Why limit console functionality?

[Tsmit42]

It seems that alot of people think that console should only be used for playing games on your living room couch, but why limit a console to just do only that? I am not suggesting taking that option away, but expand it to do other things as well. The hardware to do it is there, the programming knowledge to create such an environment is there, so what is keeping it back? Lack of vision by hardware makers, lack of time of software developers, or just the lack of consumers pushing the hardware makers to provide such a solution?

Why not include a mouse/keyboard by default? Why not let the console hook up to a pc monitor without hassle? Many may say that it would be too much like a pc then? So what? Is having some of the advantages of a PC and the advantage of a console a bad thing? If you never want to use a keyboard/mouse then don't. If you don't want to use the console to browse the internet on your pc monitor then don't. If you don't want to use the console as a video editor then don't, no one is forcing you.

A console with PC functionally could provide a booming market for cheap computers for internet browsing and common computer task. People don't care if they use Microsoft Word, they just care if the file they save can be opened on any computer. People don't care if they use internet explorer, they just care that they can use webpages without hassle. While a console could not possibly handle every type of pc application, the ones they they could provide are the most common type. It would make a great, cheap computer for your mom or even grandmother, plus you can play your next gen games when you visit . It would also be a no brainer for computer upgrades, just buy one every five years.

 

[Teasy]

Because a lot of people don't want to have to pay for that kind of stuff and console makers don't want to lose even more money per system. Mouse and Keyboards cost money, as does video editing software, internet browsers and so on. A lot of people think a console should mostly be for games and anything above and beyond that should just be provided as an addon. I can understand that, if someone wants video editing let them pay for it, not me.

 

[Tsmit42]

Because a lot of people don't want to have to pay for that kind of stuff and console makers don't want to lose even more money per system. Mouse and Keyboards cost money, as does video editing software, internet browsers and so on. A lot of people think a console should mostly be for games and anything above and beyond that should just be provided as an addon. I can understand that, if someone wants video editing let them pay for it, not me.

No one is suggestion making the software free, where did you get that impression from? Only additional cost is the mouse/keyboard that would allow people to do tons of extra things with the console. RTS games, and other games that tend to be much more playable on a keyboard mouse combination, could be made for next-gen consoles without worrying about what type of control scheme they are going to use. Also, a keyboard/mouse probably don't cost much to produce, especially in mass quanities.

 

[Teasy]

Well I assumed you meant the kind of functionality that's actually included with the console, not addons, but ok.

Incidentally Nintendo's next console is confirmed to support PC monitors.

 

[Geeforcer]

Because every minute spent browsing the internet or typing up a document is a minute spent not playing games, which the last time I checked was how the companies make money.

It would make a great, cheap computer for your mom or even grandmother, plus you can play your next gen games when you visit.

That would be a nightmare for console manufactures. People buying (heavily subsidized) hardware and not spending money on games (main source of revenue in the current business model) is a sure-fire way to financial disaster.

 

[Tsmit42]

Well I assumed you meant the kind of functionality that's actually included with the console, not addons, but ok.

Incidentally Nintendo's next console is confirmed to support PC monitors.

Well the OS and keyboard/mouse would be there by default, but not much else. Things like video editing software, word processing, etc. would cost. Software sales would make up for the additional cost to the companies if they added this functionality but charged the same price, similar to how it works now.

I say add the OS and keyboard/mouse by default is that it would be easier for companies to make money in the long run. If they take a $10 hit per console, but that $10 would generate more money because selling software makes loads of money.

 

[Tsmit42]

Because every minute spent browsing the internet or typing up a document is a minute spent not playing games, which the last time I checked was how the companies make money.

It would make a great, cheap computer for your mom or even grandmother, plus you can play your next gen games when you visit.

That would be a nightmare for console manufactures. People buying (heavily subsidized) hardware and not spending money on games (main source of revenue in the current business model) is a sure-fire way to financial disaster.

Like I said in the above post, people that would not use it to play games mostly would still spend money on software, so the company would still make money. It would also be a plus to people that plays games, because it would be that much more functional.

Plus they could justify selling the console for a higher price for longer, even when the console cost less to produce.

 

[Geeforcer]

Because every minute spent browsing the internet or typing up a document is a minute spent not playing games, which the last time I checked was how the companies make money.

It would make a great, cheap computer for your mom or even grandmother, plus you can play your next gen games when you visit.

That would be a nightmare for console manufactures. People buying (heavily subsidized) hardware and not spending money on games (main source of revenue in the current business model) is a sure-fire way to financial disaster.

Like I said in the above post, people that would not use it to play games mostly would still spend money on software, so the company would still make money. It would also be a plus to people that plays games, because it would be that much more functional.

Plus they could justify selling the console for a higher price for longer, even when the console cost less to produce.

How much money is someone's grandma going to spend on software for her Xbox360/PS3? I doubt very much it would be enough to cover 100-500 dollars hardware subsidy, yet alone make profit for the manufacturer.

Edit: You can already get a brand name PC with monitor for $299, with far more non-gaming functionality.

 

[Tsmit42]

Think about the households with teenage kids. It would be easy to convince their parents to buy a $300 computer than a $300 toy. In that case, the company would make money off of games and software so that is a ++. This would make consoles fly off the shelves and have a large install base quickly with one of the main demographics.

Also, consoles will not always sell at a lost. At that point the more consoles you sell is a plus no matter how you look at it. This could work very well, because about the time when word of mouth gets around about how great the console is as a personal computer, console production cost would have dropped.

 

[Tsmit42]

How much money is someone's grandma going to spend on software for her Xbox360/PS3? I doubt very much it would be enough to cover 100-500 dollars hardware subsidy, yet alone make profit for the manufacturer.

Edit: You can already get a brand name PC with monitor for $299, with far more non-gaming functionality.

About the same as the people that only buys consoles for madden or zelda, or the people that bought the ps2 as a dvd player. The console manufacturers knows that is will be the case, but that is why console production cost drops over time, most likely inversely proportional to the amount of units sold.

 

[Geeforcer]

Let's look at this way.

A low-end but functional PC costs $299. A console by itself cost $299. You'd need to add a mass storage device, a keyboard, mouse and a software package to that. That would push the costs to the user beyond $500. From consumer standpoint, it would not be particular good deal. From company’s standpoint, it wouldn't be a great deal either - they still would not cover the costs of the system AND as mentioned already, would cut into their bread-and-butter: game sales.

Second, what exactly is the target demographic: Mom/Grandmother or household with teenagers? I am going to venture a guess that most household with teenagers already have a PC (as do most households in America), and thus will not be in the marker for PC functionally from their console. The "grandmother" market on the other hand would a financial black hole - they are simply not going to by enough software the offset system costs. BTW, word processing and web browsing on normal NTCS 480i TV looks horrid.

In conclusion, the PCs are just too cheap and consoles market is just too cost-oriented for this functionality to ever gain generate a return on investment.

 

[Sandwich]

USB!! A console can easily have 2 simple USB ports and support keyboard and mouse (not included). Cost shouldn't be the problem.
It's true Sony and nintendo make money on games not the hardware, but suppose you had games for your console that also work with keyboard+mouse?
You could have a relatively cheap PS3 instead of a $2000 PC gaming rig and connect to your VGA. That would interest the FPS and RTS crowd into buying a console.

 

[Tsmit42]

Let's look at this way.

A low-end but functional PC costs $299. A console by itself cost $299. You'd need to add a mass storage device, a keyboard, mouse and a software package to that. That would push the costs to the user beyond $500. From consumer standpoint, it would not be particular good deal. From company’s standpoint, it wouldn't be a great deal either - they still would not cover the costs of the system AND as mentioned already, would cut into their bread-and-butter: game sales.

I'm guessing that all consoles will have a HDD, XBox360 does for sure, so no extra cost. Mouse and Keyboard cost less than $5-10 to make in mass quanities probably. So this leaves you with software cost? $490 in software cost? We are not living in MS world here geeforcers. They already have to design a OS to run the next-gen consoles, so adding extra functionality shouldn't be that much more expensive, given that you can get free OSes.

Second, what exactly is the target demographic: Mom/Grandmother or household with teenagers? I am going to venture a guess that most household with teenagers already have a PC (as do most households in America), and thus will not be in the marker for PC functionally from their console. The "grandmother" market on the other hand would a financial black hole - they are simply not going to by enough software the offset system costs. BTW, word processing and web browsing on normal NTCS 480i TV looks horrid.

The demographic is everyone. A household with teenages would gain another computer along with a console, I don't see how this is a disadvantage??? As in my other post, consoles will not always lose money. This is where selling as many consoles as possible is a good thing no matter what, even to "grandmothers." And why would someone have it hooked up to a tv when they are using it as a pc???

In conclusion, the PCs are just too cheap and consoles market is just too cost-oriented for this functionality to ever gain generate a return on investment.

Again, console hardware will not always lose money. Also, why would you want a cheap pc, when you could get an awesome specced computer, that can game like a $2000 pc.[/b]

 

[Geeforcer]

I'm guessing that all consoles will have a HDD, XBox360 does for sure, so no extra cost. Mouse and Keyboard cost less than $5-10 to make in mass quanities probably. So this leaves you with software cost? $490 in software cost? We are not living in MS world here geeforcers. They already have to design a OS to run the next-gen consoles, so adding extra functionality shouldn't be that much more expensive, given that you can get free OSes.

I don't know whether or not next consoles will have HDD – the early indications in Xbox360 case seem to be that HDD will come at extra cost. The $500 dollars I suggests was the total cost of the system - $300 + HDD + Keyboard/Mouse + Software.

The demographic is everyone. A household with teenages would gain another computer along with a console, I don't see how this is a disadvantage??? As in my other post, consoles will not always lose money. This is where selling as many consoles as possible is a good thing no matter what, even to "grandmothers." And why would someone have it hooked up to a tv when they are using it as a pc???

1) Its not necessarily a disadvantage, but it is not necessarily and advantage if in entails additional costs.
2) Most modern consoles do lose money on hardware during a significant part of their lifecycle - look how long it took Xbox to break even.
3) Wait a minute, why wouldn't the consoles be hooked to the TV? That's the display devise for the vast majority of the consoles right now - what else would it be connected to? A PC monitor? Then you have to add monitor cost to the total costs of this PC-lite system.

Again, console hardware will not always lose money. Also, why would you want a cheap pc, when you could get an awesome specced computer, that can game like a $2000 pc.[/b]

I think that once you start transitioning consoles from dedicated gaming machines into jack-of-all-traded PCs, you will end up losing some of the platforms inherent advantages. Furthermore, hasn't Sony tried this approach already with Linux kits for PS2?

 

[jvd]

It seems that alot of people think that console should only be used for playing games on your living room couch, but why limit a console to just do only that? I am not suggesting taking that option away, but expand it to do other things as well

For me a console is a gaming system and first and formost it should have the best hardware it can possibly have for games . Now if something adds to the game play like say internet acess that is great as it makes the game's replay value greater .

Things like dvd playback are fine , why not but not if it adds more to the cost of system.

The reason for this is most of the other dedicated players for mp3s , dvds , music or whatever do it better with more features and most of the time cheaper .

Look at the psp . It can play umd movies . But a 5 inch dvd player can do that and do it cheaper as dvd works on my tvs and the portable. Psp needs a special format .

Look at the psp with music . It can play music which is great but for music its very expensive . Psp + 1 gig memory stick is 350-375ish i would say where as a 1 gig shuffle is 150$ . A 60 gig ipod is 450$ a psp would be 250$ and then what 6000 more for the same storage space ?


Ps2 and dvd players . At the time for 200$ you could get a very good player and for 300$ you could get an awsome proscan player . So at launch the ps2 was a good deal. But a year later the ps2 was 300$ and the proscan players were down to 150ish .


With xbox it was worse as you had to buy a remote to use the function .


So while there is nothing wrong with adding new things . Its best if they add to the gaming factor . If they detract from it then it shouldn't be there at all .


That is my feeling

I'm guessing that all consoles will have a HDD, XBox360 does for sure, so no extra cost

So ps3 bluray , cell , nvidia gpu , hdd ..... sony will take horrible losses on that

We are not living in MS world here geeforcers. They already have to design a OS to run the next-gen consoles, so adding extra functionality shouldn't be that much more expensive, given that you can get free OSes.

They need to develop a webbrowser that will run on the console and run all webpages properly . That means having the othercompanys that have made add on programs make plug ins that support the new browser .

Then you would need ms word to write reports that would be compataible to other pcs as most pcs have word .

The console is also frozen in time and will never get better or worse and in 5 years you will make a whole new console which means all new browsers , os and other crap

 

[DigitalSoul]

Furthermore, hasn't Sony tried this approach already with Linux kits for PS2?

The purpose of Linux kit was to provide hobbyist at tool to try their hands at software development for the PS2 or something along those lines. Sony did something smiliar with the original Playstation......plus it was something you had to get through Sony themselves.

 

[Tsmit42]

I'm guessing that all consoles will have a HDD, XBox360 does for sure, so no extra cost. Mouse and Keyboard cost less than $5-10 to make in mass quanities probably. So this leaves you with software cost? $490 in software cost? We are not living in MS world here geeforcers. They already have to design a OS to run the next-gen consoles, so adding extra functionality shouldn't be that much more expensive, given that you can get free OSes.

I don't know whether or not next consoles will have HDD – the early indications in Xbox360 case seem to be that HDD will come at extra cost. The $500 dollars I suggests was the total cost of the system - $300 + HDD + Keyboard/Mouse + Software.

I was under the impression that the XBox HDD came as standard, but you could upgrade to high densities. So that still leaves us with only the additional Mouse/Keyboard price, which only comes up to $10 additionaly cost.

The demographic is everyone. A household with teenages would gain another computer along with a console, I don't see how this is a disadvantage??? As in my other post, consoles will not always lose money. This is where selling as many consoles as possible is a good thing no matter what, even to "grandmothers." And why would someone have it hooked up to a tv when they are using it as a pc???

1) Its not necessarily a disadvantage, but it is not necessarily and advantage if in entails additional costs.
2) Most modern consoles do lose money on hardware during a significant part of their lifecycle - look how long it took Xbox to break even.
3) Wait a minute, why wouldn't the consoles be hooked to the TV? That's the display devise for the vast majority of the consoles right now - what else would it be connected to? A PC monitor? Then you have to add monitor cost to the total costs of this PC-lite system.

1) As state above the additional cost could be very low.
2) Look how long it took gamecube to break even. You can also sell the console at the $300 launch price for a longer time because of the precieved value.
3) Because if they are using it as a PC, then they would want to use it on a pc monitor??? And you act like there are not alot of people that already have a pc monitor.

Again, console hardware will not always lose money. Also, why would you want a cheap pc, when you could get an awesome specced computer, that can game like a $2000 pc.[/b]

I think that once you start transitioning consoles from dedicated gaming machines into jack-of-all-traded PCs, you will end up losing some of the platforms inherent advantages. Furthermore, hasn't Sony tried this approach already with Linux kits for PS2?

How would it lose advanateges? As long as the main hardware doesn't change, the game developers can program for a fixed hardware set. As long as it still allows you to hook the console up to a big screen tv and play it with a controller, i don't see the big deal.

Yes Sony tried it with the lunix kits for Ps2, but they were not included with the base package.

 

[Tsmit42]

They need to develop a webbrowser that will run on the console and run all webpages properly . That means having the othercompanys that have made add on programs make plug ins that support the new browser .

What???

Then you would need ms word to write reports that would be compataible to other pcs as most pcs have word .

No you would need a word processor that can save and read .doc files, not MS word.

The console is also frozen in time and will never get better or worse and in 5 years you will make a whole new console which means all new browsers , os and other crap

And MS never make new operating systems, and Linux is still stuck at version 1.0 right?

 

[Geeforcer]

3) Because if they are using it as a PC, then they would want to use it on a pc monitor??? And you act like there are not alot of people that already have a pc monitor.

Most people who have PC monitors also have a fully functional PC. Why would limited PC functionality be appealing to them?

 

[Tsmit42]

3) Because if they are using it as a PC, then they would want to use it on a pc monitor??? And you act like there are not alot of people that already have a pc monitor.

Most people who have PC monitors also have a fully functional PC. Why would limited PC functionality be appealing to them?

But what could that limited functionality be? I suppose you could do pretty much every task with a next-gen console that a average computer does, especially the most common task. Things like running servers, etc. may not be possible on them, but how many people use their pc for that? If you can write software for it, then you probably could run it on next-gen systems. The software would probably runs alot faster than your average pc, giving the specs of next gen consoles and the fixed hardware. In 4-5 years when computer really start outclassing the consoles, bam, release a new one.