One Console to Rule them all!

[Peench]

What's wrong with competition? Much like the ring in Lord of the Rings, EA has recently announced that they apparently wish to rule us all... under one console.

Sure, when the words "Can't we all just get along" were uttered by Reginald Denny, they were intended to bring us all together. To point us towards solidarity and one-ness as human beings. For some reason, when EA says it, I don't get the same warm, fuzzy feeling.

I came across This Story tonight about EA's belief that currently having 14 different platforms for games is simply not a good idea, but that "set top boxes" with streaming content would make it much easier for developers. He claims that we could have one set-top box and "a Nintendo channel, a Playstation channel and an Xbox channel."

So wait a second, if there are all these different channels, and the games are being streamed to the same device, does that mean development is the same? So EA can spend its money developing for one set-top box (as opposed to 14 different platforms) and then offer the game on one of the "channels?" I'm confused here. How does that help anyone?

In my mind I see this as stifling. The existing companies would do everything in their power to ensure that a game ends up on ONLY their channel, or else what's the point? If the same game was on all the channels, who makes money? Would there be a "third party developer" channel? If so, it seems that EA is attempting to position themselves to ditch MS, Nintendo and Sony in favor of a system where they can develop games and sell them directly without the need for a peripheral device. Would they be making these set-top boxes too?

I don't know. Perhaps it is the cynic in me that sees this as a huge pie in the sky of untapped dollars for EA. A seemingly lofty goal that would allow them to ditch the R&D, sales, etc. that the current console manufacturers engage in, in favor of a simple system where they can make more money on their games. Sure, that's all fine and dandy, but would we - the gamers - see a price cut in the cost of games? I doubt it.

I love the utopian sound of a single "device" on which we could play all games developed. That would be awesome. Imagine not having to buy an Xbox 360 if all you wanted to play was Halo3? Or not having to buy a PS3 if all you wanted to play was MGS4. Or not having to buy a Wii if you wanted to play Super Mario Galaxy. That would be awesome. The best of all gaming worlds in one device.

But somehow I don't see that as possible. And even if it was, imagine the solitary cost of that device. I should start saving now!

So what do you think? Is the current competition good for the gaming industry? Or would it be better if we had a single device, on which we could play every game?

You don't have to let my cynicism towards EA get in the way of answering the poll question! Feel free to respond to the question with your answer and why and also comment on EA's comments as well.

[Spzombie]

I just think it's about the games myself. Now if you look at it from a business perspective. Multi platform games is where the money is at. Take the Halo 3 launch that was just one once console. What if it were on all three? The numbers alone would be staggering. I remember there have been times I wish I had the other console to play that cool game. Well if they did do something like that I could. But I just don't like where they are going with this. Streaming content? Channels? I think I'll pass. I still want to own my game and not rent it on a pay by play basis. Now the set top sure if there was a way to pop in a disc from any of the developers and have at it then cool. I'm down with just buying one box. Not three. Sure I did it in the past but it's sure expensive. Just buying one would make the hit to the wallet a bit better. But I don't see this happening any time soon, if at all. But it would be nice to play the games you wanted to.

[Gordon]

Heh, the one system to rule them all sounds like a PC to me... And while there are only a few out there, if it were to catch on... That is where it would.

[ZoomZoom71]

I there were only one console, what would all the fanboys do for entertainment?

[Causedawg 83]

Gaming experiences are all about sharing them with people, and that's hard to do when we all have different systems. I think the gaming community has suffered from that since there became three major gaming system manufacterers... and maybe even two.

It seemed so much simpler when EVERYONE had a NES and we all had that one great game (remember Mario 3?). Now, you either have the new Metroid game, Halo 3, or whatever on the PS3, and we all have different experiences that we can only really share with people who have the same systems.

[Quo]

I think this guy has the typical EA viewpoint. It's not about what's best for gamers. It's about what's best for EA.

Sure it'd be nice to play cross-platform. I don't see it as necessary though. What I do see as necessary is good quality games and performance of servers on a level far above what EA delivers. If a set top box is the direction the market is leading, that's fine with me. I'm very skeptical though. And if that set top box is delivered by EA... count me out. I'm not interested. I can't handle the frustration.

[grife]

its definitely an EA thing, one platform would mean every builds for something supposedly simple but even when it was just PC for the most part it was never simple with components coming out all the time to change things up. I would really go for a single platform. but since I hate EA i voted for the current regime.

[Lord Sam]

Originally Posted by ZoomZoom71

I there were only one console, what would all the fanboys do for entertainment?

[Lord Geoff]

This would be terrible if EA went this route. They most definitely do not have the consumers' best interests at heart. I don't mind the multiple platforms. It gives me choice. This round, the 360 gives me more of what I enjoy as a gamer. Next round it may be Sony or Nintendo. Who knows, but if there is only one device and one strategy, then what do you do?

I like the unified online structure of Xbox Live and what it has brought to the gaming industry. What if Sony were the only game in town? We would be back to not being able to see what your friends were playing and not sending cross-game invites and such. And no Achievement points! Oh, the humanity!

Or look at Nintendo. What if the Wii were the only console. We would be looking at a ton of games with nearly zero depth and next to nothing in online gaming. Does anyone want that? Multiple consoles encourage new technology and new ideas. EA isn't known for doing their best to enhance the gaming experience. They are known for wringing every last cent out of a title or a franchise. EA hates your freedom!

[The Milk Man 09]

I think that the power of the system would end up suffering and so would gameplay, It would be like gametap which eventually turned to making its money through adds. This type of game system would be for a totally different kind of consumer and not for a console gamer.

[churchv50]

Fanboydom comes from a need to justify your choice of platform purchase. I've read a few (read:a metric buttload) message boards, and you don't get the hate from people who bought more than one system. I personally love to play games no matter what device. I have a 360, I want a Wii, and if sony would put out something I care to play that doesn't make it onto one of the other platforms, I'd start saving money to get me a PS3.

[BrewCityUpstart]

Originally Posted by Quo

I think this guy has the typical EA viewpoint. It's not about what's best for gamers. It's about what's best for EA.

Troof!

[Thornes70]

I think what dude was getting at with the channels was literally turning to a channel and you see the MS or Sony (or whatever) logo, and you play the games they have purchased (of course from EA), which in turn you must purchase to play from them.

What it hints at (in my opinion) is basically all "gaming channels" really running the exact same formatted games - digital crap where you buy (kind of like paying for HBO or Showtime, for example). They'll all still have their 'exclusive' content, but with only one format being streamed to all - the game maker is now ditching the separate formats for each console, plus the packaging, shipping, etc. Your little box has a harddrive, maybe?

Think of it like getting dlc off Marketplace - like an arcade game.

It's a great idea - right up there with shoving a sharp pin in your eye.

[KEEZY]

Like the Sega Channel!

[GoatMother]

I say one console with EA at the helm, all first party software must get the EA approval. Hardware outsourced to whoever assembled the first years worth of 360's, but using the Wii's graphic's card. Pricing and marketing will be controlled by Sony, specifically Ken and Kaz. Three Sega games will be bundled in (trust me they'd have no problem getting EA's approval)

[The Milk Man 09]

The mediocre game company would let anything get made for their mediocre system and the game industry would fail.