The Console Arms Race: Is This What Console Gamers Want?

[Shifty Geezer]

I thought it was 50M (total console install base), not 40. Yeah, I'm not counting 50% of this poll as representative of the true audience being 50% - it'll be less than that as this poll is the higher end. However, people like better. That's proven by people buying better mobile devices year after year despite their old one beign perfectly servicable. A car can last 20 years, but people replace them sooner than that. If the improvement is enough to make a difference, there's going to be people who'll upgrade. Those who want the better framerate, and those who just want the best and always buy the best even if the improvements to experience are entirely placebo!

I'd count the minimum interest as something like the first year's sales. Yes, it's highly speculative number wrangling, but what else have we got to go on? What's the market average for device upgrades? >20% a year (a device replace every five years)?

 

[iroboto]

If both consoles do have a shorter cycle, I don't think they could wait a year like they used to to deliver. Sales for the current device would fall off a hill and all money would be saved for the new device.

If either company doesn't want to see the cash flow stop it's gotta be an announcement followed by preorder and delivery within a quick turnaround time.

At least just my thoughts to all of this.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Why would people waiting for PS4 now at ~£250 decide to not get it and buy a PS4.5 at £400? They didn't buy PS4 at that price and that's when it was a generational adance (same for XB).

 

[Deleted member 86764]

If they're going to follow mobile phones and how they're marketed then it's usually only a few weeks from announcing hardware to the device being available. I doubt it'll be that quick here though.

 

[Sigfried1977]

That's proven by people buying better mobile devices year after year despite their old one beign perfectly servicable. A car can last 20 years, but people replace them sooner than that.

Phones are not consoles. For many people they're status symbols. Most also get them through contracts. Since they're basically designed to be dead within two years as you cannot replace the fucking batteries anymore you rarely have the choice of whether or not to get a new one either. And besides that, that business model only really works for Apple and Samsung right now. It certainly doesn't work particularly well for Sony, and the less said about MS's phone division the better.

 

[iroboto]

Why would people waiting for PS4 now at ~£250 decide to not get it and buy a PS4.5 at £400? They didn't buy PS4 at that price and that's when it was a generational adance (same for XB).

True, but the market should be more diverse than that I think. The power output of something running at 4K would be significantly higher than that of the ps4.

I suppose our responses will change depending on how the device will actually work. But that being said:

Many of the first owners, trailblazers, would buy the 4K and sell off their existing investment to recoup the cost of owning the significantly more powerful device. It could very well flood the lower end used market, and those individuals looking for a cheap ps4 would be served and for everyone else hoping for a 4K money would be saved for that.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Phones are not consoles.

Phones was only one (extreme) example. People don't buy a product and stick with it until it dies. They tend to buy shiny replacements to replace perfectly serviceable products because the replacemetns are Better. People like better and buy new, improved things. That's a standard aspect of commerce and soething the consoles can rely on when trying to peddle a new, improved console.

 

[function]

People don't buy a product and stick with it until it dies.

They'll have to pry my Nokia Lumia 920 from my cold, dead hands!

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Phones was only one (extreme) example. People don't buy a product and stick with it until it dies.

Right. I don't accept the argument that consoles represent that weird consumer attitude warp because they are consoles. Consumer attitudes evolve and change. Consoles are the weird thing where consumers have exhibited a tolerance because the only alternative is the PC which is not a console.

Give consumers options and we'll see how things work out.

 

[Entropy]

Right. I don't accept the argument that consoles represent that weird consumer attitude warp because they are consoles. Consumer attitudes evolve and change. Consoles are the weird thing where consumers have exhibited a tolerance because the only alternative is the PC which is not a console.

Give consumers options and we'll see how things work out.

This is pretty much spot on.
Sony takes a risk given its current market leadership, but it can also strengthen its position further, and get its VR-effort a healthier base for growth. From the observer perspective, change is more interesting than no change.
However, they might also loose goodwill - which, as Microsoft has learned (repeatedly...) can be dangerous.

 

[milk]

How often do people replace their TVs? And their dvd/bluray player? Do they upgrade as soon as a better version comes out? How many do that? I think that's more like where consoles fit.

 

[London Geezer]

How often do people replace their TVs? And their dvd/bluray player? Do they upgrade as soon as a better version comes out? How many do that? I think that's more like where consoles fit.

I don't agree. Two completely different markets. Might as well say "how often do people change their phones". Just as inaccurate.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

How often do people replace their TVs?

TVs, probably five years average at a guess. There needs to be a better option.

And their dvd/bluray player?

DVD players are functionally identical on the whole, so there's no point upgrading. And that's the key point - people only upgrade to something better. So a digital radio can last for years, because 'better' isn't any better. A car can be upgraded more readily if it can be afforded, despite being functionally identical to the older model. How many people hold onto a car for 20 years?

How old is your PC? Your phone? Your tablet? Your digital camera? These are things that greatly improve over a few years and people update them when they are notably better. Consoles occupy the same fast-evolving tech curve, but have been held to longer update cycles than the market for high-tech goods tends to prefer.

 

[milk]

The genreal public buy a new computer/camera/ipad once the old one breaks, which is takea anywhere from 2-6 years. Aside from enthusiasts, most are pretty happy with something multiple generations behind the state of the art.

 

[London Geezer]

Also let's not forget that as technology advances, some products were never even 'upgraded'. Who 'upgraded' their DVD player unless it broke?? Some people got Bluray players, a few just had a console, the rest of the population just literally stopped buying discs.

With TVs, The People care a lot more about form factor than anything. So they will upgrade to a thin tv, a bigger one, whatever. These days all tv's are so similar that the differences in IQ are something that only IQ geeks like me care about.

Each product is different so it's really apples to oranges.

 

[Shortbread]

BioWare Founder on PS4/Xbox One Upgrades: It'd Be a "Gigantic Pain in the Ass"

"The whole purpose of consoles is the set of requirements that you work against from a hardware perspective," he said. "To change that is complete lunacy."

"I just think it's bad," he said. "I think, 'lock it' and let developers do their thing. But at the end of the day, if you can focus your development effort on one set of hardware requirements and target, you are going to get a better result. It's easier than having to split it, adding more people, having to port things across."

I'll like to hear more developers thoughts...

 

[Deleted member 11852]

BioWare Founder on PS4/Xbox One Upgrades: It'd Be a "Gigantic Pain in the Ass"

I'd like to hear what publishers think because that's really what matters. Devs will do their job on whatever hardware they are paid to and, except the super enthusiastic ones, I doubt you'll find many devs who will willingly want to optimise for two target specifications instead of one, any more than you chose to do twice as much laundry as you usually do.

 

[London Geezer]

BioWare Founder on PS4/Xbox One Upgrades: It'd Be a "Gigantic Pain in the Ass"





I'll like to hear more developers thoughts...

Omg LazyDevs alert!!!!!!!111!1

 

[Shifty Geezer]

BioWare Founder on PS4/Xbox One Upgrades: It'd Be a "Gigantic Pain in the Ass"
I'll like to hear more developers thoughts...

Except that's baloney because Bioware make cross-platform titles and need to target three different architectures along with the myriad of PC configurations. The real sentiment here is, "multiplatform development is a pain in the arse." And where a new console is another platform but running the same code as the other, it's the least hassley platform ever to include!