US$199 quad core tablet - is it the end for handheld consoles?

[Shifty Geezer]

One issue DigitalFoundry raised is that tablets suffer terribly when they output over HDMI, as much as halving framerates. I've found quite a few titles on Android that support controllers, but with gimped TV out, they are limited. I must get around to actually trying my ASUS as a mini console.

 

[tunafish]

This has always been the case though. PC games target a much larger number of PCs than those which have 1 year old high-end GPUs and have done so for a long time already. Of course, I agree that there is a chance this will get even worse in the future.

I think it's going to go the other way. Recently, Intel has seriously been upping the lowest end GPU standard in their system. Granted, Intel GPUs are still lame ducks, but they are a lot better than they used to be. It's probably wise to expect them to keep improving.

The lowest of the low end on pc is basically the worst GPU Intel has sold in the past 5 years. I can't wait for that to become HD 2000.

 

[tuna]

A console at this point represents extra expensive in every way shape and form as I will already have a pc/laptop/tablet regardless of games. If they want to justify a Xbox 720 purchase then it will need to share apps just like all my other Windows 8 based devices do. If not, then I'll have plenty of entertainment on my other said devices so no loss. I really hope Microsoft is smart enough to bring their next console properly into their own ecosystem.

High latency and low input type of games (think Civ, Tetris or Plants vs Zombies) will play nice in your desired setup. More complex or faster games will not. However, if you will get enough enjoyment of those games, good for you! I usually prefer games that "feel" better.

 

[joker454]

High latency and low input type of games (think Civ, Tetris or Plants vs Zombies) will play nice in your desired setup. More complex or faster games will not. However, if you will get enough enjoyment of those games, good for you! I usually prefer games that "feel" better.

Not sure what you mean, I play all my games this way mostly using a 360 controller, works great be they simple games or hardcore games played on high end pc or the same games played on an ultrabook, I have zero issue. Feel free to check my list of games I've played on Steam and the 360, it numbers in the hundreds and were mostly played with a 360 controller from the simplest of games like Dear Esther to the most hardcore of which I've completed plenty. For point and click adventures the mouse works great as would touch, again all playable on pc, ultrabook and tablet.

At the end of the day my main point is it's not the 80's anymore. Yeah way back a house had perhaps the 1 tv, or the 1 computer, or the 1 major electronic devices. That era is long gone, it's not unusual now for daughter Suzy herself to own a phone, computer and tablet, as does son Johnny all living in a house with 3 tv's and multiple other devices which the parents happen to use as well. The notion of locking an app to one device is dated, an archaic model that has to go.

 

[tuna]

Not sure what you mean, I play all my games this way mostly using a 360 controller, works great be they simple games or hardcore games played on high end pc or the same games played on an ultrabook, I have zero issue. Feel free to check my list of games I've played on Steam and the 360, it numbers in the hundreds and were mostly played with a 360 controller from the simplest of games like Dear Esther to the most hardcore of which I've completed plenty. For point and click adventures the mouse works great as would touch, again all playable on pc, ultrabook and tablet.

So, you want a PC with a XB360 game pad to play most types of games?

 

[tuna]

At the end of the day my main point is it's not the 80's anymore. Yeah way back a house had perhaps the 1 tv, or the 1 computer, or the 1 major electronic devices. That era is long gone, it's not unusual now for daughter Suzy herself to own a phone, computer and tablet, as does son Johnny all living in a house with 3 tv's and multiple other devices which the parents happen to use as well. The notion of locking an app to one device is dated, an archaic model that has to go.

If the device+game is fun enough, I do not seem why that model has to go.

 

[liolio]

They may end up helping Android if Playstation Mobile becomes a success, but we'll see.

My opinion is that they should have leveraged this already to set a standard in the Android realm.
It's more about Android helping them but they seem scared to enter the big pond that the Android market is.
I read some terrible analysis about how the Xperia play didn't do that well, etc.
They were all completely off, real gamers knew that Sony was not to support the platform in any way. Real gamers knows that hardware was underwhelming.

Such rapid development of the platform is a mixed blessing. It will simply mean there are a lot of devices out there that are not up to par. Perhaps the replacement ratio of portable devices is currently still high, which helped PC a lot back in the day, but this will slow down. I already know a lot of people who bought an iPad 1, who are unlikely to buy a new tablet anywhere in the new future. I think it is not that far fetched to assume a 5 year replacement rate for tablets for the mainstream.

Well there is no real strong intensive to update now, and Apple product are expansive. Imo it's not the same to replace a 500$ device and 200$ one like the fire/nexus. 200$ is in range of a Christmas/birthday present, for a lot of people 500$ is not.
People speaked about it for a while now, computing devices are becoming commodities, etc. but we were there. We should be there soon that makes a lot of difference.
Tablets to me are indeed set to replace in consumers hands: netbook, notebook, laptop. Windows coming to the tablet realm should only accelerate the trend. It's a big market, really big.

The apps stores model is coming to windows it 's going to make a difference too. Touch controls are nice as they allow people to play "off the shelves" and processing power is going to get there.
With wide IO, memory stacking, and 22nm lithography, the chip maker should provide a quad core a potent gpu for anyone within a few watts.
Actually if I go by Aaron Pink opinion you may want 2 big cores +4 more throughput oriented ones then the GPU, but it's going to be doable within a reasonable budget (silicon and power).

The whole thing is that to me is that through tablets many different experiences are to become one:
It's a laptop, a tablet a potent gaming device, it's cheap, there is a whole environment of devices using the same OS and applications.

With fragmented OSs, hardware, resolutions (including tablet display vs tv support) and input options, the iOS/Android/Win8 platforms are not quite ready yet to be a better proposition than consoles for all purposes. They fill the gap between PC, console, and portable gaming device, and while they no doubt have overlap with all of them to some extent, there is plenty of room for more devices, and services like GaiKai/OnLive won't go away either.

the point is that tablets are "all purpose" which consoles are not.
I expect them to succeed for the same reason laptop took over desktop in the personal computing realm.
You are trying again to defend the point neither me or the Yerli ever made. It's not about killing console it's about being the first device players reach. The single most used computing devices are laptop (well there are smart phone but they are not that all purpose, the screen size alone set to many restriction imo)., they were never a proper target for gaming that's going to change. It has huge implications on the gaming market.
Wrt to Gakkai and Onlive they are imo competing against consoles as we know them.
For the handled the pictures ain't pretty for Nintendo or Sony. The former made loss to only make most of its sales in Japan, the second is contemplating the option of bleeding it-self. Though I do agree that both could have done a better and there is still a niche to tap. Though you have to find the sweet spot and competing on hardware is a lost cause, there is so much more money poured into the mobile realm. Going with off the shelves part is one best bet and high end hardware is not an option imho as the perceived value is not there for most users to spend as much as they would on an "all purpose" solution.
Wrt to Sony imho for the PSV they should have come with a core 3DS such as I describe it (/ leverage the playstation brand in a all out effort in the Android world would have been more beneficial in long term for the company if successful). For the PS4 they should aim for something cheap to produce and good enough.
They are never going to be on parity with Msft if Msft bring some form of win8 on Xbox. If Win8 has any success we are speaking in a few years of hundred thousands apps, an whole environment of products (phones, tablets, laptop, desktop, etc.). The perceived difference in what the systems offer is going to be massive.

I predict that the market quite simply will keep growing as a whole as these types of electronic devices become ever more popular in our livingrooms. The big question for all players will be how to take and keep a meaningful, and above all, profitable share from that market.

Well I disagree tablet are imo set to replace laptop in most of their forms and the latter have already replace desktop for the majority of users. we are a a special moment in technology where a lot of stuffs are going to come together to make "all purpose device" good enough at "all purpose" whic hwas never really the case. Definitely consoles and desktop are not going to get extincted, but that not the point anyway.
Things is in new world of computing devices there are only ultimately three devices that makes sense (personal realm not work): the phone, the tablet and the computing device hooked to the tv.
Os are to invade the computing device below our tv.
I predict that next generation is the last one for any actors without a proper OS and there aren't that many.
I didn't answer the pool about which system is gonna sale more, we know to few about up coming systems, though sadly I would bet that Sony is going to make the wrong bet and quiet some people are going to have a bitter taste in the mouth when it all said and done.
If they don't choose wisely imho they are going to get pushed out of the living room by win8, iOS and Android device forever. Looking at the psv it looks almost too late for them to aim at a leading position in the Android realm. Anyway that off topic.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If the device+game is fun enough, I do not seem why that model has to go.

Economics. A business limited to a subset of hardware devices, 70-100 million consoles as opposed to a billion+ smart devices, isn't going to maximise opportunities for software developers. Consoles exist because the economies of games required them. The hardware needed to drive the best games, with those expensive, dedicated custom chips and highly optimised hardware configurations, which meant you needed a separate box in addition to your PC. Likewise if you wanted to game on the go, you had to buy a dedicated gaming device, whether that was a Game&Watch or a Gameboy or a DS. Technology has caught up to provide a reasonable game experience on many devices, so the requirement for dedicated hardware no longer exists. It instead becomes an option with pros and cons.

If we consider game content as no different to other media, then it's pretty obvious. You don't buy a specific music player as you once did, instead buying a music track and playing it on your PC and phone. You don't need to buy a hardware film player any more, instead having the option to watch a film on any of your devices. The devices no longer serve specific roles because they are capable of serving all roles - it's just a matter of software once the hardware becomes powerful enough.

Now films are a good example of the sort of service we expect. I went round a friend's tonight to watch a movie we knew was on PSN. I went to rent it as I had credit on my account, but the stupid service wouldn't let me as it limits me to one registered PS3 per PSN account for movies. It's ludicrous to lock someone out of their paid-for content on another device. When you have a video, you want to be able to play it on your PC and tablet and phone. In this case the device was even the same platform, underlining the frustration, but as games become commoditised content, the device barrier will become less acceptible. HTML5 games will run on all sorts of devices. OnLive will also. Android and iOS content is also device independent, and with things like Android on PC and TVs, people will get used to buying a game and having it available across their devices. This comes both from how things are developing and a history of how other media has developed. This is why MS are developing a hardware independent platform that's cross-device compatible, and why Sony are developing a device independent software platform.

Trying to justify an exclusive box for one type of media seems nigh impossible to me. The dedicated record player, tape player, minidisc and CD player has died. The dedicated VCR and DVD player is on its way out. The dedicated paper book is facing stiff competition with books that can be read and shared on Kindle, iPad, PC and phone. What is the reason for thinking that games will be immune to this transformation? The advantages of console hardware are diminshing, while the economics of a far larger market are unavoidable.

It's a matter of time. The threshold for people wil be different, where some want the very best games and wil buy dedicated hardware with specialist software support, while other will be happy to have a less formidable game experience on more convenient devices (and in the case of PC gaming, will have the best of all worlds). But as time marches on, the number of people wanting the dedicated game experience will lose out to those gaming generally, until the market dwindles to being unsustainable.

 

[Bigduo209]

Well it's the gold rush concept that so many businesses compete on. A new market comes along and everyone tries to be the first to standout for money. The problem is that only a few handful will succeed and thrive in that market. Everybody wants to make it big and gain the lion's share, it becomes so overcrowded that they ignore the existing market that has an audience waiting to part with their money. Even in that new market they have to find or create a niche to remain relevant.

Consoles and handhelds still have a market to cater to, it's just not as easy to make large amounts of money on. Mobile platforms are large and steady growing, but into what? Who/what has the most control over this space, and how will it evolve or change as time goes on?

Even then that's still assuming that consoles and dedicated gaming devices won't incorporate elements of the mobile space in the long run. They will provide different mobile apps and other multimedia content, but will be considered dedicated gaming platforms by focusing mostly on gaming-oriented content. In any market a business has to standout and maintain an identity for itself in order to remain competitive, no matter what there will always be an audience with differentiating interests and needs.

 

[tuna]

Economics. A business limited to a subset of hardware devices, 70-100 million consoles as opposed to a billion+ smart devices, isn't going to maximise opportunities for software developers. Consoles exist because the economies of games required them. The hardware needed to drive the best games, with those expensive, dedicated custom chips and highly optimised hardware configurations, which meant you needed a separate box in addition to your PC. Likewise if you wanted to game on the go, you had to buy a dedicated gaming device, whether that was a Game&Watch or a Gameboy or a DS. Technology has caught up to provide a reasonable game experience on many devices, so the requirement for dedicated hardware no longer exists. It instead becomes an option with pros and cons.

If this was the case, why has not the PC killed consoles until now?

Also, I think the quality of gaming depends on 4 devices, input, processing, network and output. Different games have different needs for all of these. Films only have need for one.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If this was the case, why has not the PC killed consoles until now?

Because they couldn't compete on quality of experience (PCs are a lot of faf versus the disc-in-and-play of consoles) or price/performance or library. That's now changing, although PC isn't quite there yet. It's only helped by the console experience deteriorating to be more PC like - buying bugged games, downloading patches, freezing consoles, etc.

Also, I think the quality of gaming depends on 4 devices, input, processing, network and output. Different games have different needs for all of these. Films only have need for one.

I can go with that, but all smart devices connect with all those things. There's certainly nothing a console has in those four categories that other devices can't do, particularly a small form-factor PC under the TV. We have some innovative input like Wii and Kinect that keeps consoles relevant within a niche, but eventually features that have proven their worth to gamers will be assimilated into the general design of other devices. eg. Controller support has been added to tablets, and we have motion tracking appearing in TVs.

 

[liolio]

Not too mention that most PC that were sold to costumers weren't up to task of running game.
Intel raising the bar on the igp/entry level is more than welcome, they are still not "there" though.

 

[tuna]

Because they couldn't compete on quality of experience (PCs are a lot of faf versus the disc-in-and-play of consoles) or price/performance or library. That's now changing, although PC isn't quite there yet. It's only helped by the console experience deteriorating to be more PC like - buying bugged games, downloading patches, freezing consoles, etc.

I can go with that, but all smart devices connect with all those things. There's certainly nothing a console has in those four categories that other devices can't do, particularly a small form-factor PC under the TV. We have some innovative input like Wii and Kinect that keeps consoles relevant within a niche, but eventually features that have proven their worth to gamers will be assimilated into the general design of other devices. eg. Controller support has been added to tablets, and we have motion tracking appearing in TVs.

If you depend on (XB360) controller support you will not get that 1 billion market you mentioned developers could target.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If you depend on (XB360) controller support you will not get that 1 billion market you mentioned developers could target.

Things will evolve. And adaptable software means adjusting to control options, which is already a part of Android and PC development.

 

[tuna]

Things will evolve. And adaptable software means adjusting to control options, which is already a part of Android and PC development.

You have to design your game for your controller if you want it to play well (excluding those exceptions I listed above). In your evolved future a lot of genres of games will become extinct.

 

[scooby_dooby]

All those devices I mentioned support the wireless 360 controller out of the box, and I have four 360 controllers lying around. Mouse control is replaced with touch. So control is a non issue on all of those devices, it's a "problem" that's already long since been solved.

Contrast that to the console experience. I'm playing Pinball Arcade lately on the 360. I'm going on a trip next week it would be cool to play it while travelling. Can I? Nope, my purchase is locked to the 360 connected to the tv. Ok well it's a nice day outside today, I'd like to lounge on my hammock and play some pinball outside. Can I? Nope, my purchase is locked to the 360 connected to the tv. Ok well I'm using my laptop while sitting on the couch and my wife is watching tv, hmm I feel like playing that pinball game I paid for on my laptop. Can I? Nope, my purchase is locked to the 360 connected to the tv. Ok, well I'm in my office right now typing this post and I wouldn't mind playing some Pinball on my pc after I'm done with this post. Can I? Nope, my purchase is locked to the 360 connected to the tv.

Whats your proposed alternative then? The closed ecosystems of Google, Apple and RIM don't support this, I can see Windows 8 + Steam could being a pretty compelling solution... but in terms of playing iOS or Android apps on your PC, and vice versa, that's happening any time soon.

Longterm you're right I think, but it's gonna be a very long road to get there. There's just no money in it for anyone, everyone makes more money selling multiple copies on multiple devices, and the benefit of ecosystem lockin is something Apple will protected tooth and nail.

It's the same issue we have for all DRM'd digital content, we're buying it locked into these proprietary ecosystems, when what we should be buying is the rights to that content, period. Definately more of a grey area with games though, as games can require significant costs to port to different for factors, so why should a consumer get it for free?

The other interesting angle is price points. With apps at <$5, I actualy don't mind buying tings twice. I'll buy FieldRunners for $3 on both my Android and iOS devices, thats completely fair in my mind. Though the fact I can't share saves should be solved...

Buying a $60 game on the other hand that runs only on a single device, is a MUCH harder sell. There's a massive disparity between Cost:Quality ratio on Mobile vs Console, and Consoles are going to feel the burn sooner than later. I'm certainly NOT getting 20x the value of World of Goo or Field Runners when I buy a Console game. In many cases, I'd take the mobile game even if costs were equal.

 

[joker454]

You have to design your game for your controller if you want it to play well (excluding those exceptions I listed above). In your evolved future a lot of genres of games will become extinct.

99% of console games are built to work with a typical everyday controller, hence why it's cake to make them all functionally work on a pc, laptop and tablet because you don't have to do anything at all, just use the same old controller which works on all those platforms. Aside from Kinect, the console is not providing a 'new" ui experience that isn't avaialble on the other platforms already because console games by and large are designed around the controller.

Whats your proposed alternative then? The closed ecosystems of Google, Apple and RIM don't support this, I can see Windows 8 + Steam could being a pretty compelling solution... but in terms of playing iOS or Android apps on your PC, and vice versa, that's happening any time soon.

Oh I'm definitely not suggestion we'll see cross compatibility between ecosystems, as in I don't expect iOS or Android apps to work on non iOS or Android os's, that won't happen. But Microsoft will have all the pieces in place to have this be feasible in another two months or so to where their x86 pc/laptop/tablets are all in sync to where all apps work on all those devices, and regarding phone I figure all Windows RT apps will work on phone as well. They are basically far ahead of everyone else, although it will probably take a year or two for the reprecussions to hit. To me what this also means is that the next Xbox could launch on day one with a large library of games if they decide to include it in the x86 ecosystem, which would also give it a huge advantage. Given that middleware rules the day and engines like Cryengine, Frostbite and Unreal are the top of the heap and all built on x86 platform, this could give the next Xbox a massive advantage over their competitors and save publishers a fortune in cost and risk. If they don't do that and the next Xbox is an isolated island then publishers will be faced with the usual console model of risk tons of money on a tiny audience and hope they don't go broke in the process.

Apple I believe will get there with their own ecosystem, they are just going at a slower pace partly because they can since their phone/tablet space is already totally unified and that market is monstrous anyways. But I'm confident at some point all iOS apps will be executable on OSx.

No clue about google, they are always a bit of a mystery to me, they seem to be all over the place with no real plan.

Longterm you're right I think, but it's gonna be a very long road to get there. There's just no money in it for anyone, everyone makes more money selling multiple copies on multiple devices, and the benefit of ecosystem lockin is something Apple will protected tooth and nail.

I actually think it's the exact opposite with respect to consoles. It's a huge financial risk to support them especially at launch, many a company has been taken out by the poor financials of dealing with consoles. On the other hand if you could launch your game and have it work on Win8 based pc, laptop, tablet and console on day one they you run a much better chance of not going broke. Middleware like Unreal, Cryengine, Frostbite, etc provide the best visuals today and all work on x86 means it's actually relatively easy to get your game working on all said platforms on day one, just tweak the settings on each.I'm speaking more generally here, yeah the COD type games can try to milk every last dollar they can since they have the clout (for now) to do so. But for most game makers like Capcom, etc, they would be much better off knowing they can make one version of the game and have it work on pc/laptop/tablet from the getgo.

The other interesting angle is price points. With apps at <$5, I actualy don't mind buying tings twice. I'll buy FieldRunners for $3 on both my Android and iOS devices, thats completely fair in my mind. Though the fact I can't share saves should be solved...

Yeah that's true, if they release Pinball Arcade on the Windows store then I'll probably rebuy it and abandon the 360 version, since I want to be ablet to play that game indoors, outdoors and on the go rather than the 360 version which chains me to one tv. It's cheap enough to do that although I still hate having to do that and would only do it for select games, and certainly not for $60 as you said. But there's another advantage that you bring up, save games. By having your game work on Win8 based pc, laptop, and tablet means it should be possible to use cloud saves so you could start playing on pc and continue on tablet if you want since it's all tied to your XBLive account anyways which will soon be available on all thsoe devices. I think cloud saves, one app working everywhere, same friends lists, standard 360 controllr support, standard interface, etc, all unified across all their platforms will be too compelling to pass up.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

You have to design your game for your controller if you want it to play well (excluding those exceptions I listed above). In your evolved future a lot of genres of games will become extinct.

Maybe. Plenty of genres have already become pretty much extinct, although indie games have seen some revival. It doesn't matter as long as people have games they want to play. But I don't expect that anyway. I expect tablet games either to have simplified versions of the same game (eg. Fifa will play differently on a tablet interface compared to a controller interface, just as PCs provide both controller and KB+M interfaces for the same games), or you'll just use your Google/Apple/MS controller.

Worst case scenario, you buy a core game that won't be much fun on your tablet or phone. You'll still be able to play that game on whatever PCs you have to hand, and you'll have a large portion of your library that will play on your console and other devices, and that's preferable to a platform where those games you would like to play on your other devices can't be played. eg. Age of Booty is getting an Android release. I have to buy it twice to play the PSN game in mobile form. The ecosystem that allows the same game to play across all my devices will have a significant value advantage.

 

[scooby_dooby]

99% of console games are built to work with a typical everyday controller, hence why it's cake to make them all functionally work on a pc, laptop and tablet because you don't have to do anything at all, just use the same old controller which works on all those platforms. Aside from Kinect, the console is not providing a 'new" ui experience that isn't avaialble on the other platforms already because console games by and large are designed around the controller.




Oh I'm definitely not suggestion we'll see cross compatibility between ecosystems, as in I don't expect iOS or Android apps to work on non iOS or Android os's, that won't happen. But Microsoft will have all the pieces in place to have this be feasible in another two months or so to where their x86 pc/laptop/tablets are all in sync to where all apps work on all those devices, and regarding phone I figure all Windows RT apps will work on phone as well. They are basically far ahead of everyone else

Right, Windows is the only player right now that looks like they could potentially do this, and Metro does already have built in API's to push and pull app data from cloud storage.

The question is really how the success of the Windows Mobile platform will be. Is there even room for them anymore? With the demise of RIM, the answer is probably yes, but it will be fun to watch... will the Developers port the best mobile games? Or will Android and iOS App Store selction continue to reign supreme as they do now.

I actually think it's the exact opposite with respect to consoles. It's a huge financial risk to support them especially at launch, many a company has been taken out by the poor financials of dealing with consoles. On the other hand if you could launch your game and have it work on Win8 based pc, laptop, tablet and console on day one they you run a much better chance of not going broke.

Oh totally, I run my company and all my apps exactly this way! I mean in terms of consumer sales not development, selling a different version on iOS/PC/Android/iOS is far more profitable than selling 1 version that works across all devices, for both me the developer, and the platform vendors as well. So that'll be a slow moving wheel

 

[tuna]

Regarding the future Windows store, is that not only for Metro apps? You will not be able to run middleware like Cryengine on that I think.....