Too many console versions
polycounter lvl 18
Why is it in recent years technology has broken into so many different versions?
Many of which have a shorter and shorter life spans? Is it consumer trends? Have we as a society told the industries that they can profit from selling various poorly constructed devices, and revising them each year? Specifically game consoles.
There is one version of the Wii. It plays all Wii games. It plays all Gamecube games. It plays many NES, 64, Genesis, etc. It includes Wifi.
There are supposedly 3 version of the Xbox. But each of the three depending on when they where made, have different hardware, and failure rates. Different storage capacities. Different cable connections. I had to check carefully at a voltage reading nearly hidden inside the box to make sure which chipset I was getting to avoid a common system failure. It requires an expensive adapter for Wifi.
The PS3 has had 7 different versions produced in the past 2 years. A couple with backwards compatibility, some with poor emulation, and now only two without any method backwards compatibility. Are they improvements?
How is anyone outside the gaming industry, the gaming community, expected to understand all this? How will they know if they're getting the product they want? How will they know they're giving the right gift? Why has it become such an effort to find a gaming system that includes the features you like to better your investment? What other industries get away with these low standards?
Just venting, I guess. Games are suppose to take you away from the frustration of the world.
Many of which have a shorter and shorter life spans? Is it consumer trends? Have we as a society told the industries that they can profit from selling various poorly constructed devices, and revising them each year? Specifically game consoles.
There is one version of the Wii. It plays all Wii games. It plays all Gamecube games. It plays many NES, 64, Genesis, etc. It includes Wifi.
There are supposedly 3 version of the Xbox. But each of the three depending on when they where made, have different hardware, and failure rates. Different storage capacities. Different cable connections. I had to check carefully at a voltage reading nearly hidden inside the box to make sure which chipset I was getting to avoid a common system failure. It requires an expensive adapter for Wifi.
The PS3 has had 7 different versions produced in the past 2 years. A couple with backwards compatibility, some with poor emulation, and now only two without any method backwards compatibility. Are they improvements?
How is anyone outside the gaming industry, the gaming community, expected to understand all this? How will they know if they're getting the product they want? How will they know they're giving the right gift? Why has it become such an effort to find a gaming system that includes the features you like to better your investment? What other industries get away with these low standards?
Just venting, I guess. Games are suppose to take you away from the frustration of the world.
Replies
Like it wasn't complicated enough when 360 and ps3 both had two at launch - then they both go and add more? ugh wtf.
Tech changes and the chipsets evolve (usually for the better).
It's not just the PS3 and Xbox 360, certainly the PSX, PS2 and Xbox had several hardware changes over their lifespan, just nothing as major as the multiple skus and storage capacity. I'm pretty sure that the original PSX had a few changes to the AV and power connectors.
I think people have also become more tech savvy than you think, especially when the price tag goes up they look at the configurations alot more closely. Yes there are some that will buy what isnt right for them and they will find out they wanted something else. I kind of see it as thier fault in the first place. You cant blame the manufacturer for an uninformed decision especially when there is plentiful info on the net and etc.
But it is also companies trying to rake in more cash by stripping down their full product, calling it basic and releasing the full version at double the price. Looking at you Vista.
Besides if they didn't do 14 different versions, marketing would have to come up with comparison charts that actually weight their product against other companies. It's easy to make your most expensive version the most attractive when you compare it to lesser versions of itself...
I have an Elite because I store a bunch of shit on the drive - music, games, movies, etc... My friend has the basic, he doesn't need that much room. And he's pretty happy he didn't have to spend a lot of cash for something he didn't want.
-now, having said that, I think the PS3 went a little nuts with the concept.
Nothing has changed over time.
All consoles go through the revisions to their chipsets over the years. There's about a dozen models of the NES and Genesis systems alone. But it makes no difference, they all work the same and look the same on the outside.
Even the Slim PS2 was just a case mod, but the mainboard went through about 8 revisions.
Early PS1 models were faulty as hell, but the system went through several revisions.
Early PS3 models included the entire PS2 chipset for backwards compatibility. It was removed due to cost. The machines were losing hundreds of dollars per unit.
The machines usually change for reliability and cost reasons. Eventually, it becomes possible to shrink the size of the chips, or combine them, and it cost less to produce them. When the machines finally hit their lowest price point (usually 99$) they have been revised a ton of times and are much cheaper and more reliable than earlier models, but they work exactly the same.
Only difference this time around is that PS3 was retarded on it's launch. They kept making panic moves to design it so it could be brought down to a lower price point, the PS2 chipset was the first component to be removed, and all the memory card reader ports went next. The next revision took out whatever component was needed for the software emulation to run at all.
360 was rushed to beat PS3 to market, and had some faulty hardware design. In many cases what breaks the early models is simply the act of turning them on. The solders can't take the shock of powering up, and break over time.
The Jasper boards has smaller a CPU and GPU, that use less power, and produce less heat. It also only requires a fraction of the power as older models. There is another 360 version due next year called the Valhalla, rumoured to put both the GPU and CPU onto one chip, and it will probably come with a drop to $99 or $129.
what is this heresy! there is already only one option on the menu.
BEEF!
The 360 didn't fuck up, they simply made the best choice. You want wifi? Well thats great but I dont, so why should i pay for it? You want it, you buy it. And thats the best attitude. The only different in the 360 sku's is the HDD size. The Arcade/Core now all come with memory cards and wireless pads...
This is all fine. It gives you all choice. There isnt a single sku out there that wont play games out of the box, for all 3 current gen machines.
Look back a while ago and remember the N64 DID require you to buy the memory pack addon for a few titles to work at all. That was a bad choice, but it had to be done. Again, it saved both the consumer and the company money... Whats the point in making you buy it if you dont want it.
I think you are over thinking the whole thing... I'm glad that there is choice in all this. I dont need a 99999gb HDD and wifi and card reader... i just want to play some damn games.... Why should I have to pay for that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_ring_of_death
There, educate yo'self.
I have a 60GB hard disc in mine (I think? Could be 80) and I will never run out of space. I remember the GC memory card. Biggest rip off ever; the average gamer would need 3 at least.
I agree with you that the installs are just ridiculous. They can be so long and you just want to play your new game!
You can pick up a cheap headset/60gb combo for your 360. No real difference between the SKUs otherwise. YOu get the same gaming experience.
Hang on, I'm confused. You were complaining about HDD's a minute ago and now you are complaining about SKU's.
It doesn't really matter what the different technicalities are, it matters that you stated that the only manufacturer who screwed up this generation was SONY, and that is just not true. As many mistakes as SONY has made, and they have made a fair few, these are dwarfed by the biggest disaster in console history regarding faulty units.
Odium: This is in fact a discussion that involves chipset changes, because it has become a consideration when buying a new 360. And it's about the consumer, perhaps the less informed, understanding what they're buying. The RRoD is a major and common problem with the Xbox. Sure, maybe it hasn't happened to you, but perhaps you know five or more folks it has happened to. And that's a large percentage. I, as a smart consumer, like to buy things after they have been proven to last. I don't stand in lines to buy hardware when it launches at the highest price and failure rate. That's why I've waited so long and researched before making the purchase. The average person doesn't invest in games like many in this community would. To avoid the potential for RRoD ruining my gameplay experience, I found a system with the latest chipset in an Arcade bundle. Since it's an Arcade system, I assumed from what I had read, that I would qualify for a discount HDD from Microsoft. I was wrong. Despite my consumer research, I was still ill informed. In my mind, both Microsoft and Sony have made some major mistakes, and have struggled to correct them, or ignore them. But Microsoft has found clever ways to profit. It's just all too much to think about for those who don't make it their living.
And having the choice of WiFi is convenient. But now, my choice is a small extremely overpriced Wireless adapter...or 50 ft. of ethernet cable (the system I bought didn't come with any ethernet cables, like the others). How much more of an expense to the consumer would it have been for Microsoft to include WiFi in the system, like the Wii and PS3 have? Out of the box, the games I want to play don't work until I buy over $100 in attachments. That's different than a simple memory card. And why should the average person be given the task to know all this, when all they want is an enjoyable gameplay experience?
With this pattern in place, how difficult will the next generation of consoles be?
The RRoD and other hardware failures are irrelevant - they are not factors in companies making different skus. Nobody makes a 'broken version' and a 'working version' for customers to choose from.
Edit: I just read ElysiumGX's reply, and he raises some good points about different chipsets being more stable - but I don't see those as being part of 'too many options', as many skus have different internal parts depending on when and where they were made.
Sony, however, is all over the fucking place with absolutely no consistency.
But you are forgetting one key thing: you are clearly far more anal about things than the average consumer. The average consumer doesn't give two shits about the features of a console versus another, they just care which one has the games they would like and costs the least.
The 360 Arcade is $199, plays all 360 games, has the same backwards compatibility as every other 360, can save games, and works on all TVs. It's a simple choice for simple people. Unlike the Wii, however, they are nice enough to offer options for the more hardcore gamer. Not every company desires to be like Nintendo and hold back progress in an attempt to define what gaming "should be."
I don't know if you're misinformed or if you just forgot about this, but the Wii doesn't even have a fucking ethernet port, the standard input for high speed internet across the world. I would take an ethernet port I know will work 100% of the time than some shoddy Wifi that is much weaker than even my laptop.
Nintendo has been in the business of charging shit tons for stupid peripherals since the beginning. Look at the new Wii attachment for the remote that allows 1:1 positional mapping. That could have easily been included in the current Wii remote, but they didn't do it because they knew they could charge $20 for it later and make tons of money.
And what are you talking about when you say you can't play the games out of the box without $100 in attachments? Every game on the 360 works on every single console. Why in the hell do you need Wifi to play a game?
One of the points in having so many choices is to see what consumers want. Obviously a lot of people like the mid-range 360 that has storage features but most aren't willing to pay much extra for more of it. This is the first generation of consoles with tons of DLC and internet usage, so give them time to work it out.
And to end this post, I'll say thank you to Sony and Microsoft for giving me options. Yes, the PS3 and 360 SKUs are whack, but it's because they are both pushing for the advancement of gaming and they are listening to what the gamers want. I'm not talking about better graphics. I'm talking about large storage, movie marketplaces, DLC, online game distribution, game patches, HD output, the ability to run Linux on your console, console customization, and more. I will acknowledge Nintendo for the geniuses they are, but I also feel like they are not any kind of company I would like to support. Instead of trying to push consoles forward, they are holding them back because they don't feel that's what gaming should be. Sorry to break it to you Nintendo, but you don't speak for all gamers. They can pull in all the kids and soccer moms they want and make tons of money doing it, but as an adult and hardcore gamer I've found much better options than something so limited.
And I can only imagine that this sort of thing is a massive headache for developers. Constantly changing hardware specs on home consoles is exactly what developers don't want. There are very compelling reasons for developers to work on consoles. One of those reasons is consistency in the hardware architecture. Working on a console project means that you are going to get a fixed hardware spec, and you can develop your game specifically for that tech.
The more that the companies iterate on the hardware, the more it messes up what the developer can do with it.
I've been hearing a lot of Sony bashing in this thread so far. And goodness knows they are taking their lumps right now. But I would actually point to Microsoft as the biggest offender here. The HDD / no HDD issue is much more significant to the development community than any of the mincing around Sony has been experimenting with. The PS3 at least is required to have a HDD, it won't function without one. And developers definitely like having the guarantee of a hard drive around for various reasons.
Meanwhile PS3 SKU's are 40GB, 60GB, 80GB.... yet the hard drive size is the least important difference between them! Honestly, I own one and even I get them mixed up still. It's a big branding failure and really, it's representative of where Sony has had the most trouble for the last couple of years: Poor marketing. The machine itself is fine. The different versions are fine. It's just not clear what the different versions are. 60GB doesn't mean anything to anyone. Being able to play PS2 games does.
I think I said before here, that console gaming has basically turned into PC gaming, and the multiple SKU's are a big part of that. So in the same way that the average person is confused about what parts are in a computer, the average person is confused about what different console versions are.
So do I. That's not being anal. It's being an informed consumer who wants to get what he pays for. Saying a consumer doesn't care about the features is a rather general, and ignorant statement. I think they would care, if they knew what they should be caring about.
Only after you've added a harddrive. I didn't know that until recently. So an Arcade system that will play original Xbox titles, is actually around $300. Or $230, if you're lucky enough to get a discount refurbished HDD from Microsoft because you have an older model. Proving the point of this thread.
Holy crap. I've owned a Wii for over a year and forgot it doesn't have one. I guess I didn't mind. My entertainment center is in a separate room from my computer and other networked devices. Wifi is more common now, everyone i know has a wireless capable router, and the Wii isn't an internet heavy system..
Didn't I answer that already? And it's not the point.
Those kids (which you once use to be), and soccer moms, and girlfriends, and families....out-number you. You say MS and Sony are listening, and bringing all these great things to the world. So are Nintendo. And they doing it for an entirely new demographic. Everyone. They are still outselling.
But this isn't about which company is doing best. Or which company YOU like best. In this case, all console developers are guilty of some form of scam. With the next generation of consoles, which I hope isn't for a couple more years, I hope they do it right.
The arcade model i think was designed with the thought that people who buy this aren't going to venture online they will just need the barebones to play games. If you were intending to use xboxlive with the 360, then theres 2 other SKUs to choose from