Should consoles be upgradeable and make PC gamers happy

No, Consoles are already to much like a PC.

Hope so. But it won't be a console anymore, consoles is known for the ease of use, no graphics settings or anyother stuff needed to be tinkered around.

With upgradable hardware, it will be a "PC" anyway...

They're called personal computers.

Uh...wouldn't that just make Consoles PCs?

No because that would make those upgrades super expensive compared to PC upgrades.

All these upgrades will have to Sony approved and they would control the pricing of it. No Thank You.

I don't think the big 3 would like that...

As a PC gamer, that's the opposite of what I want. One big reason I hate the 360 and PS3 is because they are becoming more and more like a PC, except a lot more **** I want them to go back to being consoles.

has already happen and never ends well. it also kills the whole point in console gaming . Its pretty dumb to even try it .

Consoles are locked PC's

has already happen and never ends well. it also kills the whole point in console gaming . Its pretty dumb to even try it .

dontshackzmii

nah N64 did it right, infact N64 did lots of things right, like how Pokemon Staduim could use your gameboy pokemon, I also thought the upgrade improved graphics alot

I would only cause massive amounts of confusion with the general public. If that were to happen sooner or late developers would developing games that would only work on a specific graphic card and risk losing half or more of it's fanbase.lawlessx

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]I would only cause massive amounts of confusion with the general public. If that were to happen sooner or late developers would developing games that would only work on a specific graphic card and risk losing half or more of it's fanbase.mitu123

I don't know why the expansion slot never caught on from the N64. I mean, that particular expansion didn't do very much, but that doesn't mean the concept sucks.

Nope, I'd rather consoles focus on being the furthest thing from a PC as possible.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="lawlessx"]I would only cause massive amounts of confusion with the general public. If that were to happen sooner or late developers would developing games that would only work on a specific graphic card and risk losing half or more of it's fanbase.millerlight89

That probably wouldn't happen but I can see them making two SKUs ( and what I'd like to happen :P )

1- $400-$500 typical next-gen jump hardware specs.

2- $600-$700 high end hardware specs for those who wants to take full advantage of their consoles.

I doubt PC gamers have anything against the horsepower of the consoles, What they DO mind, is partly the control scheme, and more importantly when a PC game gets a Multiplat sequal (where all the versions are the same) Due to the nature of alot of PC games, They are more complex, they need alot more buttens to work, and sequals being multiplats, alot of the control they had over who or whatever they controlled in the PC Ccentric games, are diminished, by ALOT (does not apply to all genres tho, and FPS are amongst those with so little input that it can nearly be ported without loss).

What PC gamers DO complain about and have more then a fair point in, is the completely and utterly Dumbing down of game series to appeal to the masses, This is often what they refer to when they use the word "consolised" Its not really the process of converting to consoles, it is the process of ripping any kind of depth and personality in a game, to reach a broader audience, while not directly due to the consoles, it does have something to do with a fair share of the Console Userbase, That said the PC also has its own share of said people.

So when PC gamers use the word "Consolised" it is generally a more negative version of a Devs word "streamlined" It is not really the average console gamers fault at all, which some people around here seem to belive, The fault lies soley on the Devs, The mass consumer force of the consoles does however ensure that every single series is slowly being bled dry, resulting in a barely recognisable sequal to a beloved game, torn apart in the name of sales numbers, driven by the Pubs and thier share holders.

But you can hardly blame the PC gamers for being pretty darn annoyied, The Jump from PC to the 360 or PS3, is much like the Jump from the 360 or PS3 to the Wii, The control schemes simplify, game gets simpler due to what the majority of the demographics are on consoles (think the average consumer not people with gaming as a hobby).

It really pains me to see what RPGs have become, Instant action fighting fest, in a world with no personality, no depth and no complexivity because Pubs are afraid the majority wont understand it, continous action with no downtime or space to interact with the envioments, due to the very larg group of average consumers with an attention span less then 15 minutes long. Most Rpgslack any kind of Identity deeper then "this is a sci fi rpg, or this is a high fantasy rpg, this is a Jrpg" political correctness and all.

THAT is the PC gamers problem (the ones with gaming as a big hobby anyways)

It would not be as bad if the Devs would make the PC version first, and atleast make sure the controls work like they should on the PC, AND seem Logical (I still cringe when I think of Asassins creed 2 and the horrible horrible controles that had).

So no, making the consoles upgradable would not make pc gamers happy, because it is not the consoles per say that is the problem, it is the devs, and the increased mass market demographics, I doubt most Hermits on here look down on the average console gamer on here, since well, I am fairly certain that even the console centric gamers on these forums, are so sick and rired of cookie cutter games with no risk, and no personality, that there only seem to be room for combat in most games now, and the rest of the game world is being pushed further and further away. You know it is bad when you need to read a book because the games themselves can nolonger portray any story due to the Devs fear of people getting bored with just the smallest bit og backstory.

I doubt PC gamers have anything against the horsepower of the consoles, What they DO mind, is partly the control scheme, and more importantly when a PC game gets a Multiplat sequal (where all the versions are the same) Due to the nature of alot of PC games, They are more complex, they need alot more buttens to work, and sequals being multiplats, alot of the control they had over who or whatever they controlled in the PC Ccentric games, are diminished, by ALOT (does not apply to all genres tho, and FPS are amongst those with so little input that it can nearly be ported without loss).

What PC gamers DO complain about and have more then a fair point in, is the completely and utterly Dumbing down of game series to appeal to the masses, This is often what they refer to when they use the word "consolised" Its not really the process of converting to consoles, it is the process of ripping any kind of depth and personality in a game, to reach a broader audience, while not directly due to the consoles, it does have something to do with a fair share of the Console Userbase, That said the PC also has its own share of said people.

So when PC gamers use the word "Consolised" it is generally a more negative version of a Devs word "streamlined" It is not really the average console gamers fault at all, which some people around here seem to belive, The fault lies soley on the Devs, The mass consumer force of the consoles does however ensure that every single series is slowly being bled dry, resulting in a barely recognisable sequal to a beloved game, torn apart in the name of sales numbers, driven by the Pubs and thier share holders.

But you can hardly blame the PC gamers for being pretty darn annoyied, The Jump from PC to the 360 or PS3, is much like the Jump from the 360 or PS3 to the Wii, The control schemes simplify, game gets simpler due to what the majority of the demographics are on consoles (think the average consumer not people with gaming as a hobby).

It really pains me to see what RPGs have become, Instant action fighting fest, in a world with no personality, no depth and no complexivity because Pubs are afraid the majority wont understand it, continous action with no downtime or space to interact with the envioments, due to the very larg group of average consumers with an attention span less then 15 minutes long. Most Rpgslack any kind of Identity deeper then "this is a sci fi rpg, or this is a high fantasy rpg, this is a Jrpg" political correctness and all.

THAT is the PC gamers problem (the ones with gaming as a big hobby anyways)

It would not be as bad if the Devs would make the PC version first, and atleast make sure the controls work like they should on the PC, AND seem Logical (I still cringe when I think of Asassins creed 2 and the horrible horrible controles that had).

So no, making the consoles upgradable would not make pc gamers happy, because it is not the consoles per say that is the problem, it is the devs, and the increased mass market demographics, I doubt most Hermits on here look down on the average console gamer on here, since well, I am fairly certain that even the console centric gamers on these forums, are so sick and rired of cookie cutter games with no risk, and no personality, that there only seem to be room for combat in most games now, and the rest of the game world is being pushed further and further away. You know it is bad when you need to read a book because the games themselves can nolonger portray any story due to the Devs fear of people getting bored with just the smallest bit og backstory.

Maddie_Larkin

If they were then I'm sure MS and Sony would make the upgrades limited. You would have to buy a certain graphics card or ram andthey will automically set the benchmarks for you online or use software that comes with a cd. It would be pc for dummies but I always liked the idea anyways.

No.

PC gamers have their PCs for upgrading. I do not want the fragmentation of PC gaming anywhere near my consoles.

What would be the point? It would then become a PC...... :|

no def not.one of great thing about consoles is they are all the same. by that i mean all ps3's are the same ect as far as how powerfull they are. when you start adding def upgrades ect you end up spliting your user base. also cost is another plus to consoles. when you buy so in so console you know that you will not have to really worry about haveing to shell out money for upgrades. thats why i switched back to consoles after 6 or so years of PC gameing.I loved PC gameing and even enjoyed planning out my updrades and new builds but over time i got sick of haveing to pay threw the nose for upgrades to keep up with new game requirments. 200-400$ on a GPU,100 bucks for more rame,100-200$ for a cpu upgrade ect,i always ended up paying a few more hundred dollers every 2 or 3 years to keep up or just building a new rig after a few years, ether way i found it to costly for me wallet. Not every one is willing or able to keep shelling out for hardware. If thats what you like to do then just stick with PC.Now if were talking a one time upgrade about half way threw the cosoles lifethat is not expenssive then i would have no problem with it, like the memmory upgrade the N64 got back in the day. spend 40 bucks and double thevideo ram or what not would be cool as ram is normaly the bottle neck on consoles.And why the heck should any one care if PC gamers are happy or not in regards to consoles? thats kind of like saying they should put V8 motors in toyota camrys to make Ford mustang owners happy.:)

sory about spelling ect, i was in a hurry .

Consoles will be upgradable. Not the next gen, becouse that one will be inspired more by Wii and Move, but the one after that I think. Ive always said that with time consoles will become like PCs becouse people will want more out of their systems.

No.

PC gamers have their PCs for upgrading. I do not want the fragmentation of PC gaming anywhere near my consoles.

The_Game21x

Fragmentation? You know PC gaming has worked quite well for the last 20 years yes?

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="lawlessx"]I would only cause massive amounts of confusion with the general public. If that were to happen sooner or late developers would developing games that would only work on a specific graphic card and risk losing half or more of it's fanbase.millerlight89

what does this phrase even mean?

"I want consoles to go back to being consoles"

like should consoles just be 2D side scrollers and Halo knock offs?

what the hells does that comment mean?

-------------Comment on "Streamlining/Consolization"-------------------

Also having finished Dragon Age 2 myself just a couple of hours ago (clocked in at 45 hours and 13 minutes). I actually really liked it, granted i played it on PS3. and i do understand some of the complaints of simplification. but for the most part. I liked it, the combat wheel was easier to navigate. No more putting precious few points into the tactics slot - which grew based on level ups in DA2 - and was extremely handy in doing the little bit of behaviour AI i wanted my teammates to do.

This may sound dumb to the fantasy-fans/buffs but it took me a while to even figure out that Health Poultrice was a Health potion in DA1.

This reminds me of the sort of thing like Starbucks and naming it's cup sizes, everything has a language to it. you want large? you mean Grande? - which is actually medium? or do you want Tall which is actually small size. Oh you want the biggest size? That is Venti.

A health potion and the choosing a drink size shouldn't be an event. It's just a basic object.

I'm far more interested in different odd names for things like rituals, people, history, locations. but basic crap like gun, sword, grenade, potion, etc. shouldn't be just called "ballistic projectile devices".

As far as combat goes in DA2. Don't see why they couldn't do an isometric view on PC's, it wouldn't change much or be that hard. combat on PS3 - doing a basic attack was spamming x button, but everything else - and i had to at some fights - play it like it i was playing DA1. so the changes were at best minimal, and despite spamming being rather stupid, you COULD not get very far on that, it at least kept me in the action.they could of given PC the option to have both the DA1 ****click once moves and goes into attack, and do it isometric move. Really in the end that'd come down to a preference if you wanted to play it that way. I got by mostly fine on the PS3 version with the non-isometric view. but the active button pressing for basic combat on consoles - however stupid it may sound - at least kept the player engaged. makes sense on a controller. can seem far more annoying on PC with clicking a mouse or button constantly. Wouldn't necessarily see it as a downgrading either to consoles, they're gonna need to play a little differently, though i suspect fanboys on both sides would find arguements to try to prove otherwise.

Also for the guy saying that gamers on consoles are impatient and can't stand to watch and listen to the dialog for more then a few minute. Take a minute to step back and think about this. you could barely function or understand what the hell is going on in ANY RPG if the player is not paying attention. The only games i've seen people mute the game and just play has been the linear shooters.

Like one of my room mates is your - basically - BroGamer. just got Call of Duty World at War. plays it completely mute. skips the cutscenes just wants to get straight to the action.

but RPG's however streamlined they've been recently you cannot get the most out of it or even know what to do if you are not paying attention. Not all streamlining is bad either. games regardless of if they are on PC or consoles or handhelds DO NOT HAVE TO BE NEEDLESS COMPLICATED. just because you got 105 buttons on a typical keyboard does not mean it should tailored to use most of them.

--------------------------------

On the topic at hand.

I think consoles are gonna go three ways

1. Do the same thing they've been doing forever now, making jumps every generations.

2. Go the route of Onlive - cloud based.

3. Upgrades but with a platform owned mandatory line.

by that last one. What i mean is this. As far as visual and audio fidelities are concerned, i can see console developers having a mandatory - min base to meet - like minimum requirements if you will. To match with, and there SCALE it up for the fraction of the audience that decided to go out and buy the ok'd or propreitary drives. Much like upgrading a hardrive on the PS3/360.However the minimum base would have to have some sort of quality assurance, Crysis 3 on the PS4 and Xbox 720 (and maybe the Super Wii) can't just barely chug on the base model console and call it a day.

console developers would still be limited to make sure the game works with base model, but with the mandate from the platform it'll be good for all involved.

However, doing it any other way, completely defeats the purpose of having a console.

Upgradable consoles cannot target specific hardware to the extent they do now, their fixed hardware utilization advantages go out the window. Their cost advantages also cease to exist, because they can no longer mass produce a fixed design.

nah its funny to you them angry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDHUo6bTh3M dont take that seriously just for the lulz

As a PC gamer, that's the opposite of what I want. One big reason I hate the 360 and PS3 is because they are becoming more and more like a PC, except a lot more **** I want them to go back to being consoles.

millerlight89

I'm not sure what would make PC gamers happy but I think consoles should rather not be upgradable because that way they're dividing their userbases.

Consoles are upgradable. It's called firmware updates.CajunShooter

Do you think for the longevity of consoles that future consoles should have slide trays that allow you to pull out the graphics cars and upgrade. Ram as well? I don't mean just any ole graphics card, for example. Sony launches PS4 with 2 Gbs of ram, GPU400. Down the road Sony announces every three years more ram and a new GPU cled GPU500. So know you can have 2,500 Gb I'd ram and a stronger GPU and developers can keep PC and console closer as far as degree of porting and work. And on a game box it would say "supports GPU400 or GPU500 and below." I wouldn't mind it. caseypayne69

hell no,

Hope so. But it won't be a console anymore, consoles is known for the ease of use, no graphics settings or anyother stuff needed to be tinkered around.

With upgradable hardware, it will be a "PC" anyway...

Khoo1992

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

No.

PC gamers have their PCs for upgrading. I do not want the fragmentation of PC gaming anywhere near my consoles.

rzepak

Fragmentation? You know PC gaming has worked quite well for the last 20 years yes?

I didn't say it didn't. Nor did I say that fragmentation was a bad thing.

lol:lol: If you could upgrade hardware of a console, you might as well call it a PC.

No, Just No. I like my consoles the way the are and always have been.

I think it would be a great idea. Those that are against it are usingthe same reasons as they did this generation with the upgradeable hardrives at first. "Too confusing for theconsumer", "it will make it a PC" and "too expensive" etc etc. .... Upgradeable hardrives were introduced this generation without a problem.Upgradeable graphics will be introduced next gen without a problem either. Its time to roll with the times and accept change.Sony/microsoft will implement a way to make it simple for everyone to understand.

I certainly hope Sony or Microsoft come up with upgradable graphics and not only that for crying out loud add more RAM, at least 4 GB, none of this 256MB crap. I hope Sony or Mircosoft has the balls to do it. But I doubt either will.