Should Next-Gen Game Consoles Be Upgradeable? 348
MojoKid writes "Historically, console add-ons that boosted the performance of the primary unit haven't done well. Any attempt to upgrade a system's core performance risks bifurcating the user base and increases work developers must do to ensure that a game runs smoothly on both original and upgraded systems. The other reason is that a number of games rely on very specific hardware characteristics to ensure proper operation. In a PC, swapping a CPU with 256K of L2 for a chip with 512K of L2 is a non-issue assuming proper platform support. Existing software will automatically take advantage of the additional cache. The Xbox 360, on the other hand, allows programmers to lock specific cache blocks and use them for storing data from particular threads. In that case, expanding the amount of L2 cache risks breaking previous games because it changes the range of available cache addresses. The other side of the upgrade argument is that the Xbox 360 has been upgraded more effectively than any previous console; current high-end versions ship with more than 10x the storage of the original, as well as support for HDMI and integrated WiFi. It would also forestall the decline in comparative image quality between console and PC platforms."
First Post (Score:3, Informative)
No
Re:First Post (Score:5, Interesting)
No
Correct.
The reason platforms become popular are for one of two reasons.
1. A known base system so developers know what to build for. The Kinect is an outlier as it was advertised as the "next-gen" of the XBox and it was interesting enough for people to get to play with. It wasn't a memory increase (N64), but it was a Rumble Pack which came packaged with a product that requires it.
Apple did well with the requirement of having 1 mouse button as the standard. It forced developers to make simpler interfaces, which made Macs easier to use.
2. Cheap replaceable and interchangeable parts. The PC falls into this category, but companies with systems like Consoles or consumer gadgets do not want people poking around them. To top it off, all major console manufacturers have acted against altering the systems systematically.
Re:First Post (Score:5, Insightful)
You basically said what I was going to say.
Essentially, allowing them to be "upgradeable" removes the last barrier that effectively makes them computers with odd user interface devices. So I must say to anyone who wants upgrade-able consoles, it is okay. You don't have to be in the closet. PC gaming isn't so evil you need to hide it under a hipster like charade. We understand.
Re:First Post (Score:5, Insightful)
It wouldn't be that nice. Only approved upgrade kits would work, every 6 months a new $100 kit would come out, and developers would be forced into an SDK that automatically keeps any game's minimum requirements lock-step with the console upgrade schedule. The upgrades would be nothing more than unlock codes for clockspeed and features already built into the machine.
Apple would sue them for ripping off their business model.
Re:First Post (Score:5, Insightful)
No
Mod parent up.
The great thing about console programming is that you know every last detail of the target machine. You know what works, what doesn't. You can budget everything right down to the last clock cycle and squeeze out 100% performance from the chips.
If you take that away then it's game over as far as optimization is concerned.
Re: (Score:3)
I agree that the ability to squeeze out every drop of performance possible by having a fixed hardware configuration is the strongest reason why consoles should not be upgradeable (except on the peripheral and I/O side like HDMI outputs, hard-drive storage, etc.). However, a close second factor is the fact that having a non-upgradeable machine can also dramatically reduce development and per device costs. Flexibility is great, but costs money. This is why I can have a PC that costs 3-10X the cost of a gam
Doubt Sony will (Score:5, Funny)
It is too much of a change from the current gen being downgradable.
Re:Doubt Sony will (Score:5, Funny)
Oh give it up. So Sony disabled your hardware's capabilities. So what? At least they didn't totally disable the hardware, which they could. You should be grateful for that. You'd have a right to complain if Sony goons came to your house and cut your hands off, at least if you aren't a pirate. If you're a pirate or complain online about Sony, it's totally justified to cut your hands off, because you are hurting Sony and costing billions of Americans their jobs.
Why is this modded flamebait? (Score:3)
To me it reads like satire.
Poe's law I guess....
Re:Why is this modded flamebait? (Score:5, Funny)
You know, originally that post was without that last part. Then I added a line about "costing billions of Americans their jobs" and saying it's justified to cut off the hands of people who criticize Sony online.
And people still take me seriously. What is this, YouTube?
Recognizing satire is a disappearing ability (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Since you have people that don't RTFA or even RTFS, why do you think moderators RTFC? He probably made it through the first sentence and went "Oooh, flamebait" then moved on to the next one.
Re: (Score:3)
A form of Poe's law applies here:
Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of copyright maximalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're referring to the PS3, the most standards-using (basic USB, standard hard drives, etc) popular console in history?
Re:Doubt Sony will (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:who uses Linux on PS3? (Score:5, Insightful)
The point was to be able to circumvent import rules on game consoles rather than computers. Officially it was something like "playstation computer entertainment system". Sony was saying 'look it even runs linux like a regular computer!'. That tack of course did not work.
The main users of linux on PS3's were research and development places that were buying PS3's, at a subsidized rate, but then never buying games. Which was just costing sony money.
Now, as a practical matter they shouldn't be allowed to remove the functionality from the device once sold. That's illegal, but they also shouldn't feel any obligation to offer further PS3's with linux support because as you say, it's a non market, and their "the PS3 is really a computer" didn't pan out.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Doubt Sony will (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Doubt Sony will (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Doubt Sony will (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I lol'd, but in a sad way.
No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Step up to PC gaming if you want to able to upgrade your stuff.
-americamatrix
Re: (Score:3)
More to the point.. once they're upgradeable, what's the fundamental difference between PC's and Consoles?
I submit that the next gen consoles can't be more than trivially upgradable, because they wouldn't be consoles any more.
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
The difference between PC and console gaming has always been "control".
Hardware doesn't matter, software doesn't matter, it's who chooses what goes where. On PCs, users have full control to install or tweak hardware and software(even changing the games themselves through mods). On consoles, it's up to the manufacturer. Giving users access to hardware upgrades would erode the difference between PC and console, but it wouldn't eliminate it.
There are obvious advantages to both approaches. I'd like for consoles and PCs to stay separate so that I can continue to enjoy the advantages of each.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't know, but apparently you're logically handicapped. The fact that "n00bs" use consoles doesn't mean that only them use consoles.
Comment removed (Score:4, Funny)
No, because that's not the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No, because that's not the point (Score:4, Insightful)
Consoles for games, open(ish) HW for work
Then what for indie games? Xbox Live Indie Games and nothing else?
Re: (Score:2)
But how are they worse than mainstream games? (Score:2)
that's really all the Xbox Indie games are, either clones of a different game
One could say the same for mainstream games. What are all the military FPS games other than clones of each other? Even Katamari Damacy is just the old Williams arcade game Bubbles redone as a 3D platformer. The last genre launch I know of was around 1997 when Parappa the Rapper was released.
or flash games with 3D graphics that cost money
One could say the same for a lot of Wii disc games in the $20 bin at Walmart.
So how should one join the industry if one's family is unwilling to move to Austin or Seattle?
Internship: don't know where to start (Score:3)
go to school, learn to code
What should I add to my existing B.S. in computer science?
MOVE to Austin, Seattle, or Boston
I have no support network of friends and family in Austin, Seattle, or Boston, and my family is unwilling to follow me to Austin, Seattle, or Boston. How does one relocate hundreds of miles from family for the first time in order to seek a job in the video game industry?
Nobody is stopping you from being an intern at any game studio.
If high-tech internships have become unpaid [slashdot.org], how does an intern at a game studio afford food and rent?
Re: (Score:3)
Work any job to get food and rent.
Go home and work on your own game. Keep it simple, and polished. If you don't know how to do something, find out how and do it (game developers wear many hats). The resulting game is your resume to get into the gaming industry. It doesn't need to be a widespread hit, just a working example of what you are capable of, both in terms of technical prowess, and in terms of personal passion for the work.
Yes, that means working all day and all night, but that's the kind of work/li
Re:No, because that's not the point (Score:5, Interesting)
+1 I was going to make a similar reply. The whole point is so developers can make their game run on 4 year old hardware, optimized of course. This is why so many console games don't look as nice as their PC counterparts..but they do play on 4 year old hardware.
the other nice benefit of consoles is multiplayer, everyone is on equal hardware. Where as in the PC world, someone playing on 4 year old hardware might not be able to perform as well as someone with the latest and greatest system (think fps)...that is one benefit of consoles.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Even more than 4 years... XBox 360 is almost 7 years old, as it was unveiled in may 2005
Re: (Score:2)
Although the summary as described essentially says "devs don't want to figure out size and configuration of caches at run time", something that's commonly done even in some otherwise immutable hardware. After all there's always the next gen of hardware and it's nice to be able to not redo the software if you don't have to. In other words, devs shouldn't be lazier than necessary.
I think this attitude really came from early days where the PC was just an awful mess with applications and games completely bypa
Re: (Score:2)
Um, it wasn't "on a whim", at least on IBM PCs. On early IBM PCs, ROM BIOS was the closest thing to a HAL; but ROM BIOS was also dog slow (stemming from the fact that RAM was many times faster than ROM, meaning a program that made a lot of ROM calls would tend to be dog slo
Culture of bigger monitors and multiple gamepads (Score:3)
If you allow upgrading CPU, GPU, etc. then it's just PC gaming
That and unlike with PCs, there's a culture of plugging consoles into bigger monitors so that people on a sofa can play together in person. Not all games are competitive FPS or RTS where splitting the screen destroys the multiplayer experience. Fighting games, for instance, don't even need a split screen.
Re:Culture of bigger monitors and multiple gamepad (Score:4, Interesting)
I've been disappointed with perhaps decreasing support for split-screen in console games. To me it's where consoles really shine above PC games. I haven't upgraded from Forza 3 to Forza 4 because they didn't make much improvement to the splitscreen mode (co-op online play, more than 2 AI cars, etc).
Would you buy console-style MP games for PC? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Try Portal 2, my brother and I have been playing on split screen across two monitors with two X360 for PC controllers. It's pretty freaking awesome.
It does take some doing though, there are multiple threads in the steam forums giving step by step instructions.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Nobody will make the connection because everyone's already sick of hearing you Apple trolls repeating it ad nauseam in every single Android story.
Re:No, because that's not the point (Score:5, Informative)
It's not even true anymore anyhow. There are so many different classes of Apple hardware that a developer has to target that it's not a homogenous platform anymore. You've got three different resolutions ranging from 480x320 to 1024x768 (not even the same aspect ratio), two incompatible instruction sets (ARMv6 and ARMv7), two incompatible and fundamentally opposite graphics APIs (OpenGL ES 1.x and 2.x, which is kind of like DX7 fixed function versus DX9 programmable), varying amounts of CPU cores, clockspeeds, amounts of RAM, screen sizes... Third-party iOS apps are running on three different device families, and that's only going to broaden when Apple's iTV product comes out.
All told, there are currently twelve different product lines running iOS (with further variations within a product line, such as amount of flash), all with different capabilities, all with different OS version support. For each of those twelve devices, you have to support at least two major OS versions, and potentially a few sub-versions. The feature grid on the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_iOS_devices) should underscore how non-homogeneous the platform is.
Re:No, because that's not the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because someone doesn't toe the iPhone zealotry line doesn't make them an Android zealot. Most of us are simply sick of both groups baiting and arguing over whose phone is the best. It is beyond bizarre that people get worked up over phones or consoles or graphic cards, but not so much over jeans or shampoo or mattresses.
Re:No, because that's not the point (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah! Quit fighting!
Android already the whole thing.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not defending Android. I don't have an Android (I like my S60 Nokia, thank-you-very-much), nor have I even used one, and for all I know the fragmentation problem is real and will kill the platform. I don't really know, or care.
What I'm replying to is how one cannot hear about Android without someone mentioning it, every damn time, like fucking clockwork.
Re: (Score:3)
Consoles vs. PCs (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Consoles vs. PCs (Score:4, Interesting)
It doesn't matter (Score:5, Interesting)
Suppose all those problems were resolved, and after resolving them we concluded "yes, next gen consoles should be upgradeable".
It wouldn't make any difference. Consoles are proprietary platforms--controlled by one company. The fact that making the console upgradeable would benefit *you* isn't going to result in an upgradeable console. It wouldn't benefit the company, and that's what matters. I mean, I'm sure that PS3 Linux benefitted people.
(Incidentally, for an example of a successful add-on, look at the PC Engine CD. We just don't remember it much because the system barely got a foothold in the US.)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, imagine if you had the option of buying an Xbox 361 right now, that would function identically to the Xbox 360, but would get better frame rates. Would people want to buy it? Sure. I hate it when cutscenes suddenly drop down to 15fps, or when a game suddenly lags under the weight of all the action on the screen. I'd pay a hundred bucks or so to upgrade the 360 at this point.
You'd just have to enforce a decree that all games are playable on the low end systems, and try not to have too many different up
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
This is why I switched from PC to console gaming years ago. If I'm playing against you on a console, it comes down to skill: we both have the same console, so it's a level playing field. On a PC, we could be equally matched in whatever game... but since you spent that extra $100 on your video card, you'r
Re:It doesn't matter (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to cut in on the OMG-PROPRIETARY-PLATFORMS rant, but benefiting the company is kind of the point of running a business. And the console business is doing extremely well, much better than the PC gaming market, so mainstream customers are clearly okay with it. The fact that people on Slashdot still rant about PS3 Linux as if any significant share of the PS3 user base even bothered with it is illustration enough how out-of-touch many of the posters are.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I sold you a bicycle, but then told you how you were allowed to drive it, how fast would you tell me to fly a kite? What if I then told you I wasn't kidding, and came back later and removed the back wheel and welded on a block of concrete in it's place?
Tough, the eula is in the panier in the back and you agreed to it with you got on. Nah nahnah nahnah nah!
Re:It doesn't matter (Score:4)
but benefiting the company is kind of the point of running a business
Forget society. I can do whatever I please to make money.
The fact that people on Slashdot still rant about PS3 Linux as if any significant share
Of course. If something bad happens to a few people, it doesn't matter. It's only a few people, right? Something "bad" suddenly changes into something "neutral" or "good" because it only happened to a few people!
Re: (Score:3)
(Incidentally, for an example of a successful add-on, look at the PC Engine CD. We just don't remember it much because the system barely got a foothold in the US.)
The N64 memory upgrade would be an actual example of a successful console upgrade. Plenty of people bought that and it was well supported.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It doesn't matter (Score:4, Informative)
citation please?
Can't find exact install base, but The Legend of Zelda: Majoras Mask required the Expansion Pak and it alone sold 3million copies [wikipedia.org]. So 3 million at an absolute minimum to get a ballpark figure going. Plenty of other games highly encouraged people to get it too. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
The N64 memory upgrade was also thrown in free with Perfect Dark, Donkey Kong and most importantly, Zelda: Majora's Mask. It also helped that 3rd parties also put out RAM expansions too.
Re: (Score:2)
Wikipedia tells me it is super fx chip http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_FX [wikipedia.org] I would call this the most successful console upgrade ever, because it was 100% seamless!
Re: (Score:2)
One database lists 417 CD games for the PC Engine and 301 cartridge games. I'm sure those are at least close to the correct values.
By any standards the PC Engine CD was a success. It wasn't a cheap upgrade compared to the price of the base system, either.
Didn't you just answer the question? (Score:3)
Using that "counter-example" to argue that perhaps they should allow upgrades to the components the programmers depend on is just weird. Certainly you'd have to include a disclaimer in the docs right from the start about which components might be upgraded in the future. Even so, a large number of programmers would either not notice the disclaimers and fail to account for the possibility in their programming, or decide that dealing with it would be too difficult and thus fail to account for the possibility in their programming.
No (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And pray that your game even supports controllers (Score:2)
If you want upgradable consoles, then just use your pc and buy a controller.
And pray that your game even supports controllers. Too many PC games support only a mouse and keyboard, not a HID or Xbox 360 gamepad. And even if they do let you use a gamepad without JoyToKey, they make you use a separate computer and a separate copy of the game (cha-ching [cracked.com]) for players 2, 3, and 4.
Good lord no. (Score:5, Insightful)
Unless you mandate that older hardware works just as well as newer hardware, no.
People will rush to point out things like Kinect, or PSMove, or WiiMotion Plus... Those are accessories. Often cheap too, relatively speaking. The CPU is still the same, the RAM is still the same, game compatibility is still the same(more or less; there are bizarre examples across the board). Having upgradable mass storage or expandable accessories doesn't break the underlying assumptions.
I think that consoles should be "good enough." Big deal, Battlefield 3 looks amazing on PC. Surprise, it also looks amazing on Xbox and PS3. Increased levels of detail do improve immersion a LOT. But when there's a huge trade off between bleeding edge graphics and stability and compatibility, I'll lean towards stability and compatibility.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but you've got to now load low res textures, midrange textures, blahblahblah.
It's a huge hassle. Not to mention QA nightmare for game devs.
Maybe 10 years ago, but not now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
We have this already. (Score:2)
Not this cr*p again..... (Score:5, Insightful)
Upgradable in anything more than a trivial way, HD or Optical for example, basically an add-in card, blows the console economics out of the water. Socketed ram adds cost and drops speeds vs soldered. Same with CPU, and then we get to cooling issues..... Given MS's ability to keep the bumps on the 360 from shattering, would you want people to start mucking with that?
Part 2 is pointed out well above, console = fixed platform = cheap software testing. Upgrades = not fixed platform = testing nightmare.
While I haven't read the article (yeah, shame on me), I know more than enough about console development, economics and programming. I also talk to people doing the 'next gen' consoles almost every week. Having written for a console, I can tell you directly that 'upgrades' are, and will always be a non-starter. Anyone who posits it seriously is the walking equivalent of a flashing neon 'N00B' sign, complete with arrows. :)
-Charlie
Fairly lame article, but... (Score:2)
...at least I learned about pork brains in milk gravy! Almost made it worth reading.
Sure! (Score:2)
Yes, I think that upgradeable consoles would be great! We could even come up with a special name for them... Since you could customize them as you choose, that makes it more personal to the owner. They also perform various computations that allow you to play games. Let's call them personal computers! Perhaps we could even shorten that to "PC" if people prefer.
Just imagine one of these PCs and all of the parts you could put in it. You could even attach different types of input devices! I can even see them us
Personal computer vs. family computer (Score:2)
Yes, they should be PCs. (Score:4, Informative)
The Next Gen console is an inexpensive PC capable of playing the newest games with reasonable quality.
The whole console paradigm is based on two qualities.
1. Price. Consoles cut corners and lack certain qualities that PCs have and as a result have great game performance at a reduced price. This is entirely possible with PC hardware today. If MS builds their own PC from the ground up to be a gaming machine then there's no reason why it can't support windows and have superior game performance.
2. Ease of use. PCs have been hobbled for years by being too complicated for their own good when it comes to games. More sophisticated gamers have no problem with this but it can be an issue with many. Take a cue from Apple and lock down these console replacement PCs by default so the casual users doesn't mess them up. For one thing, restrict multitasking by default as that harms game performance. If people want to have lots of background processes running while they play their game then give them a setting that lets them disable the feature. But by default, just as with typical consoles, have them devote all their attention to the game when it's running. Everything else is suppressed. Also as MS would be releasing these machines there would be no driver confusion since all the systems would come with the exact same hardware installed in them.
This would also break down the barrier between Xbox users and PC users. This barrier is not in MS's interests. If the Xbox and the PC play the exact same games then no other console is going to be able to compete with them. Exclusive titles just for the xbox that don't get released on the PC don't help the xbox... they hurt the PC.
As an additional aside, the consoles and MS especially need to get serious about producing a REAL media center. Something like XMBC only better. XMBC is pretty impressive for an open source community built project but MS, Sony, Nintendo, or Apple can do better. Stop dicking around. Stop trying to restrict what people can and cannot play on the machine. This only hobbles the utility of the system and ensures it won't catch on. Who gives a damn about windows media center edition? Who ever cared? It was a flop right out the door because it was half baked. Produce a complete product and release it. We want it.
Oh, and MS... consider dropping a version of windows on a phone that can run desktop applications. These smart phones are vastly more powerful then the machines that ran windows 3.1 . I think some have to be faster then those that initially ran windows XP. If you can't squeeze a version of windows 8 on one of those phones with a custom touch UI... then you're fools. A system that had that sort of capability would be vastly more useful then any other device on the market.
Fear, surprise, efficiency, and devotion (Score:2)
The whole console paradigm is based on two qualities. 1. Price. [...] 2. Ease of use.
At the risk of sounding like a Monty Python inquisitor [tvtropes.org], make that three qualities: price, ease of use, and local multiplayer. The Wii especially is fun when you have other gamers living with you or when you have friends or relatives visiting you at home. It's a lot easier (and a lot more spouse-acceptable [wikipedia.org]) to buy more controllers than to set up a LAN party.
Re:Yes, they should be PCs. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Yes, they should be PCs. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, as the summary talks about, programming for PC's and for consoles is very very different in some aspects. You can do a lot of stuff with a console you just can't on a PC because you know precisely what resources you have, where they are, and how fast they will be. The PS3 actually has custom libraries from Sony/Naughty Dog that are similar but different from openGl precisely because OpenGl would be too slow for the PS3 if you can avoid it. If you started allowing different GPU's you'd have to move to something like directx. Which is a good concept for 200 or so different video card models, but it's not worth the efficiency loss if you'd only ever have say, 4. Directx (and openGl) manage a lot of the GPU memory system stuff for you. That's easy, but it can be very inefficient, which is why a video card with 1 gig of memory does about as well as a PS3 or 360 with shared 512. Now directx and opengl (and the GDI layer in general on windows) have to account for the arbitrary nature of what might also be in video memory at the time. Right now I have two web browsers, some office applications I left open, a game, and steam all doing stuff that might take up memory. That's actually a really tough problem to manage in general, which is why consoles can do some awesome stuff with less, because you know exactly how much memory you get. When you could lock down a full screen application in windows and boot everything else out it was easier (but not easier on users and had its own complications).
In short. Your point 1 is wrong. If it supports windows it has to support general program environments and random crap hanging out in the desktop. Windows is a productivity OS (despite what people may think) and you can use a stripped down version of the kernel, but the actual OS as sold does a lot of stuff you definitely would not want in a memory constrained environment, like layers of stuff on the desktop etc.
And yes, the idea with windows 8 is to have a unified environment to execute phone or desktop code. Same OS, different skin. Now if then get intel into a 3 way with nokia they will have one hell of a product on their hands.
Re:Yes, they should be PCs. (Score:4, Informative)
Unlikely, consoles will become dumb terminals to an onlive service eventually, or it will be a software layer you run on PC sure, but then you're into a whole different architecture. I'm not sure who you're talking about 'you guys' at? Yes I'm a graphics and AI programmer, but I don't run the industry. Having to build for 6 or 7 different targets is a bloody pain in the arse (and the windows version is really multiple platforms at at once). Where do I get 6 or 7 from? Even if it's a different game I want to reuse as much code as possible in each game, so I might be building on 4 consoles (PS3, Xbox2, Wii, Wii U) handhelds (PSP, PSP2, DS), and PC. But of course most shops aren't developing on all of those at once, and you will probably have dropped development for the Wii and PSP by now, but not necessarily both. If you wanted to make it into a PC it would have to *be* a PC, with all of the perils that come with that, and the article in general is about what would happen if you could upgrade consoles as we think of them today. Right now I have 900 mb of RAM being used, 688 by Opera and 212 by my media player because it's busy doing something to the TV show it just recorded. Steam is, for some reason using 90 MB of memory, I'm not really sure what it's doing that takes up that much space (it's not downloading anything). So wait, how much memory do I have to use again? Well this machine has 12 gigs of ram. So 10 gigs probably. I can count on that much on every PC right? Lol. I can't even count on 1 GB of ram on a PC. Sure, the OS can page stuff out, but now I have much trickier performance requirements. Do I show load screens all the time? How do I 'wait' for that memory to get there? These are all solvable (and solved problems), so I'm not saying it's impossible, it's just a lot less efficient. Easier to program for in some ways, but when I know precisely how much memory I have, how fast it is etc. I can do a lot more with it than just dumping some stuff in an unknown data structure in video memory that will hopefully optimize itself. Now you will always be able to make this argument. Specialized software to solve a specific set of problems, with clearly defined constraints and specific hardware can always be more efficiently used than a general purpose machine, that's sort of the point of specializing it. A sedan is never going to be a truck, no matter how much you do to increase it's carrying capacity. That doesn't mean specialization is great, it would be preferable if we could do all of our computing on one box, but well, it would be an expensive and difficult to manage box at the moment.
It really isn't as simple as you're making it out to be unfortunately. A good abstraction layer works because when you build for a particular console you know it will behave one way, another console another, and then the PC is a mess. The abstraction layer hides the implementation of those optimizations from other parts of the system, but they're still there. The PC has its advantages of course (a crapload of memory, sometimes extremely powerful CPU's and GPU's), but it's still a mess. It's exactly as you say, you write a driver and a universal driver that interfaces with abstraction through to the hardware. that's called directx and openGl basically (and the windows graphics subsystem). And they're very much less memory efficient compared to what you can get on crappier hardware on consoles assuming you write the code yourself well.
Jason Gregory (of Naughty Dog) actually has a book on "Game Engine Architecture" that covers a bit of this stuff. Sony has its own custom library rather than OpenGl for a reason. Specifically, for the PS3 libgcm http://www.ps3devwiki.com/files/documents/-%20SONY%20PS3%20SDK%20Documentation/graphics/libgcm-Overview_e.pdf and What sony calls "Edge" developed by their various tech groups. I'm not sure if there's something newer as well.
It's not just drivers, actually drivers isn't really a problem. Keeping them updated, that's really a separate probl
Absolutely! (Score:2)
It is ridiculous that they are not and the waste involved in the industry. It is nice that most consoles live a 5-7 year lifespan but there is very little reason that they could not be designed for some modularity and allow for them to be upgraded. Basically at this point it is a MB/CPU and GPU upgrade. I'd be OK if it was even the same price as a new system just to reduce the ewaste. Also, it is ridiculous that consoles are not required to offer backwards compatibility at least through emulation. I used to
Wii has more back-compat (Score:2)
Also, it is ridiculous that consoles are not required to offer backwards compatibility at least through emulation.
Nintendo upgraded the GameCube in 2006. The new version had not only more RAM, a slightly faster CPU and GPU, and a distinctive remote controller, but also an online service to buy older consoles' games. The Wii can play downloadable NES, Super NES, and N64 games in Virtual Console emulation, and units from about the first five years of production can play GameCube game discs. What other console has as much backward compatibility?
Re: (Score:2)
I never said that they don't, but that they should be required to. The reason they do not is because they feel it promotes the used market and that people will not buy new versions if they can keep playing their old games. Of course that is B.S. and what it does do is keep older less efficient consoles in operation or a waste of the user throwing everything away since it usually has little value. The Wii is probably the standout in this area.
Re: (Score:2)
they should be required to
Would you apply that to the PC as well? Even PC back-compat isn't perfect. The 64-bit versions of Windows Vista and Windows 7 can't run DOS games, DPMI games, or Windows 3.1 games. Heck, some games relying on undocumented behaviors of Windows 9x never got patched even to run on NT-based Windows XP.
Re: (Score:2)
razors and blades (Score:2)
Considering the price of games, one would think that the next-gen consoles would be nearly free, subsidized by the publishers. Especially as efforts to limit the value of used games becomes more prevalent.
I don't see Sony doing it, but I could totally see Microsoft partnering with a distribution channel to keep the price of the new consoles down. As it is, they'll probably be closer to $1000 than they will be to the prices of the current consoles.
I hope they fail. Consoles do nothing to improve the lives
NES (Score:3)
I suspect if there was ever to be upgradable hardware, it'd have to work by yearly subscription, and it'd have to be no more than $50 a year for the part. However, with guaranteed sales in the millions of units (as games would hard-require it) the logistics of making some pretty crazy stuff fit into $50/yr wouldn't be unimaginable. Remember that XBox Live is already pulling, what, $60/yr?
Re: (Score:2)
So - Sega could have made the 32X successful if they had just put it in the cartridges?
---hey, who threw that knife at me?
In a word: NO (Score:3)
Absolutely Not. (Score:5, Insightful)
With non upgradable consoles, you never go to buy a new game, and wonder 'wait, will this run on my machine?' That is the appeal of consoles over PC gaming, for the most part, 'it just works' you put the disc in, and play the game, and it is the same for everyone. No wondering if your graphics card will be able to make it look like the videos you saw online, no wondering if it will lag during action sequences, no wondering if you're going to need to drop another 50$ on more ram to play.
Upgradable no, but get upgrades yes (Score:3)
Making a console user upgradeable makes little sense, as consoles are meant to be compact and user upgradeable parts would work against that. In times where you can't even swap the battery in most devices, you can't expect to swap the GPU or CPU. On the other side consoles should reach a point where they can get upgrades in the mid of a generation or more dramatically the whole "console generation" thing should disappear and updates should be more fluent. Essentially they should reach a point where they act like a TV: Want to see the a movie in glorious 1080p, you have to buy a new TV, but you can also just use your SDTV and view the movie just fine, but at lower quality. Furthermore your 1080p can still play old SDTV content just fine. There is a lot of forward and backward compatibility in the system. Consoles don't have that right now, backward compatibility is very limited and forward compatibly almost non-existent (except for a few GameBoyColor games). Of course at some point there would be a cut-off where the old-console would really be to old to play some new content, but things like small PSN/XboxLive games could easily be made flexible enough to run not only on the latest generation of hardware, but also a generation before that.
Dumb article is dumb. (Score:4, Insightful)
They're consoles. The whole point is to have a consistent hardware base, so developers can custom tailor their code to the platform, leading to simplified testing and improved stability. One CPU, one memory spec, one GPU... the key parts are consistent.
You want to upgrade your console ? Trade it in for a new one! Or, if you're like me, you put it away and take it out from time to time for nostalgia.
Consoles are inherently upgradable (Score:3)
You buy the next generation of console.
Aladdin Deck Enhancer explained (Score:2)
Think along the lines of the Aladin Deck Enhancer for the NES or the Genesis 32X.
The Genesis 32X I understand, and the Super Game Boy and Game Boy Player were the same way. But the Aladdin Deck Enhancer wasn't that so much as a set of common components (CHR RAM, bankswitching, and lockout defeat) that were in all Codemasters carts anyway. NES carts have three independent buses: the PRG bus used by the CPU, the CHR bus used by the PPU, and the CIC bus used by the lockout chip. The Aladdin adapter just handled the PPU and CIC bus jobs and ran the CPU bus lines out to a separate connector
Re: (Score:2)