David Jaffe Wants a Single Console Future

I find it much more likely that PC's will get affordable and small enough to basically replace consoles, with the big 3 licensing games out, than switching to a single console.

Way to support a monopoly. Ever hear of the notion that consumer electronics innovation thrives on competition and brand loyalty? One console to rule them all, and in the darkness blind them you asshole.

NO.

I actually would be surprised if it doesn't happen at some point... but not for a LONG time. I think in about 20 years when graphics have literally no room to improve, processor power is maxed out, memory is cheap enough so it isn't a limitation, sound chips can do everything.... then why do we need different consoles... when all the technical limitations are gone? They will all basically do the same thing in the long run. I think eventually we will just have game systems... designed by different companies... but playing the same games. The competition will be in the software, not the hardware. I think it's just a matter of time... but it's a long way off.

all you douchebags are missing the forest for the trees. a single console format would be spec'd out by the 3 current powerhouses (MS/Nintendo/Son) with input from the major software developers.

the console would be built, all developers could focus on a single engine/architecture and actually have the potential to master it, rather then just put out copy/paste games every other month because they don't have time to figure shit out between 3 ports.

naturally the 3 would work on a new console every 5-8 years or whatever the market warranted. single spec, single console, not core crap, not premium crap, not elite crap, not pushing blu-ray or hd-dvd against each other, not having to choose between 256 megs of ram and hdmi and all that crap, one solid design (to rule them all ;).

MS/Sony/Nintendo make the bulk of their money through software licensing, not selling the shitty consoles themselves, they don't want to build the crap anymore than we want to have to pick between them every couple of years, they just want to sell software/licenses. being owners of the "ONE", they'd split licensing profits equally and be happy, developers would focus on one thing and be happy as they'd learn a single architecture and reach 3 times the potential audience. gamers would be happy because they'd only have to buy ONE console instead of 3 to get access to ALL the great games.

Yea then we could be charged $700 for a syetem that barely updates dick every year or two. I mean we can't bitch or complain, because theres no competition!

"What the fuck dude, GameBox 6 is exactly the same as GameBox 7 only without the Greenray player and the extra 20mhz"

"STFU hater, I want Madden 2029!"

Yeah lets have a single console, single dev kit, single company, and single board of directors while we are at it. And lets have them define what innovation is.

Fuck off Jaffe.

capitalism and monopolies and the hate for socialism will make this void... well, once the robots take over it wont matter anyways.

As a professional game developer with 10+ years in the industry, I have to say this is a remarkably dumb idea. If we were ever to adopt a standard console architecture, the motivation and ability to update, upgrade or otherwise modify the hardware goes to zero. They never updated the VHS standard, the DVD standard, the audio CD standard because they couldn't. Doing so would invalidate the media that came before. It would be like next summer's update to the 360 makes it so none of the current 360 games are playable any longer. Not going to happen. With a single standard platform, one of two things would happen:
1) The platform would remain static and would not change. This would hurt the consumer and developers because ongoing technology improvements would not be available. Imagine if we were still limited to PS1's. Bleh. To be sure, a second party would recognize this opportunity and would offer a new platform, putting us in the exact situation we're in today.
2) Different vendors would incrementally improve the "standard" with faster machines or ones with added features. We already have a platform like this. It's called the PC. Ironically, the closest thing to a single standard game platform is the PC, which is very, very heterogeneous, thereby eliminating the advantage the consoles have - homogamy of platform.

In short, this idea of a single gaming platform is naive, impracticable and, bluntly stated, stupid.

Of course he wants a single console future, he's a developer. I love the variety and creativity that comes along with having the competition between different consoles.

Many of you appear to be misinterpreting what he's saying. He's not asking for one company to become dominant and create a monopoly, but rather any company can create game consoles based on a set of standards.

What a horrible comparison. DVD the standard vs. home consoles?

If i could buy one console and play any game out there i would but one. But sine i have to buy three to play all the games I would like I have not bought one. I could see maybe getting a PS3 when the next price cut comes just for the blue ray and then maybe get some PS3 games since they should have a selection to choose from by then.

This would give any game designer a target crowd of anyone who owns a game console. So if they make a good game they will make more money then they do in the current market. If game ls like SMG could be played on every console its sales would of been doubled. More money to make more good games.

Console designers would just compete to see who could make most preferable machine cause people would not buy a machine based on what games it would have.

The idea of competition driving progress looks down on David Jaffe's gaming monopoly with pity.

An issue I see with this is that new standards tend to start with a high entry level price. Look at HD-DVD and Bluray. The initial customers are people w/ a lot of money to spare b/c they can throw $800 at a player. They will have some content to watch because movie companies can spend a small amount of money to release their movies on that format and still get the bulk of their income from regular DVD's and hte movie actually being in the theater.

If a new "standardized" console comes out with a high entry level price (similar to the standardized media formats) then its not worth the investment for gaming companies because there will be very few initial adopters and they don't have any other formats to release their game on.

I guess there would need to be a big first party push to get people to adopt the new console.

What a douche.

$250 Wii

$500 PS3

There is a reason those systems have different price points.

It's nice to want thing...Personally, I want this loudmouth crybaby to go away forever.

and so, Jaffe's descent into irrelevence continues, much like Dyack and Romero, sadly.

If he wants a single console, develop for PC.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say they're being absurd. Imagine what would happen in our industry today if the single console that was allowed to exist in the market was the PS3.

You'd have a complete meltdown of the industry if the one console that existed was a failure in any way. What if something is wrong with it? What if its too expensive because they insist on building in an overpriced HD disc format? You need competition in this industry.

I can sympathize with having to support too many platforms, it sucks to have that pressure. But the market has proven it can handle 2 or 3 major players at once. The real problem here, I think, is the pressure that developers are under by their publishers to go multiplatform. If it were up to the developers, they would choose their fav console and build for that and ignore sales realities.

I think these guys ought to be thankful for competition among consoles. Could you imagine if the 360 was the only one and there was no Wii? What about innovation in interface and other areas, do we really expect one console manufacturer to do all the innovation themselves? The whole reason why the Wii exists is because Nintendo realized it was fruitless to compete on graphics in an industry that was growing stagnant on HD, and so they expanded the market by going in a different direction.

Exactly what benefits have we reaped from CD and DVD? Companies charging consumers top dollar for 10 year old media? Cd's are still fucking $15-$18, and the medium costs less than a penny. DVD's were super expensive until they figured out they could flood the grocery store line with shit movies for $6 and people would buy them.

Industry standard help the producers of content, not the consumers. Consumers are benefited best by competition. Haven't we learned this yet? Doesn't it sound vaguely familiar?

The Nintendo was $200 in 1988. $200 in 1988 was like $600 now. So our $249 Wii and $349 x360 are technically cheaper and vastly superior in every way. This would not happen with Industry Standards.

competition between consoles just breeds new ideas and (hopefullly) better products.

While I do not see this happening anytime soon. I do, however, see the possibility of it happening eventually. Maybe in 15 or 20, or even 30 years from now, technology may stabilize enough that a software and basic hardware standard for each console generation arises. I do not think a 'one console' would exist. I still think there would be more then one, because the market is so diversified in it's wants and needs, that from a marketing point of view, it would be easier to do in multiple products.

Think of a future, where you still have your Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, or because it's the future, someone new. But as a developer I could now make a game that works on ALL of them without the need to do separate multi-platform development. Each console could offer different features, outside of the standard, and if a developer wanted to, they could take advantage of those features at the cost of their product not working on the other consoles. Basically becoming an exclusive.

So in a way, things wouldn't change to much, but at the same time for the developer, the publisher and the consumer, it would and everyone would be better off. I wouldn't miss out on a lot of the good multi-platform titles that exist today (i.e. the ones that are PC/360 only, or 360/PS3 only, leaving Wii users with either crap or nothing), because even if I bought the new Nintendo console, I know it will still play all these other titles, besides the ones Nintendo takes advantage of their system with.

I just think it is extremely foolish of people to scream, 'NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN!' when it comes to some kind of standard. It may not come to pass, especially as Jaffe wants it to, but it is still quite the possible future for us as an industry. Especially when you look at the current trends in engine development to ease cross platform development. While one console in the future is highly unlikely, a software standard and a base hardware standard is likely to come to fruition.

Hey Jaffe, it was called the PC, you f@#%ing tard bag.

Despite all the money this would save me (I think I have evey viable platform), no thanks. I want Nintendo to keep being Nintendo most of all, but there are tons of reasons this is a bad idea.

Next gen console will be pretty much a dedicated gaming pc will it not? Actually, IMHO they already are except for the Wii. They (Sony/Microsoft) have already mooched pretty much every feature off of pc technology now except for upgradability of all major components.

Software companies are always trying to commoditize hardware, and hardware companies are always trying to commoditize software.

yeah i'll just hold my breath on this one. i'm pretty sure many "experts" are also advocating world peace.

competition has driven the gaming industry since the beginning when Nolan Bushnell stole the idea of Pong.

you've got to have the companies pushing each other.

Yeah, it's not gonna happen.

I don't see it happening. There is demand for the DS, Wii, and 360. Regardless if one manufacturer somehow manages to obtain control in the future, I think that there will always be the three spots filled.

So, let him develop for only a single console. Problem solved.

If that happens we won't be around to see it. I'm thinking by circa 2400 or so.

Never. Going. To. Happen.