@LesserAngel @SuperDutchy never said out-power. 95% of the AAA title currently out for PC are available on consoles as well and while they do achieve the raw visuals achieveable on a PC, consoles come close (aka approach).
If you take into consideration that the specs the PS3 and Xbox are ridiculously inferior to most modern high end PCs, it's easy to fathom that PS4 and Xbox 720 will last for 5-10 years, because of the visuals they will be able to achieve if not simply because they were designed to.
@Codester_41 they are created in a programming environment designed for the console they're being programmed for. Also, anything is a PC by most peoples definition, as long as it includes a HDD(or SSD), RAM, MoBo, GPU, and CPU...really a PC just a combination of parts. a PS3 is a PC, a 360 is a PC, a PS4 is a PC, they're just specialized devices.
This seems like common sense. Really when you break it down, a console specifically designed for gaming, running an OS designed for gaming, running a current GPU designed for gaming, running 8 GB DDR5 (plus RAM from the GPU). There's very little that needs to be processed in the background on a console.
A PC is not just running your games, even tho you may use it just for that. It's running the (most likely) Windows OS, random programs, steams, etc basically whatever you have on at the time. this is using up Core, GPU and RAM resources in the background while you are playing your Call of Duty or more likely World of Warcraft (be honest now).
The current generation, which are able to achieve games that look like Tomb Raider, Crysis 3 and some other notables literally use a tenth of the specs that these supposed new machines possess, while at the same time approaching(somewhat) what is capable on a high end machine.
So when someone says that a machine dedicated to gaming will last for several years, to me this is common sense and easily believeable.
How does it make sense that EA, literally the largest publisher of games in the world, did not anticipate this would happen?
First off, the idea that in order to play a single player game not associated with anyone else all by yourself requires logging in to a server...There is no way that they honestly thought this was a good idea. Who knows what they were thinking.
Then there's the servers themselves. the knew how many people were pre-ordering the game, so how on earth would they not have had enough servers up and running for release. And a better question yet is why weren't the servers stressed tested and made sure that they would be able to handle the workload.
There's really no excuse for what's happening, but I'm sure they'll try their hardest to make some up...
The Sega CD wasn't really successful, but that didn't really matter because it was an extension of the Genesis
The Sega 32X was also not succesful, but for the same reason as the Sega CD, Sega was bring out all its good AAA titles directly to the Genesis on cartridge
The Sega Saturn was very successful, although much moreso in Japan, but limited in the United States
This all led up to the release of the Dreamcast (which I bought on day 1, btw ). It was an AMAZING system with amazing games. Soul Calibur, Resident Evil :Code Veronica, Seaman, the list goes on. overall it was a solid system. it was even the first system to come with a built in 56k modem. When the Sony PS2 came out, none of that mattered though.
The Nintendo Wii U is Amazing, and I can see the potential it has, but right now CURRENTLY, companies are passing up releasing games for the system, because they do not believe that the copies will sell.
EA has Crysis 3 up-and-running on the Wii U, but chose not to release it
I hate to think that other companies may do the same if the system doesn't start to sell better. currently the sales numbers are very low and a Nintendo console has not sold this poorly since the Virtualboy.
Once again, I love the Wii U. I am not talking smack, just stating facts. I would hate to see the systems life cut short after the release of the PS4 and Xbox 720...it deserves better.
I don't necessarily believe that this would be the end as a hardware producing company, but if the system continues the way it's going and they cannot being up their sales SIGNIFICANTLY, then I don't know what they could do to compete with the new systems. I will cry if Nintendo stops producing hardware.
I love Nintendo. My first console I owned was the original NES and I grew up with Nintendo during the 80s, 90s and 2000s...unfortunately due to the low sales figures of the Wii U and the approaching release of the PS4 and the Xbox 720 ( or whatever it will be called ) it seems that Nintendo may be repeating what happened with Sega and the Dreamcast.
They have released an innovative, yet ultimately underpowered (yet capable) machine, with too few AAA "console selling" Wii U exclusives. There's no Mario, Zelda, Pikmin, Animal Crossing, Smash Bros. , Mario Kart, Yoshi, etc...bottom line is that the titles that Nintendo NEEDS, are not available now, and unless they can get them out in a timely fashion, the future remains uncertain as a hardware producer.
Holiday season 2013 will be the season of judgement it seems and if Nintendo cannot make it through with significant profits, I fear it will spell doom for their current console, which I don't think they can afford to fail. I don't think the success of handhelds alone can keep them afloat and I doubt that Nintendo wants to become a third part developer producing games for other systems.
I really hope it doesn't come to this. It will be a sad day when we are playing Super Mario Bros on a non-Nintendo system.
SuperDutchy's comments