Why I want the xbox to dominate other consoles.

Discussion in 'Gaming' started by David Proud, Dec 14, 2001.

Tags:
  1. David Proud

    David Proud Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    now when you read this, don't see this as a flame or as something to stir up trouble. I respect the many ps2 owners and the many gamecube owners out there and wouldn't wanna hurt anyones feelings.
    It's nice and all to say I hope all consoles survive so we have great games on all consoles. I have several problems with this analogy.
    #1 if all consoles survived you would have to spend 1000$ to get all three consoles just to play different platform games.
    #2 If the future I feel alot of the time The xbox's full power and potential is not gonna be used when companies create a game made to work on the least powerfull platform and port it over to all consoles. example EASPORTS ports over a game made for PS2 or multi platforms, IE PS2/XBOX/GC. Or Sega sports, etc..
    If we only had one powerfull console on the market the game could be created with the full power of the console and not held back to work with a lesser power console. Thats one of the reasons some PC games are held back. To make them work on as many graphic cards as possible, its about sales.
    If we are to have multi platform consoles which I am all for competition they should meet specific hardware guidelines. Kinda like the PC with standards like PC97,PC2000, PC98 compliances, etc.
    Or even something as simple to understand as HDTV resolution standards. The signal is standard so it works on multiple brands of HDTVs and set top boxes.
    All standardized hardware requirements utilizing DIRECTX So the game you buy will work on your Sony console, your Panasonic Console, your Microsoft console, etc.
    This way the consumer doesn't have to buy three different platforms to play all the games they want. WE have PC97 compliances, PC98, PC2000 compliances.
    Why not have a CONSOLE 2004 Version1 compliance, CONSOLE 2004 Version2 compliance,console 2005 v1 compliance, etc?
    The only problem I could see is we would be faced with the same issues games on the PC are faced with. The game must work on as many graphic cards as possible so they hold back a bunch of its potential.
    I can see where developers would hold back say a game created to be compatible with CONSOLE 2004 hardware compliance standards, CONSOLE 2004 V2 Hardware complaince standards, and Console 2005 V1 hardware complaince standards. This would be nice for consumers who had the lower end consoles but not good for those who bought the new CONSOLE 2005 V1 console. For this idea to work as well as having just one powerfull Console the developer would have to create games optimized for the state of the art new console standards and since must people wouldn't have the latest console I doubt the developer would optimize it for the latest console generation. I guess it depends on how often the average consumer would upgrade his console standards.
    So for now, I wanna see the xbox rule the show so no more games are held back to run on the two inferior consoles.
    Some of the PC ports for XBOx look as good as my highend pc, however they are slightly held back and not taking full advantage of what the xbox game console has to offer.
    A couple of newer PC GAMES have been ported to the PS2 and they are held back and are not too good. Read gamespots review on the max payne game for more information on this.
    Just wait about a year and a couple of the future generation of pc games optimized for Geforce3 or later graphics cards look ported over on the xbox console, it will be much better taking full advantage of what the xbox has to offer. I doubt they will even try and port those over to the PS2. And in the future you will sure bet there will be a couple of XBOX games ported to the PC when the average consumer has a better graphics card in his home machine.
    Have a good day, and take my opinions for exactly what they are worth. [​IMG]
     
  2. BrianB

    BrianB Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,205
    Likes Received:
    1
    You're basically asking for a 3D0, you know that, don't you?

    Actually, reading it again, you're asking for a standardised PC... You start off asking for one platform, then you want different levels of hardware for the same platform, ending up back having multiple machines, multiple configurations, multiple targets....
     
  3. Iain Lambert

    Iain Lambert Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 1999
    Messages:
    1,345
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Why I want the xbox to dominate other consoles". Because thats what I bought rather than a Gamecube? [​IMG]
    Microsoft already dominate the PC market very much to its detriment. Them doing the same to the console market doesn't strike me as a recipe for success. In any case, as Brian points out what you want is a PC. I buy consoles to get a different experience to the multiple standard but supposedly compatible, driver updating, constantly patching fiddlefest thats part and parcel of running open hardware. Don't get me wrong, I've got one and for some things they are great, but they are two seperate things.
     
  4. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    My $0.02 - I think that software developers would do better business if they only had to develop for one platform. They could streamline the design process and push products out faster and with better QA/QC.
    However, as far as one console standard goes, I think it is a pipe dream. With consoles becoming an increasingly popular component of the home entertainment center, if one console maker were to gain 90% of the market share, I am sure that anti-trust issues would be raised. But even moreso, I think consoles are like cars. Some like Honda while others go for Chevy or Ford. Consoles are the same - Nintendo and PS2 have loyal fan bases while Xbox is trying to carve out its market share.
    I hope that, even if the consoles remain separate, they all move more towards the DirectX API to take a load off the developers and allow them to offer games across platforms. Just like in PC games, it is possible to turn off certain graphics options, so too will console games be able to be "scaled" to a particular platform (i.e. turn off bump-mapping, or FSAA to increase frame rate). At least that's how I would do it - but others have called me a madman [​IMG]
    Jason
     
  5. Alex Spindler

    Alex Spindler Producer

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2000
    Messages:
    3,971
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the last thing we want to see is an single vendor market. I welcome the presence of three completely competent consoles whom I consider to be on an even level. In reality, the limitations imposed by hardware are approching insignifigance.

    What I think you are complaining most about is that the XBox's release schedule is littered with ports of games from other sources. The correct solution to this is not to remove the source of those games (the other consoles), but instead to push Microsoft to get more games developed directly, or even better exclusively, for their system. Until they reach that level of developer confidence in the XBox system, you won't see exceptional variation in games released on all three platforms. But if the PS2 or Gamecube didn't exist, you wouldn't have much drive to develop groundbreaking software for the XBox, as well as having a release slate consisting almost entirely of PC ports.

    Nope, you complaint is that MS didn't succeed in securing exclusive and original content (outside of Munch and Halo).
     
  6. David Proud

    David Proud Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    "I hope that, even if the consoles remain separate, they all move more towards the DirectX API to take a load off the developers and allow them to offer games across platforms. Just like in PC games, it is possible to turn off certain graphics options, so too will console games be able to be "scaled" to a particular platform (i.e. turn off bump-mapping, or FSAA to increase frame rate). At least that's how I would do it - but others have called me a madman "

    Hey I agree with you completely there. The whole Directx thing and everything. That sounds like an excellent solution. Just give us options to turn on or off extra options. Like for simplicity have three levels of options, "Optimized for Xbox", "Optimized for PS2", "Optimized for GC" , etc.

    Also guys I don't think standazing consoles is the answer, I was just exploring what would happen if we did that and then we would have the same problems the pc is faced with. So no it wouldn't work which goes back to my first point of why I want the xbox to dominate other consoles.

    But after reading Brians post I agree, having every console support the directx api sounds like an awesome solution. Then in the games give users the options of selecting "Optimized for Xbox", "Optimzed for GC", etc.

    now all we need is where the developer can have the option of packaging the DVD Game in one package and it will run on multiple directX consoles.
     
  7. David Proud

    David Proud Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the above post I was saying, "STandardizing" not stadizing hehe
     
  8. Andre F

    Andre F Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2000
    Messages:
    1,486
    Likes Received:
    2
    This is exactly why I don't want one console and in my opinion I definately don't want it to be a Microsoft console. We need to have lots of developers creating games for a couple of consoles. That way we get games that are geared for a systems strengths. Otherwise we wind up with a boatload of games that look and feel the same. I think this kind of thinking will also lead us to a battle similar to the IE vs Navigator fight. By the way what do most of you surf the web with?

    -Andre F
     
  9. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    A hypothetical situation: you want three games. Rogue Leader on the GC, MGS2 on the PS2 and Halo on the XBOX (sorry for the abbreviations[​IMG]) Wouldn't it be pretty cool if you did not need to shell out $800+ for the consoles(with controllers and Av packs, probably $1000) just to play $150 in games? Nobody wins here - the console makers lose money on every console (I heard that a console maker doesn't break even until 3-4 games are purchased for each console; hence the bundle paks). The gamers lose money because they are blowing their wad on hardware. The software developers lose money because they have to write the program differently for each platform.
    Just imagine how many more games would be sold if people did not have to drop all their money on consoles! I don't see who loses here. The gamers win because they get more games. The console makers win because they are reaping profits from a higher game:console ratio. The game makers win because they are developing for one API - they make the same money as if they developed for three platforms, but more profit because they are only developing for one.
    I agree with Andre in the sense that there should not be a dominant market share by any one console maker, because then they dictate the pace of technological advance. But if you are offering many different consoles, healthy competition comes along and pushes it FASTER. Why you ask? Because right now, Nintendo knows that if you want to play Rogue Leader, you will buy their system. Hence if they cut corners somewhere in the design of the console, there is still no competition. I think it gives console manufacturers a reason to NOT push the envelope...they are competing on different fields, and relying on the games to sell the machine. They do not have to worry about Xbox coming in an gaining market share on RL or Luigi.
    Sorry for the rant, please comment - I think this is a great thread!
    Jason
     
  10. BrianB

    BrianB Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,205
    Likes Received:
    1
    So the quest in this thread is for a console standard with different manufacturers providing machines that meet the common standard but have the ability for each type of machine to have different features to the next? Yes?
     
  11. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes. Use the car analogy: people argue incessantly over which is better, Honda or Chevy or Ford. Functionally, they all have the same features, but some have bells and whistles that others do not. But the bottom line remains: the makers have their market share.

    What I am saying is that Nintendo can offer a console with slightly less functionality than Xbox, but cut the price $100 to attract more people. Also, how about the different controllers? Just like some people like certain cars because they "feel" better, so too does a controller define the gamers experience with the game.

    Lets say one console manufacturer decides to focus on FSAA as a feature, while another likes the idea of bump mapping or texture and lighting. The software developers can make a game that does them ALL, and the console makers can choose the balance between features and price. Naturally you will have some consoles that cost a fortune but have lots of those features.

    We will all agree that it would be nice to choose the Accord EX with all the features, but they cost more money. So, you could choose an Accord LX that lacks the sunroof and CD player but still is a Honda with the same ability to drive down the road. Same with consoles. Say the DVD player option is irrelevant to you...get a console that does not offer that feature. Don't have an HD-monitor? Get a console geared for 480i output. Don't have a home theater with 5.1? Get the console that only incorporates stereo sound.

    I don't profess to say that this will ever happen, but i think standardizing the programming interface would stimulate the game industry immensely, and everybody would win.
     
  12. BrianB

    BrianB Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,205
    Likes Received:
    1
     
  13. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah it got thrown up [​IMG] I know the car analogy is not the best, and finding an analog to the games is tough to do, but that sort of supports my point. There is no crux or divisive element like games in the car market. Some cars are built better and some cost more (they do not necessarily go hand in hand [​IMG]), plain and simple. For cars, it is all about the machine itself and people's preference and budget. I don't like with the idea that you have to buy all three consoles to play the 3 hottest games on the market right now.
    As far as the software features go, it is being done now on PC games. Using the DirectX API, game makers are able to define certain features that can be toggled based on system capabilities. FSAA, 32- vs. 16-bit textures, bump-mapping, resolution (for consoles, SD- vs. HD- output), etc.
    I do not think that adding these features is hard; if they have already been coded, putting a flag into the program to turn it off is not that difficult. But then again, I am not a software programmer and I am just speaking this out of my butt [​IMG]
    Jason
     
  14. BrianB

    BrianB Producer

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2000
    Messages:
    5,205
    Likes Received:
    1
     
  15. Ryan Peter

    Ryan Peter Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 1999
    Messages:
    1,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's say every three year or so, programmers, developers, and hareware makers meet and develop a new standard of hardware via a committee. Just like they develop new standards of HTML, etc. Then as many companies as there can be go out and create this hardware, compete with each other based on the lowest price. So you could buy a MS Box, a Nintendo Box, and a Sony Box, but there have the identical hardware. Software will be perfectly compatible with the standard hardware used.
     
  16. Joe michaels

    Joe michaels Second Unit

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 1999
    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  17. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think the PC market is an extreme example of multiple platforms. And like I said above, I am not a programmer so I can't speak for the difficulty. But I think this would work for the console market because they are inherently less "tweakable" than PCs. With the PC, you have to worry about install issues, driver issues, supporting multiple resolutions (which I think would be the hardest part), multiple combos of mboard/chip/video card. With consoles, you would have much fewer combos, because the consoles have predetermined hardware specifications.

    And from what I have heard on this forum, the PS2 is a dog to write code for, and a more streamlined interface could only help dev times and boost profit. I do not know anything about the GC in this regard.

    Are there any software/game programmers out there that can give us an insiders perspective?

    Jason

    And Brian - the PC market is actually doing pretty well these days, games like the Sims and Civilization III among others have really had their time in the sun. Not to mention the online RPGs like EQ and Dark Age of Camelot, which have hundreds of thousands of subscribers. So, I do not think your argument there is particularly strong...this scalability of PC games adds DIRECTLY to their appeal to owners of all PCs!
     
  18. David Proud

    David Proud Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2000
    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    0
    yeah I agree comparing a console standard to pc standard is not a fair comparison.

    The console is designed specifically for video games.

    the pc is not designed specifically for pc games and can cause issues when trying to deal with all the issues that different pc configurations have, ie differnet operating systems, 100's of different video cards, etc.
     
  19. DaveF

    DaveF Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2001
    Messages:
    17,621
    Likes Received:
    1,434
    Location:
    One Loudoun, Ashburn, VA
    Real Name:
    David Fischer
    If you replaced "XBox" with "GameCube", you'd have a much better argument, one that I could agree with :p)
     
  20. Jason Handy

    Jason Handy Second Unit

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2001
    Messages:
    379
    Likes Received:
    0
    DaveProud,

    The different OS issue is one I have been avoiding in this thread...since MS sort of owns the market in this regard. One of the things I have been trying to resolve for myself is how to make this work without forcing all console makers to essentially have the Windows kernel driving the system.

    For the DirectX API to work, it needs a windows platform. I suppose a 3rd party could promote a different chip architecture and the console could be run on some sort of Linux kernel, but that is for a different thread...

    Jason

    And DaveF - I am not promoting MS in any way on this thread...just promoting the idea of a consolidated architecture.
     

Share This Page