During my usual cruising the Internet routine for all things gaming news, I stumbled upon
this article, in which Square-Enix was quoted as "wanting to get it off their chest" that bringing Final Fantasy to the Xbox 360 was not in any way, shape, or form, a sign of betrayal to faithful PlayStation fans.
OK, I'll go with that. Great games shared among consoles is a great idea. With production budgets on par with Hollywood movies (and bursting at the seams), it makes business sense not to want to limit your audience. Think of all the Xbox 360 owners out there who simply don't possess a PS3, but would purchase a FF game if it were an option to do so. Then again, it would makes sense to port it to the Wii as well, wouldn't it? I don't care if the console can't run it to visual perfection, due to technological constraints. Nintendo is top dog at the moment, right? Let Square-Enix go all out, and really spread the love.
Now that I think about it, let all games be interchangeable. It's the path we're steadily going down, anyway. At this rate -- and not far from now -- there will be little difference between what MS, Sony, and Nintendo offers at any given time... other than variations of controllers, and online infrastructures. Oh yes, I almost forgot the differences in cases. Add to that checklist " how each of the consoles look, perched proudly in your entertainment center."
See what I'm getting at here? Back in the day, your choice of console (if you couldn't afford more than one) was based on the amount of "must have" games that were specific to it. With that line being continually blurred, we are winning on the consumer end, but I have to wonder if this is going to eventually lead to a thinning of the herd. When you can walk into a store and no longer have to trouble yourself with having a specific console to play your games on, the guy that offers the one that's readily available, durable, and cheapest, is going to win.
We may scoff at the idea of living in a single console world, but I say to you -- it's coming, and has been for a long time. By demanding that we "share" everything, including games and the ideas between competitors (NXE and rumble anyone?), everyone starts looking the same. When that time finally comes, you just might find that tired, old cliche about getting what you wish for to be a painful lesson in reality. I just hope that in the end, we're ready to sleep in the proverbial bed that we made.
Gameboi's blog
Follow
RSS
Contact
As such, the closer we get to a 1 console world, the more an exclusive will be worth, and the more sony/microsoft would offer for it, so it'll balance out.
I didn't include the Wii because to publish a game on the Wii you google "Wii minigame collection open-source" and change the graphics.
I wouldn't like to see a port of Final Fantasy XIII to the Wii. It most definately wouldn't be as good as the other two versions, because of the Wii's shortage of power. The game would have to be scaled down significantly, plus of the limitations of the Wii remote. I just wouldn't like to see it on the Wii.
The way the video industry did after betamax died. Ya.
Having 2-3 home consoles, each with games that run exclusively to their individual OSs only works to decrease compatition and affordable prices. For instance, why do you think Nintendo can continue to charge $250 for the Wii despite the fact that the little white crap-box is just two Gamecabe duct taped together? It's because of thier exclusive OS, which has Mii's, waggle, and certain games the other guys don't have. That's what Wii owners are buying the console for: the OS, not the hardware.
But what if you could run the Wii's OS on the PS3. How much do you think a Wii would cost then? My guess is $99, which would be a good thing for everybody, amirite?
So I say "NO" to the one console future, but "YES" to the multiplatform console OS future. It just makes good sense, people!
It's a ridiculous notion that the thing that's driving innovation and good games is exclusivity, as if developers are going 'well, I guess we'll have to shelve our plans to make a rubbish game and make a great game instead, since we're only on one console and we need it to stay competitive.'
Good games happen because there are people that have the ability and will to work hard to bring us good games. Of course, market pressures mean that it's not always that simple but I maintain as long as those people exist, we'll continue to get great games, and the best way to get those great games to an audience is to make sure as many people can play it as possible.
Fantastic and enlightening, piece. A lot of food for thought there. I don't welcome a future where all consoles have the same to offer either.Even though I generally get all of them and more money exits my pockets, I'm willing to do that not just for those exclusives but as an investment to drive competition as well as innovation from them.
Good stuff.
Hmm...maybe this could be another article entirely...anyhow, one console, no. Only PCs...lol.
Monopolie$ aren't legal in the USA...
@ Yojimbo
I'm with you more money may leave the wallet.
BUT, EXCLUSV's are where it's at!
@ Gameboi
I hate to say it but isn't that what the PC a test model for this concept already. (( Emulation ))
& besides, can't you get the biggest console games on PC too?
(( Examples : CallofDuty, Halo, DeadSpace, Assassin'sCreed, & L4D ))