huge, simply because it was a post-release accessory that developers didn't have to develop for. If Sony wants their new MOVE 2.0/Eyetoy 2.0 to be sued, it NEEDS to be bundled with ALL PS4's. So yeah, keep that "upgrade" crap away from my consoles. I have a PC already, I don't want to have to worry about my console as well.
I completely agree with you. The whole POINT of having a console is having FIXED hardware that does the job for a set period of time.
Yes, a set architecture designed specifically for gaming and running specific software at a high level with minimal oversight. If people want a PC, then they can just buy a PC. Everyone understands PC's can post higher spec numbers because they're upgradable. A console on the other hand hides the layers of abstraction from the user, providing them with a simple user friendly experience. Console manufacturers are well aware of the purpose of a console. They don't go messing with the formula all willy-nilly.
It would work a lot better. If your disc drive dies, swap it out instead of paying to fix it or buying a new one. Or when its time for a graphics update like five years later swap it.
I like your idea of being able to replace parts if they fail, but an upgrade would fracture the user base and not be well supported.
@AAACE5 - If your disc drive fails within the first year, get it replaced under warranty. If it is outside of the warranty period, buy the replacement part off of eBay and replace it yourself for a fraction of the cost. As far as graphics, if you want an update for graphics in "like five years", then wait for the next generation to come out, OR whatever the future of the gaming industry does. What you're describing is exactly what PCs are for ;)
So your saying if Xbox 720 or PS4 offered an upgrade to your system for $60 you wouldn't do it ? All of you are kidding yourselves.
Your argument is invalid as soon as you said $60. That would never happen (without a heavy subsidization). The fact remains that if upgrades were offered, developers would have to either 1) spend more money to support the new tech/upgrade AND the base tech for those who haven't upgraded, or 2) pick one over the other, thus people will be losing out. No upgrades = developers make a game EVERYONE can enjoy (if they have that console).
The N64 Upgrade was $50-60 It was = to the price of a new game or slightly more. So $60 is probably not far off. I could see it being $100 but no more. People aren't going to pay %50 the price of a system for an upgrade. It will happen eventually, even if it's just a RAM upgrade.
As far as I know, consoles has been already upgradable. NES: Disk System Sega Genesis: Sega CD Sega Saturn - RAM Cart N64: Disc Drive Sega Dreamcast: Modem PS2: Network Adapter HDD PS3: HDD etc etc Upgradability is nothing new to consoles and not exclusive to PCs Valve's Steambox dual SKUs are all clues that the PS4 maybe be an upgradable platform. Now in regards to PC-like upgradability Steambox is is the first to announce it. One basic model for the mainstream console gamers on a budget and one upgradable high end model for serious hardcore gamers. That is enough evidence to believe that PS4 will have the same offerings since companies try to outdo each other by spying on the other. This way upradability is a matter of choice.
But arent consoles already upgradeable? With new hard drives and accesories to improve the gaming experience? Isnt that what an upgrade essentially is? Especially if you slap an SSD in a PS3. I seriously hope nex gen consoles come with full SSD support from day 1.
There is no need for upgradeable consoles when you have cell architecture when the games become better, better & better. Just look at GOW: A. It's about making a console that lasts.
Imagine if the ps3 could go to a ps4 with the pop, pull, and replacement of an external custom gpu for 200.00 or less. That would be great. But the ps3 is a bad choice because of the ram situation. But the ps4-ps5 would be very capable.
Ummm well that is what pc gaming is all about. An upgradeable console needs to have a very simple easy to understand upgrade system in order for it to work along with .affordable prices for its upgrades like a $50-$100.00 dollars for a gpu not $200.00.
@jp_footy2 I agree completely, there would be too many complications and it would essentially cause a divide between consumers who own a lesser part of the machine when developers are designing for the new released part in mind. I suppose there could be ways around it such as official release dates for the parts with cut offs for the older ones. But again, its complicated and expensive. Defeats the point of buying the package that in the case of playstation is a 10 year one. my opinion.
I want an upgradable console, atleast for two console cycles, with just the gpu being replaced. Imagine an xbox/ps4 with a pool of 8gb ram and a great cpu. A custom gpu solution on a pcie bus that you just pop off the side and can replace for peanuts the next generation (5-6 years down the line). I would want that. It would save the customer money and cut down on R&D every other console cycle. They will not need to create a new gpu every year, just with the console cycle.
Well then you'd be paying ATI or Nvidia directly, not Microsoft/Sony who happens to pay companies like them. Really consoles are middlemen, who try to add a service on top. Really you're buying downgraded PC parts repackaged in another shell.
even if you put in a scalable solution like n64 rampack your still looking at basically putting a port of the same game in a package high graphics and lo graphic pcs have long lists of ini files to check each function and weather it will work consoles were meant to be a static dev system
Sony already makes an all-in-one PC with Windows 8. All they have to do is ditch Windows and make a Linux-based OS with full accessory and game support. That probably won't happen though.
I agree with SynGamer on this one. Console gamimg puts everyone on the same "level", whereas gamers playing on super-customizable PCs often have an advantage. With consoles, game developers have a "least common denominator" that they know everyone has because of the built-in features / specs of a particular system to start out with so they can maximize the gaming experience from there. If you want more / better / "bleeding-edge" technology, then PC gaming is probably best bet for you. If you want simplicity /"plug-n-play gaming", then a console, (of your choice), may be more appropriate for your situation. Either way, it's great that there are so many options out there for gamers. Althogh making systems "slimmer" as time goes by is great, it'd be even better to see the makers of these systems integrate a few "ugrades" along the way with those changes, as systems evolve. Of course, this may lengthen the lifespan of the console-- which may or may not align with the plans of the video game console manufacturers in the long run. The video game console manufacturers have to constantly ask themselves, "What if other console manufacturers don't include these "upgrades' in their systems"-- "What if they do?". "How will this affect their strategic decision when it comes to developing the new systems for the future?" and "How does it ultimately alter their timeline when doing so?". Even the smallest "upgrade" may have unintended consequences that haven't been forseen. Let's face it; everyone loves new technology-- we just need to be careful when/ how we integrate it-- that' all.
Although I would not like this approach, it could work. Millions of us have upgraded our consoles hard drives, so in theory on that basis...but it seems like a demographic/community splitter, terrible idea.
Upgrading a medium of storage and upgrading something that contributes to graphical capabilities is nowhere near the same.
I was referring more to the psychological than the technical aspect of upgrading e.g. will people be bothered with that, hence millions upgrading their HDD's ZombieNinjaPanda. My bad....I should have been more clearer :)
It could work via a leveling system every three years i.e. level 2 parts are available then down the road level 3 parts are available. With that in mind is easy to upgrade with a game requires level 3 but this game requires level 2 ok since level 3 parts allow me to play level 2 games is time to buy level 3 parts. The pricing has to be affordable in order for it to work.
It would never work sorry, but I would welcome it if it was possible
An upgradable console is OK in theory, but what if you purchase a game and can't play it because you haven't upgraded your console for a nominal fee? That's a potential occurrence that I find pretty worrying. Some people may be fine with shelling out cash for upgrades but a lot of people don't want the hassle or simply couldn't afford upgrading their home console, after all aren't consoles supposed to be simple gaming machines without the worry and aggravations you can get from gaming on a PC?
If I wanted an upgradable console then I would just buy a PC.
Hello. No. Have a nice day.
That cover image was like a trip down memory lane.
Maybe the SteamBox but not the PS & Xbox but it would be nice.
An upgradable console is no longer a console.
N64 was upgradable. By the way, awesome avatar. Is that Moss from IT Crowd?
Oil sure hope so. That way the people who want more out of there console can get more and for those not interested can stay the same.
That would be cool. I totally remember the memory exapansion pack for the n64.