St. John: Game Consoles Will Be Dead By 2020

[QUOTE="Zhengi"]

This guy's analysis is completely wrong. The console industry continues to break records all the way around with the Wii, 360, and PS3. All consoles are doing remarkably better than they did last year and they are selling a lot of software. You can see this when you look at the YOY growth for both hardware and software sales.

In fact, I expect the industry to continue to grow bigger and bigger as long as there are new gamers who are brought in. This is why the PS1, PS2, and the Wii have done well in appealing to the mass market. As long as consoles continue to do this, the industry will not collapse upon itself.

HuusAsking

We'll run out of gamers to attract when 6 billion people stop caring. That's the meaning of mass market appeal.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

I need to take a BUSINESS CLASS! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Yeah. I think you do.

No thanks, I'm trying to be something other than a third-rate goombah.

So what is a third rate goombah? Exactly what do you mean by this term in this context.

1, 2, and 3 mean nothing to me and I derive utterly more convenience from PC gaming.

So the above is most telling. 1, 2, and 3 mean nothing to YOU. You can't see beyond YOURSELF. Thus, if nothing consoles offer applies to you PERSONALLY, there is fault in it. I knew I was on to something when I stated earlier about narrow mindness and lack of vision.

The Wii has garbage software when put up against a direct comparison to the 360, PS3, PC, or PS2. PS2 has practically equivalent graphics to the Wii. Plus it's a....DVD player...lol.

Again, big deal. It PS2 can play DVD's. They sell DVD's seperate you, know. Its a new thing they have been doing since the PS2. People buy consoles mainly to PLAY GAMES! They have DVD players , music players, etc.

And then you bring up GRAPHICS and this is again, most telling. If you really knew games, you would know graphics are not everything. Nintendo didn't lie about saying their graphics were state of the art, so why bring up the obvious?

You don't need a Wii-mote. Nobody does. I game with a KB/M and a Sixaxis. I'm not utterly incapable of doing so last time I checked.

Well, yeah, you kinda do for some Wii games. Try Trauma Center without it. And many reviewers here praise it when using it properly. Plus, gears of war designer Cliff Bleszinski actually thinks the 360/ps3 controllers are too complicated and likes what wii remote has to offer. And that is someone in the business who made a steller 360 'hardcore' graphic killer game.Or is he a third rate goomba too?

Marketing doesn't make a quality product, neither does running an efficient business that gives people what they demand. I don't care what people demand, because I'm a consumer, not a lemming (non-system wars usage).

Nope. Nobody said it did.And other people that buy stuff you dont like are consumers as well and non lemming (non-system wars usage).

I wouldn't touch Nintendo or any other business with a 20 foot pole. I don't like businesses because I don't like capitalism. I'm interested in a quality product, which the Wii is not.

So you never buy any game ever? How do you live without touching businesses. you NEVER buy anything? You never buy a game?

BobHipJames

Comments in bold above

The world will be dead by then, lawls.TheRealMC01

:roll:

So what happens when you run out of potential gamers to attract? When the audience becomes saturated? When all you have left are the people who could care less about gaming?HuusAsking

New people get born. 10 years, you have a whole new audience of gamers. Games are more and more becoming part of everyday entertiainment, like movies and music IMO

he might be right.....I mean PS3 and 360 are basically the same thing....who knowsMikeE21286

So are PC's and MACs. Look how long that has been going on...

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]So what happens when you run out of potential gamers to attract? When the audience becomes saturated? When all you have left are the people who could care less about gaming?flazzle

New people get born. 10 years, you have a whole new audience of gamers. Games are more and more becoming part of everyday entertiainment, like movies and music IMO

[QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

You don't need a Wii-mote. Nobody does. I game with a KB/M and a Sixaxis. I'm not utterly incapable of doing so last time I checked.

Well, yeah, you kinda do for some Wii games. Try Trauma Center without it. And many reviewers here praise it when using it properly. Plus, gears of war designer Cliff Bleszinski actually thinks the 360/ps3 controllers are too complicated and likes what wii remote has to offer. And that is someone in the business who made a steller 360 'hardcore' graphic killer game.Or is he a third rate goomba too?

flazzle

Comments in bold above

In that case, yes, we think he is a third-rate goomba. And that he deserves a first-rate stomp to the head.

>>>He's right, he is wrong! ...wait:?..

Yeah it was a good read, but it doesnt make sense. PC has online, consoles NOW have online.

[QUOTE="Chutebox"][QUOTE="flazzle"]

[QUOTE="Chutebox"]Is this guy really calling himself a Saint?heretrix

Good question. Maybe he is a rapper or something.

If he is, everyone in this world should just ignore him.

Ok, thanks lol. I was confused as to why anyone would call themselves a saint. Never heard of this guy.

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

Nintendo_Man

The difference this time is the virtually immortal and globaly extensive PC market. You couldn't say it was anything like that back in '83. What is being implied here is that video gaming in itself will not die, but that it will be absorbed by another medium, in this case PC. Now the question is, will it? What can the console market continue to offer as PCs and its games become increasingly connected, easier to use, and affordable?

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Man"]

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

jetpower3

The difference this time is the virtually immortal and globaly extensive PC market. You couldn't say it was anything like that back in '83. What is being implied here is that video gaming in itself will not die, but that it will be absorbed by another medium, in this case PC. Now the question is, will it? What can the console market continue to offer as PCs and its games become increasingly connected, easier to use, and affordable?

I would think it would be easier to argue that desktops will fade away to obliviion and laptops would take over.

flazzle

I would think it'd be easy to argue that consoles will fade away and be replaced by laptop computers

[QUOTE="jetpower3"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Man"]

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

HuusAsking

The difference this time is the virtually immortal and globaly extensive PC market. You couldn't say it was anything like that back in '83. What is being implied here is that video gaming in itself will not die, but that it will be absorbed by another medium, in this case PC. Now the question is, will it? What can the console market continue to offer as PCs and its games become increasingly connected, easier to use, and affordable?

You think it's impossible to make a computer play discs the same as a console?

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="jetpower3"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Man"]

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

scottie300z

The difference this time is the virtually immortal and globaly extensive PC market. You couldn't say it was anything like that back in '83. What is being implied here is that video gaming in itself will not die, but that it will be absorbed by another medium, in this case PC. Now the question is, will it? What can the console market continue to offer as PCs and its games become increasingly connected, easier to use, and affordable?

You think it's impossible to make a computer play discs the same as a console?

[QUOTE="flazzle"]I would think it would be easier to argue that desktops will fade away to obliviion and laptops would take over.

scottie300z

I would think it'd be easy to argue that consoles will fade away and be replaced by laptop computers

[QUOTE="scottie300z"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="jetpower3"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Man"]

Sounds like what people predicted in the 80's and look how that turned out.

HuusAsking

The difference this time is the virtually immortal and globaly extensive PC market. You couldn't say it was anything like that back in '83. What is being implied here is that video gaming in itself will not die, but that it will be absorbed by another medium, in this case PC. Now the question is, will it? What can the console market continue to offer as PCs and its games become increasingly connected, easier to use, and affordable?

You think it's impossible to make a computer play discs the same as a console?

unless everything is setup as read only. Or the put in and play system along w/ the save files and everything is done on a seperate harddrive that isn't alowed access to the rest of the computer. Just b/c it's not being done now doesn't mean it's impossible to do in the future.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Yeah, I do. Does the term "AutoPlay Trojan" provide a clue? The PC is an open platform, so there's no quality assurance and safety testing of the software discs. All one would have to do to eliminate that simplicity is to create an tojan and masquerade it as a game disc.scottie300z

unless everything is setup as read only. Or the put in and play system along w/ the save files and everything is done on a seperate harddrive that isn't alowed access to the rest of the computer. Just b/c it's not being done now doesn't mean it's impossible to do in the future.

[QUOTE="scottie300z"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Yeah, I do. Does the term "AutoPlay Trojan" provide a clue? The PC is an open platform, so there's no quality assurance and safety testing of the software discs. All one would have to do to eliminate that simplicity is to create an tojan and masquerade it as a game disc.HuusAsking

unless everything is setup as read only. Or the put in and play system along w/ the save files and everything is done on a seperate harddrive that isn't alowed access to the rest of the computer. Just b/c it's not being done now doesn't mean it's impossible to do in the future.

Grow an imagination and some creativity already. Tear down some of the walls you have built up and surround yourself that you use as rules. You could even have computer databases that are downloaded on computers w/ a list of codes that match legit disks sold in stores. If a disk entered into the drive doesn't match the latest list, guess what? it doesn't play. Why can't hackers just copy the codes or put fake codes? Maybe future discs can have readable barcodes placed within a disc itself. not data but actual barcode inside the mid layers. Then hackers would have to manufacture discs and insert the same barcodes. Who knows what there could be, but just stamping your foot and saying it's impossible in the future b/c nobody thought of it before isn't exactly the brightest thing.

Or maybe while I wasn't right about the read only suggestion, making the pop in and play drive work exactly like a console when game discs are put in keeps the pc and the console bits apart yet together in the same box. And you noted people like simplicity, having it all in 1 device is pretty simple instead of having multiple things.

I could give you 50 "possibilities" and all of them be proven wrong and it wouldn't matter. Because I'm not the person in charge of creating this particular aspect of our future world. But even if I was, I wouldn't be the only one. Your assessment of the current state of the world is pretty good and it may hold for 10, 20, or a hundred years. But just the fact that consoles are becoming more and more like true computers points that sooner or later their improvements are going to jump over the line that seperates the two.

Too bad I live in the present...MuffinPunk

Grow an imagination and some creativity already. Tear down some of the walls you have built up and surround yourself that you use as rules. You could even have computer databases that are downloaded on computers w/ a list of codes that match legit disks sold in stores. If a disk entered into the drive doesn't match the latest list, guess what? it doesn't play. Why can't hackers just copy the codes or put fake codes? Maybe future discs can have readable barcodes placed within a disc itself. not data but actual barcode inside the mid layers. Then hackers would have to manufacture discs and insert the same barcodes. Who knows what there could be, but just stamping your foot and saying it's impossible in the future b/c nobody thought of it before isn't exactly the brightest thing.

scottie300z

"What physical science can devise and synthesize, physical science can analyze and duplicate."--E.E. Smith

Or maybe while I wasn't right about the read only suggestion, making the pop in and play drive work exactly like a console when game discs are put in keeps the pc and the console bits apart yet together in the same box. And you noted people like simplicity, having it all in 1 device is pretty simple instead of having multiple things.

I could give you 50 "possibilities" and all of them be proven wrong and it wouldn't matter. Because I'm not the person in charge of creating this particular aspect of our future world. But even if I was, I wouldn't be the only one. Your assessment of the current state of the world is pretty good and it may hold for 10, 20, or a hundred years. But just the fact that consoles are becoming more and more like true computers points that sooner or later their improvements are going to jump over the line that seperates the two.

scottie300z

As for creating virtual spaces for gaming, productivity, etc. that makes things more complex, defeating the simplification argument.

We've been at this for well over a decade and perhaps longer than that, and so far no one's come up with a better solution than a dedicated gaming console that is limited by design so as to "Keep It Simple, Stupid."

As for creating virtual spaces for gaming, productivity, etc. that makes things more complex, defeating the simplification argument.

HuusAsking

for the maker maybe more so than the user

[QUOTE="flazzle"]

as long as something is profitable, it'll be around. Nintendo manages to make a profit every time (minus virtual boy). I dont think Sony lost anything with PS1 or PS2.

"Oh, but times change!"

yeah, well, Gary Ellison of Oracle predicted everything would go to dumb terminals and everyone would hook up to services and remote storage, eliminateing standalone desktops. Still waiting on that one.

I would think it would be easier to argue that desktops will fade away to obliviion and laptops would take over.

BobHipJames

Some people make stupid predictions and some people don't.

Here's the thing: it doesn't matter whether it's profitable or not. It matters whether people buy it. If you don't buy a console, they don't get your money. Simple as that.

if they don't get your money, they don't get their profit, When they don't get their profit, they lose out on money. when they lose out on money, they make worse product. when they make worse product, their company, in turn.... dies. your logic has a huge flaw in it.

A lot of those predictions seem pretty reasonable.

Of course many people who have posted in this thread have simply shrugged off the possibility. I don't think they remember how the console market imploded last time around, in a situation of intense competition and low profitability.

Consoles are not like PCs, they are not intrinsically valuable to society and it is entirely possible that they could fade away.

Also: St. John is a surname guys.

[QUOTE="livinitup01"][QUOTE="BobHipJames"][QUOTE="flazzle"][QUOTE="BobHipJames"]

Let me put it this way: if you want garbage, you can buy garbage and giggle your way to the bank. When you buy a Wii you're buying old technology that's been basically reissued so that it's cheaper to manufacture.

muscleserge

The Wii Remote is OLD technology? And the last console it was on was...

Oh, please. The Wii does not have a DVD player, it does not have a music player (does it?), it doesn't have a hard drive, it's running on old video components....

A Wii remote costs $40 and a Wii nun-chuck costs $20. That's literally all you're getting that's "new." That's if you call "new" technology wireless technology with motion sensing. And those are retail prices. I have no doubt Nintendo is making a profit at the $60 mark for a Wii controller.

You're not even getting close to what you pay for, beyond the novelty and the platform itself and what its capable of. From a price-performance ratio and from a cost-effectiveness ratio, in comparison to the competition, the Wii is completely and utterly embarrassing.

And whether or not the Wii remote is new....listen, you could package the stupid thing as a PC component and have the exact same enterprise.

Why do you like PCs so much dude? I hate computer games. Sitting in front of my small computer screen pressing buttons. I'd rather play a game on a big screen TV at least 10 feet away from the screen. All I want to use a computer for is work, checking e-mail, internet and storing my photos, videos, files and music. That's the way I like it. No doubt it won't be like this forever but when that day comes then I'll change.

Like I and many others have said before people don't want to be in front of computers all the time. Each device has their set uses. All in one handheld devices like the iPhone are great because they're portable and not as tedious to upgrade as PCs. What if your PC got a virus, had a disc failure, or an operating system error, like countless computers out there, and you couldn't play your games anymore? If you liked both computers and consoles then you'd still have a console to use. For you, my console hating friend, you'd be left out to dry while your computer was being repaired. This is why consoles are better. They don't HAVE to be constantly upgraded in order to play the games which were MEANT to be played on specific consoles. A lot of PC games, like Devil May Cry 4 and BioShock, will need to be played on a computer with a certain amount of RAM, hard drive space, a certain type of processor, graphics card and operating system. This means that you'd have to keep making an investment just to play one game. If you don't have the minimum specs you can't play the game. With consoles ALL THE GAMES JUST WORK. You'd be paying more for your computer just to run games in the long run than for a console.

A lot of those predictions seem pretty reasonable.

Of course many people who have posted in this thread have simply shrugged off the possibility. I don't think they remember how the console market imploded last time around, in a situation of intense competition and low profitability.

Consoles are not like PCs, they are not intrinsically valuable to society and it is entirely possible that they could fade away.

Also: St. John is a surname guys.

Danm_999

Agreed.

[QUOTE="flazzle"]

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]So what happens when you run out of potential gamers to attract? When the audience becomes saturated? When all you have left are the people who could care less about gaming?HuusAsking

New people get born. 10 years, you have a whole new audience of gamers. Games are more and more becoming part of everyday entertiainment, like movies and music IMO

Oh really? The world is at 0% population growth? Since when?

Are we talking about the Cliff Bleszinski who said that piracy is killing PC gaming (even though it is stronger than any other market, has more top-rated games and stronger overall sales than any other console--otherwise, why would Sins sell so well without a single copy protection scheme)? The Cliff Bleszinski who essentially told the gamers who built his business (PC gamers) that they're not important anymore since consoles are where it's at?

In that case, yes, we think he is a third-rate goomba. And that he deserves a first-rate stomp to the head.

HuusAsking

Man, poor Cliff! Stomp to the head?

Lets look at some quotes from St. John:

"Nobody needs a console when a game's value and DRM is defined by community or an input device. Consoles just serve to keep you from playing a game you didn't pay for. What's Sony and Microsoft's motivation to make another console? It's been so rocky, and it's not about the pretty graphics anymore." According to St. John, spectacular graphics have become a commodity, and not the platform for games to differentiate themselves. "The Wii is the exception that proves the rule — it's not about the graphics, it's about the input device."

...and that's why 360 is chasing Wii right now and catering to the casuals. There is more to a console than just keeping you from playing a game you didn't pay for. He only sees the functionality of playing games, not the reality of how people play games. yes, he has a point, but people simply do not crowd around the 'PC' for family fun, nor does everyone like to sacrafice the PC for serious gaming.

I would think people that agree with him would also watch all their tv and movies from the PC, and not own a TV at all. And you can logically make that argument. And you can logically shoot down that argument.

Now, speaking of goomba-heads, lets examine this gem:

"You'll never hear this from anybody else because they probably don't know. The original codename for Direct X was the Manhattan Project, because strategically it was an effort to displace Japanese game consoles with PCs and ultimately the Xbox. We called it The Manhattan Project because that was the codename for the program developing the nuclear bomb. We had a glowing radiation logo for the prototype for Direct X, and of course as soon as that got out and the press covered it, it caused a scandal."

Wow. Classy. Whats next? Naming a project after the Holocaust? Calling this guy a fourth-rate goomba isn't enough.

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Are we talking about the Cliff Bleszinski who said that piracy is killing PC gaming (even though it is stronger than any other market, has more top-rated games and stronger overall sales than any other console--otherwise, why would Sins sell so well without a single copy protection scheme)? The Cliff Bleszinski who essentially told the gamers who built his business (PC gamers) that they're not important anymore since consoles are where it's at?

In that case, yes, we think he is a third-rate goomba. And that he deserves a first-rate stomp to the head.

flazzle

Man, poor Cliff! Stomp to the head?

Lets look at some quotes from St. John:

"Nobody needs a console when a game's value and DRM is defined by community or an input device. Consoles just serve to keep you from playing a game you didn't pay for. What's Sony and Microsoft's motivation to make another console? It's been so rocky, and it's not about the pretty graphics anymore." According to St. John, spectacular graphics have become a commodity, and not the platform for games to differentiate themselves. "The Wii is the exception that proves the rule — it's not about the graphics, it's about the input device."

...and that's why 360 is chasing Wii right now and catering to the casuals. There is more to a console than just keeping you from playing a game you didn't pay for. He only sees the functionality of playing games, not the reality of how people play games. yes, he has a point, but people simply do not crowd around the 'PC' for family fun, nor does everyone like to sacrafice the PC for serious gaming.

I would think people that agree with him would also watch all their tv and movies from the PC, and not own a TV at all. And you can logically make that argument. And you can logically shoot down that argument.

Now, speaking of goomba-heads, lets examine this gem:

"You'll never hear this from anybody else because they probably don't know. The original codename for Direct X was the Manhattan Project, because strategically it was an effort to displace Japanese game consoles with PCs and ultimately the Xbox. We called it The Manhattan Project because that was the codename for the program developing the nuclear bomb. We had a glowing radiation logo for the prototype for Direct X, and of course as soon as that got out and the press covered it, it caused a scandal."

Wow. Classy. Whats next? Naming a project after the holocaust? Calling this guy a fourth-rate goomba isn't enough.

Manhattan Project =/= Holocaust. Nuclear weapons probably prevented WWIII from breaking out within 20 years of WWII.

BTW, people do watch TV and movies from PCs. They do it by hooking up a TV to their PCs. The TV is nothing more than a monitor with a built-in tuner.

[QUOTE="flazzle"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Are we talking about the Cliff Bleszinski who said that piracy is killing PC gaming (even though it is stronger than any other market, has more top-rated games and stronger overall sales than any other console--otherwise, why would Sins sell so well without a single copy protection scheme)? The Cliff Bleszinski who essentially told the gamers who built his business (PC gamers) that they're not important anymore since consoles are where it's at?

In that case, yes, we think he is a third-rate goomba. And that he deserves a first-rate stomp to the head.

mjarantilla

Man, poor Cliff! Stomp to the head?

Lets look at some quotes from St. John:

"Nobody needs a console when a game's value and DRM is defined by community or an input device. Consoles just serve to keep you from playing a game you didn't pay for. What's Sony and Microsoft's motivation to make another console? It's been so rocky, and it's not about the pretty graphics anymore." According to St. John, spectacular graphics have become a commodity, and not the platform for games to differentiate themselves. "The Wii is the exception that proves the rule — it's not about the graphics, it's about the input device."

...and that's why 360 is chasing Wii right now and catering to the casuals. There is more to a console than just keeping you from playing a game you didn't pay for. He only sees the functionality of playing games, not the reality of how people play games. yes, he has a point, but people simply do not crowd around the 'PC' for family fun, nor does everyone like to sacrafice the PC for serious gaming.

I would think people that agree with him would also watch all their tv and movies from the PC, and not own a TV at all. And you can logically make that argument. And you can logically shoot down that argument.

Now, speaking of goomba-heads, lets examine this gem:

"You'll never hear this from anybody else because they probably don't know. The original codename for Direct X was the Manhattan Project, because strategically it was an effort to displace Japanese game consoles with PCs and ultimately the Xbox. We called it The Manhattan Project because that was the codename for the program developing the nuclear bomb. We had a glowing radiation logo for the prototype for Direct X, and of course as soon as that got out and the press covered it, it caused a scandal."

Wow. Classy. Whats next? Naming a project after the holocaust? Calling this guy a fourth-rate goomba isn't enough.

Manhattan Project =/= Holocaust. Nuclear weapons probably prevented WWIII from breaking out within 20 years of WWII.

No, but they caused two terrible proxy wars/genocides and a semi-paranoid world for the next 45 years against two countries that wanted to be hostile, but couldn't be directly. I personally think that fighting such a war instead of a real one is a lot scarier and terrible, because you would never know when the end would come, or if it ever would. Either way, it could have all been over in an instant. I don't think you would speak so fondly of nuclear weapons if it wasn't in retrospect.

[QUOTE="mjarantilla"][QUOTE="flazzle"][QUOTE="HuusAsking"]

Are we talking about the Cliff Bleszinski who said that piracy is killing PC gaming (even though it is stronger than any other market, has more top-rated games and stronger overall sales than any other console--otherwise, why would Sins sell so well without a single copy protection scheme)? The Cliff Bleszinski who essentially told the gamers who built his business (PC gamers) that they're not important anymore since consoles are where it's at?

In that case, yes, we think he is a third-rate goomba. And that he deserves a first-rate stomp to the head.

jetpower3

Man, poor Cliff! Stomp to the head?

Lets look at some quotes from St. John:

"Nobody needs a console when a game's value and DRM is defined by community or an input device. Consoles just serve to keep you from playing a game you didn't pay for. What's Sony and Microsoft's motivation to make another console? It's been so rocky, and it's not about the pretty graphics anymore." According to St. John, spectacular graphics have become a commodity, and not the platform for games to differentiate themselves. "The Wii is the exception that proves the rule — it's not about the graphics, it's about the input device."

...and that's why 360 is chasing Wii right now and catering to the casuals. There is more to a console than just keeping you from playing a game you didn't pay for. He only sees the functionality of playing games, not the reality of how people play games. yes, he has a point, but people simply do not crowd around the 'PC' for family fun, nor does everyone like to sacrafice the PC for serious gaming.

I would think people that agree with him would also watch all their tv and movies from the PC, and not own a TV at all. And you can logically make that argument. And you can logically shoot down that argument.

Now, speaking of goomba-heads, lets examine this gem:

"You'll never hear this from anybody else because they probably don't know. The original codename for Direct X was the Manhattan Project, because strategically it was an effort to displace Japanese game consoles with PCs and ultimately the Xbox. We called it The Manhattan Project because that was the codename for the program developing the nuclear bomb. We had a glowing radiation logo for the prototype for Direct X, and of course as soon as that got out and the press covered it, it caused a scandal."

Wow. Classy. Whats next? Naming a project after the holocaust? Calling this guy a fourth-rate goomba isn't enough.

Manhattan Project =/= Holocaust. Nuclear weapons probably prevented WWIII from breaking out within 20 years of WWII.

No, but they caused two terrible proxy wars/genocides and a semi-paranoid world for the next 45 years against two countries that wanted to be hostile, but couldn't be directly. I personally think that fighting such a war instead of a real one is a lot scarier and terrible, because you would never know when the end would come, or if it ever would. Either way, it could have all been over in an instant. I don't think you would speak so fondly of nuclear weapons if it wasn't in retrospect.

Nuclear weapons caused Vietnam and Korea? Here I thought it was because of the Cold War, which, incidentally, remained "cold" specifically because of nuclear weapons, and it still ended.

And if you ask me, scary is better than dead.

Anyway, we always look back and see the past the way we want to see them, but the truth is that the only thing that really matters is survival. Humanity adjusts to pretty much any other kind of situation.

Manhattan Project =/= Holocaust. Nuclear weapons probably prevented WWIII from breaking out within 20 years of WWII.

BTW, people do watch TV and movies from PCs. They do it by hooking up a TV to their PCs. The TV is nothing more than a monitor with a built-in tuner.

mjarantilla

It's pretty classless and thoughtless to have a project with the purpose of displace the 'Japanese' game console stronghold with by comparing it to a nuclear bomb. I'm not arguing whether dropping the nukes was right or wrong. I am arguing its wrong and insensitive to use a nuclear bomb reference in this way.

Japan is VERY sensitive to making light of those bombings. It's nothing to make light of.

And of course people do watch TV and movies from PC. Why would you repeat what I just said? But ITS NOT THE NORM!

Its like people that buy the PSP over the DS, because PSP can play movies and music out of the box, and has a bigger screen. But guess what? It's about the GAMES. Not what makes sense 'technology' wise.

Here is why PC is better than a console... 1. Combine experient- why have everything separate, DVD player, Game system, DVR etc... when a PC can do it all, in just one box. 2. Versatility- you PC can be whatever you want it to be. You can use any controller you want 3. Better graphics 4. Better games 5. Free online and a choice of services like Steam, Xfire, or Live. 6. Multitasking, convert a video while playing a game, or if a game doesn't support custom soundtracks, have a media player in the backroud. 7. Mods 8. Niches- there are modder, overclockers, programmers, hackers etc.. all on a singe platform. I could go on for longer but I am at work.muscleserge

This is all your opinion except the better graphics part. Point 8 is why I perfer consoles over PC because I don't have to deal with any of that.

[QUOTE="muscleserge"]Here is why PC is better than a console... 1. Combine experient- why have everything separate, DVD player, Game system, DVR etc... when a PC can do it all, in just one box. 2. Versatility- you PC can be whatever you want it to be. You can use any controller you want 3. Better graphics 4. Better games 5. Free online and a choice of services like Steam, Xfire, or Live. 6. Multitasking, convert a video while playing a game, or if a game doesn't support custom soundtracks, have a media player in the backroud. 7. Mods 8. Niches- there are modder, overclockers, programmers, hackers etc.. all on a singe platform. I could go on for longer but I am at work.-Renegade

This is all your opinion except the better graphics part. Point 8 is why I perfer consoles over PC because I don't have to deal with any of that.

you don't HAVE to deal w/ it on your pc either.

[QUOTE="-Renegade"]

[QUOTE="muscleserge"]Here is why PC is better than a console... 1. Combine experient- why have everything separate, DVD player, Game system, DVR etc... when a PC can do it all, in just one box. 2. Versatility- you PC can be whatever you want it to be. You can use any controller you want 3. Better graphics 4. Better games 5. Free online and a choice of services like Steam, Xfire, or Live. 6. Multitasking, convert a video while playing a game, or if a game doesn't support custom soundtracks, have a media player in the backroud. 7. Mods 8. Niches- there are modder, overclockers, programmers, hackers etc.. all on a singe platform. I could go on for longer but I am at work.scottie300z

This is all your opinion except the better graphics part. Point 8 is why I perfer consoles over PC because I don't have to deal with any of that.

you don't HAVE to deal w/ it on your pc either.

If there is one thing you can't avoid on PC it's hackers. They ruin just about every game on PC.

If there is one thing you can't avoid on PC it's hackers. They ruin just about every game on PC.

-Renegade

Regardless. Whether the experience is better or worse on console or PC is not what is driving the console industry. IMO it's the fact that many many people like the separation of a gaming console compared to playing games on the PC.

Arguing which one is better is not the point. The point is, until the day comes where people 'gather' around the PC instead of the TV, and have no problem sharing their PC to be both a home tool and a dedicated entertainment device, and console creators can no longer figure out how to appeal to consumers, it's probably not going to happen.

There is a lot to be said for having one device dedicated to one function and the convenience it offers. It's also nice to have a dedicated supplier, because with Nintendo you get fanatastic service. I had nightmare service with Gateway and other PC suppliers. Im sure there are good PC producers with great support. I haven't experienced them all. But I feel real comfortable getting a Nintendo product for this reason, which is just another reason people may like consoles.

[QUOTE="muscleserge"]Here is why PC is better than a console... 1. Combine experient- why have everything separate, DVD player, Game system, DVR etc... when a PC can do it all, in just one box. 2. Versatility- you PC can be whatever you want it to be. You can use any controller you want 3. Better graphics 4. Better games 5. Free online and a choice of services like Steam, Xfire, or Live. 6. Multitasking, convert a video while playing a game, or if a game doesn't support custom soundtracks, have a media player in the backroud. 7. Mods 8. Niches- there are modder, overclockers, programmers, hackers etc.. all on a singe platform. I could go on for longer but I am at work.-Renegade

This is all your opinion except the better graphics part. Point 8 is why I perfer consoles over PC because I don't have to deal with any of that.