[UPDATED] Designer believes single format would increase software competition
Veteran game designer David Jaffe has spoken out on the ‘one console future’ debate, supporting Denis Dyack’s frequent claims that a single console would benefit both developers and gamers.
In a post on his blog, Jaffe says: “We have it with DVD, we had it with VHS. We have it with televisions. So what do we lose by having it for game consoles?
Sure, you miss out on some features that may otherwise be available if another console was there to compete. And for those few features you lose, don’t you make up for it in so many other ways?”
The benefits, Jaffe says, are that gamers have a huge variety of content available to them and that developers wouldn’t have to spend time and money making their content work on multiple consoles.
As a reply to the common criticism that the single-console argument reduces competition, Jaffe explained that “[with a single console] you get more competition on the software side – which to me is where it counts – because there is more competition to be the best on a single system instead of content creators splintering and never worrying about competing with two of the three groups.”
Advertisement
[UPDATE: Since the publication of his original comments, Jaffe has updated his blog entry to stress that he's in favour of a uniform console standard, not a single console. He also claims that, despite devoting the original post to coming up with arguments as to why a single format would benefit consumers and developers, he is not 'advocating' one side over the other - merely attempting to initiate a dialogue]
Some people say the PC is the unified device.
But if you want an instant-on experience, prefer to play in any room, want the freedom of nothing to download / install, then you need... a PC; someone else's.
Imagine the future whereby your local cable TV / telco piped games to you like TV channels. They could host servers running standard PC games but with the images fed as compressed MPEG video streams to your existing set-top-box (STB).
These servers could even feed mobile devices. The quality of experience would of course vary according to the screen and other aspects of the device, but such a centralised system would allow you to start playing on your TV at home, continue on a mobile device and finish on a PC at your destination.
Some people say that the presence of multiple console manufacturers increases innovation. Really? The real innovation has been with the controller and the software. Most modern STBs have USBs. Plug in any controller you want.
Stay tuned; this new paradigm is already on its way.
You sounds like marketing for a certain service! I saw the compressed MPEG video output/run on central server idea a few days ago... They've been talking about this idea for PC software and having thin clients for years, but nothing has come of it! I think the lag will be a little annoying for hardcore gaming - maybe casual gaming?
What is needed is something half-way between being a PC and a console. It needs to be a PC, but of a fixed standard for, say, 5 years. Developers would then code to this standard, and people with that minimum spec of machine could play the games. Of course, a standardised operating system on top would be useful too.
Microsoft seem to be trying to do this with Windows for Games and the various DirectX releases, but even those occur too frequently, and having a full PC operating system is a bit overkill for a gaming device. Maybe as well as the various Tablet and Media Center versions, there should be a Games Console version?
You are correct about the innovation coming from controllers, and that this 'unified console of the future' could connect to a standard interface, such as USB, but then you hit the eternal problem of peripherals never being a major success, unless it's part of the console in the first place. Would people have clamoured for the Wii controller if it had just been a new controller launched 4 years into the PS2 lifecycle?
"Would people have clamoured for the Wii controller if it had just been a new controller launched 4 years into the PS2 lifecycle"
Imagine walking into HMV and there is a Wii controller in a box with "WiiSports" written on it. You pay £30, take it home, plug it into your set top box and then type the code in from the manual to auto-download or stream the game.
That would have exactly the same chance of success as it did on the Wii surely? In fact it would have even more chance of success as it wouldn't need to cost as much because you don't need to buy an entirely new console.
Rikki said, "They've been talking about this idea for PC software and having thin clients for years, but nothing has come of it!"
All good things come to those who wait. The company you read about spent several years researching new technology (supported by two government grants). People had been talking about video-on-demand for even longer.
Rikki said, "I think the lag will be a little annoying for hardcore gaming - maybe casual gaming?"
I agree that centralised gaming wouldn't be suitable for hard-core, but that's when they c****e their own PC. See how versatile the unified console is!
But there's more than just "hard-core" and "casual". The former is less than 10% and the latter is les than 5%. There's still over 85% of the market.
And don't assume that lag will be a killer. The hard-core segment spend much of the time playing online. That means across the wild Internet to connect to just one server per territory. But centralised gaming means only connecting via a telco's own network to servers housed in multiple sites in a territory. Assuming there's enough bandwidth (and that improves every month) lag may be less.
Rikki said, "They've been talking about this idea for PC software and having thin clients for years, but nothing has come of it!"
All good things come to those who wait. The company you read about spent several years researching new technology (supported by two government grants). People had been talking about video-on-demand for even longer.
Rikki said, "I think the lag will be a little annoying for hardcore gaming - maybe casual gaming?"
I agree that centralised gaming wouldn't be suitable for hard-core, but that's when they c****e their own PC. See how versatile the unified console is!
But there's more than just "hard-core" and "casual". The former is less than 10% and the latter is les than 5%. There's still over 85% of the market.
And don't assume that lag will be a killer. The hard-core segment spend much of the time playing online. That means across the wild Internet to connect to just one server per territory. But centralised gaming means only connecting via a telco's own network to servers housed in multiple sites in a territory. Assuming there's enough bandwidth (and that improves every month) lag may be less.
