Can a console over $300 succeed?

[Dahne]

I'm curious. Has any really expensive game-realted item ever caught on? $300 seems to be the cut-off point, though it's probably half that for a handheld. I'm not quite sure, though. I haven't been old enough to pay much attention to the industry for much of its history. Anybody want to put together a list of things over that price, and whether or not they've failed?

[AB Positive]

We'll find out next year. PS3, and XBOX2 are both slated to be well close to the $500 mark, let alone $300

-AG

[Retsudo]

$500, :eek 2: damn, looks like this PS2 is the last console im going to buy!

[Half Japanese]

$500, damn, looks like this PS2 is the last console im going to buy!

But thanks to Sony's shitty quality parts, you'll be buying a ps2 over and over and over...........

[Flack]

I have two forms of currency -- "A Taco" (which runs a $1) and "my first car" (a 1979 Ford Mustang, which cost $1000). It's tough enough spending the equivalent of 300 tacos on a gaming system, but when it gets to half of my first car, that's just silly.

[Ze_ro]

PS3, and XBOX2 are both slated to be well close to the $500 mark

X_x @_@ Ouch... looks like I'll be sitting out the next generation. The only system I'm likely to spend that much on is a NeoGeo. Maybe Nintendo will provide something cheaper...

As for the discussion at hand... I think you're right. No system over $300 that I'm aware of could ever really be considered a success.

--Zero

[badinsults]

The Saturn went for over $500, and the Playstation was over $300 when it was released, I believe.

[Jasoco]

Well.. the prices will probably drop really fast. Until they hit $200-250 each, I won't be going after them.

[dmhawkmoon]

This question is tough because the price of systems fluctuates. Even if the next PS begins at $500 it might be a success because it will certainly drop in price.

As for systems which held value for a long time, the Neo-Geo was a success and it cost well over $500 as far as I recall. That system is still going; they are still releasing new home carts. In fact, I'm purchasing a Metal Slug 5 home cart preorder any day now.

[zmweasel]

N/A

[zmweasel]

N/A

[zmweasel]

N/A

[Raedon]

$500, damn, looks like this PS2 is the last console im going to buy!

But thanks to Sony's shitty quality parts, you'll be buying a ps2 over and over and over...........

ugh.. my PS2 is still going strong and I dropped it 6 months ago..

anyway.. :D

I'll wait. I've got so many games to finish that "keeping up with the Jones" isn't something I need to do..

[Ed Oscuro]

I thought we were all supposed to know something about games, oh well.

Guess not. I do like Flack's post, though...that and Zach's thrilling trillogy of comments have made this topic worthwhile. The premise of the topic isn't bad, either.

What system was released at $500? Jeeesus, the TG-16 CD was that, wasn't it? Not a success. I really can't think of anything else that should've been that expensive. I've heard that the Neo Geo was $700 at release...not a success, that goes without saying...

I don't think I would be buying a system, old or new, for $500, especially when I sometimes come across old systems I want with a ton of games for that much, i.e. the still undelivered Sharp x68K: ~$550 with 50 games and other extras. If I can do that well, there's no reason to throw down $500 for something I won't use that much (my GameCube has seen a good deal of use, but for three games only: Metroid Prime, Phantasy Star Online (Offline), and Zelda Wind Waker, which I beat just an hour ago) and will lose money as soon as I buy it. I'd rather work on my GC title collection or buy a PS2 for that much money...

None of the Big Three are stupid enough to think that people are gonna buy a whole new system for $500 when their lineup will be virtually empty once again, with few titles released and the public's willingness to blow that much cash on *anything* apparently rather low (not a bad idea if you ask me).

[Ed Oscuro]

An interesting quote from the PlayStation FAQ (circa 1995) up at GameFAQs:


The PlayStation II and III are already planned, but don't let that stop you from buying the PlayStation I, as the PS II is planned for 1998 and PS III in 2003. So relax and get on with it.

[Needle]

Given the current trends of buyers, I'd say a system launch over $300 would probably be met with low purchases. It seems the competition is so strong these days that anyone can expect a console price cut sometime after the system's 1st birthday, and if you're starting at a price over $300 then you're going to be cutting quite a bit to remain competitive.

I've noticed the prices of games have stayed about the same at launch as they were years ago, but the time it takes for those games to reduce in price has significantly shortened. I wonder if this trend will carry over to hardware. Will we see console price cuts after the first six months?

I don't know. My point is that $500 isn't a very competitive price. If they're selling the PS3 at $499 after selling both the PSX and PS2 at $299, then how will consumers react? I'll tell you how I'd react. Not well. :)

[Raedon]

they are making one mistake.. consumers only need one TiVo like device on their main TV.. All the HDTV digital tuners I've seen for cable and satallite have come with a tivo type recording device.

The push to get a "console does all" could be the a big boost for a party who didn't have all the thrills..

[Speedy]

300 dollar that's a damn low release price. Here in holland i bought my PS2 for 500 euro's (that's 630 dollar now), a year after release here (bought it with Gran Turismo 3) and see what for succes it was. Xbox was going for 480 euro's in the first months, but that one dropped fast in price.
For the older console's i know PSX and Saturn where more than 300 dollars, N64 was also near that price.

American launch buyers are lucky people i think ;)

[punkoffgirl]

We'll find out next year. PS3, and XBOX2 are both slated to be well close to the $500 mark, let alone $300

-AG

And which part of your colon did you pull this "news" out of?

-- Z.

Probably the same part you got your lovely attitude from?

[EnemyZero]

personally...I can care less what the next gen consoles run for, lock me in my room and i will be fine with everything i got now. Im not gonna dish out 500 bucks on a new sony or microsoft console when i can buy hundreds of genesis or nes games -.o

[kainemaxwell]

Do we have the economy to support such a large price tag for these next-gen systems though?

[Flack]

Here's the problem. Like we discussed in that other thread, consoles move in roughly 5 year cycles. The way it's worked out, the big three consoles are now roughly on the same cycle, which means that within 6 months or so, we'll have three consoles to choose from. That means there will be competition.

One thing we learned recently is that price means everything. Nintendo recently pulled off one of the most amazing sales comebacks in console history last Christmas by dropping the GC temporarily to $79 and maintaining a $99 price. I already have a PS2 and as a consumer I can honestly say I'd like to get an XBox, but I bought a GC BECAUSE of the price drop. So, it worked. If three nextgen consoles come out, two at $500 and one at $300, I guarantee you the $300 one will win, at least in the short run.

The other problem with that $500 launch price speculation is that there's too much out there already that I haven't played. I just NOW got a Gamecube. I have four or five games for it. That means there's a LOT of software out there I haven't played on it. Like I mentioned, I don't even own an XBox yet. If I have a choice between some nextgen console for $500 and an XBox for around $100 at that point, I'm going for the cheapo.

If they start doing that to launch prices, they'll end up doing what the PC industry has done. People will just end up waiting for the price of new technology to drop.

[dreamcaster]

The Saturn went for over $500, and the Playstation was over $300 when it was released, I believe.

No, and no. The Saturn launched at $399; the PlayStation launched at $299, which was ENORMOUS news. Sony famously held a press conference at the 1995 Electronic Entertainment Expo in which the only words uttered by the company CEO were "Two-ninety-nine."

-- Z.

Heh, I remember that.

Plus, as a side note that's always pissed me off. Sony may well have announced that $299 US price-point, but what did they give you for that price? A console...and oh! A demo disc!!!! Whoop-ee-fricking-doo.

What did Sega give? A console, with a free full game (worth $49.99 US) and a console that didn't need memory cards straight away!

With the Sony, you had to fork out money for a new game plus a memory card, both of which Sega covered already. The final saving by the consumer was minimal. And as a consumer, I would've gone with the ready-to-go console (Saturn) with the tried and true franchises (Virtua Fighter, Daytona, Sega Rally) with a known gaming brand (Sega).

With the PlayStation, after buying a game (and at the PS launch, aside from Ridge Racer, there wasn't much to choose from) and a memory card you were saving only about $30 US - a far cry from the proposed $100 US saving.

[maxlords]

Zach is right though....there's been NOTHING but rumors. No official price points, approximated or otherwise. That being said, I'd have to say that even at $300, they'll be taking a loss for sure. We've heard Sony wants to make money on the PSP instead of selling them for a loss, and the question is, will they want to use that same strategy with the PS3? Either way, for me personally, even $300 for a new console is WAY too much right now. I won't be buying a new one when they come out, at $300 or $500 or even $200. Hell, IMO, they're still not taxing most of the hardware close to enough to justify a switch to a new console. I'm still getting the use out of my games and my systems. Also, we WON'T see a new series of consoles this year. With the PSP and a rush for PSP launch software (even if they're ports) and new Nintendo hardware of some sort (but not a NEXT gen system) on the way, the only people really standing still are Microsoft, and we won't see jack out of them till their next system (which I hope to goodness is NOT called the friggin XBox2 or X2 or anything like that). And they haven't really even announced the hard anc fast specs so it will NOT be out by Xmas this year. Gonna be end of 2005 at the earliest unless someone jumps the gun. And we saw what happened to Sega when they did that....

[portnoyd]

No. (To answer the question posed on post#1 of this thread):

Taken from a post from the Phantom forums by myself: (You need to reg for these forums, and if you ask me, you're wating your time)
http://forum.phantom.net/index.php?showtopic=2078

Playstation: $300
Playstation2: $300
XBox: $300
GameCube: $200
Nintendo 64: $250
Saturn $400
Neo Geo: $700
3D0: $700
Genesis: $200
SNES: $200
Jaguar: $300
Dreamcast: $200

Some of these may be wrong. But $300 is definitely the make-or-break barrier.

dave

[IntvGene]

With the graphics reaching the level that they are at now, I don't know what they will do to make it look like I need that new system. There better be some great launch games or a TiVo like use for it, or something to get me to shell out the cash (whatever the cost). They can't just show me some more pretty pictures to get me excited anymore.

[Captain Wrong]

What system was released at $500? Jeeesus, the TG-16 CD was that, wasn't it? Not a success. I really can't think of anything else that should've been that expensive. I've heard that the Neo Geo was $700 at release...not a success, that goes without saying...

3D0 launched at $699, IIRC. Not a sucess exactly, but I've seen more of those in the wild than I've seen Neos or TG-CD units.

Also I have to wonder if we haven't reached a point where consumers are going to have to be forced in to buying a new console by the companies not making PS2/Xbox/GC games rather than there actually being consumer demand. It seems to me (and I don't claim to have my pulse on the cutting edge of gaming) the average consumer is still content with what they have.

Of course, I'd also like it if they made games I actually wanted to play. My PS2 is covered in thick dust and still probably has more hours playing DVDs than games. I think I'll pass on the next gen, thanks.

[kainemaxwell]

3D0 was promoted more.

[Kejoriv]

I agree with the common opinion, a console released for over 300 can not survive. Unless it has lots of features, tivo, burner (like the PS released in Japan), and other stuff. Right now I have GC and Xbox. I dont even have PS2. If a console comes out for over 300 I rather spend half that on a PS2 and some games.

[Ze_ro]

I suppose you could add combo systems like the Genesis+SegaCD(+32X even), Jaguar+JagCD, TG-16+CD and so forth... each of those would easily have been over $400, and none of them really succeeded at all.


With the graphics reaching the level that they are at now, I don't know what they will do to make it look like I need that new system.

I completely agree with this, and have been arguing it ever since PS3 rumors have been going around... what more do people want from the graphics and power in a console? If Madden 2005 lets you actually see sweat drip from the players faces, is that worth the price of a new system to you?

As far as I'm concerned, barring some amazing breakthrough (like good virtual reality, holodecks, or something, or constant orgasms while playing), I don't really see much point in new systems. Hell, I'm still amazed by the graphics in the Gamecube launch titles.

Perhaps Nintendo's secretive new system that plays SNES and N64 games will turn out to be something worth buying?

--Zero

[calthaer]

Of course, I'd also like it if they made games I actually wanted to play. My PS2 is covered in thick dust and still probably has more hours playing DVDs than games. I think I'll pass on the next gen, thanks.

I agree with IntvGene and Capt. Wrong. My PS2 hasn't gotten anywhere near as much playtime as my GCN and PC, and I don't really have that many PS2 games, anyways. I largely bought a PS2 because I never had an original Playstation and I wanted to play some of the "greats" I had always heard about but never had the hardware to play (the new FFs that didn't come out for the PC, FF Tactics, Castlevania SotN, etc.).

Besides Sly Cooper and BG: Dark Alliance, I don't know if there are any of my PS2 games that I can honestly say were so great that I'm really glad I plunked down the money for the system (got it at $199). My GCN, on the other hand, cost me $150 with the free game this past year, and between Metroid Prime, Wind Waker, Animal Crossing Ikaruga, and all the rest of the gaming goodness I've seen for the GCN I can definitely say I'd pick another one of Nintendo's systems up. Not the new PS, though - they can have it. I haven't even started a lot of these FF games I got, let alone finished them...I'll pass on the next gen PS, for sure - but I'll give Nintendo careful consideration...because Nintendo *is* making games I want to play.

[tholly]

I will buy all 3 next gen systems. I will not buy them when they first come out, but I will get them all. I don't need a $300 system the first day it comes out, I can buy it at $200 when it comes bundled with games and the like. For now I will be happy with what I have, but until I get the new ones in my possession, I will be itching to own them.

[LazingBlazers]

Somebody needs to bring back the package system with a FRESH launch game. Two controllers, system, and FRESH game for $299.99. I'd buy that if the game was FRESH enough. Otherwise I'll just continue to live in 1994.

[tholly]

Somebody needs to bring back the package system with a FRESH launch game. Two controllers, system, and FRESH game for $299.99. I'd buy that if the game was FRESH enough. Otherwise I'll just continue to live in 1994.

Yea, i have hated that since the N64. Systems used to come with everything you needed to play at least one game. Now you dont even get a game. I am waiting for the day when you wont even get a controller, just the system and the cables. even if a new system came out at 299, after you got a 2nd controller, memory card, and game, your at 400 + just to play one game on a new system.

[dmhawkmoon]

As for systems which held value for a long time, the Neo-Geo was a success and it cost well over $500 as far as I recall. That system is still going; they are still releasing new home carts. In fact, I'm purchasing a Metal Slug 5 home cart preorder any day now.

What do you define as a "success"? Seeing as SNK died (its name and assets now owned by Playmore), your definition must be quite liberal.

-- Z.

SNK did not go out of business because the Neo-Geo MVS and home systems failed. It was because of the NGPC and Hyper 64 losing lots of money. (and bootlegging to an extent) The main system is what kept them afloat for over 10 years and SNKP now manages to make money off of it even after everyone thought it was all over.

[Ed Oscuro]

3D0 launched at $699, IIRC. Not a sucess exactly, but I've seen more of those in the wild than I've seen Neos or TG-CD units.

Yes, I do think 3DO launched at $699. It's not really a good system to compare others to, since 3DO simply farmed out production of the units and I think poor knowledge about the average video gamer's wants (nobody could point to the downfall of Atari and say there were obvious parallels, since Atari had different problems) let the companies think seriously of that as a good price tag. Again, it never was a real success and probably most of the consoles you've seen were sold well after prices had fallen a good deal.


Also I have to wonder if we haven't reached a point where consumers are going to have to be forced in to buying a new console by the companies not making PS2/Xbox/GC games rather than there actually being consumer demand.

If companies aren't making games for the current gen consoles, why would they go out and buy a new dev kit and start pushing a new console? Game development is all about trying to sell a number of units; state of the art be damned! I wouldn't be surprised to learn that your average game developer is fed up with the PS2, but companies have barely tapped the resources of the GameCube and Xbox, really. Even the PS2 seems to have further to go; look at the new Sega Shinobi (Nightshade) and what we've seen so far out of Konami's MGS3.

[hu6800]

I'm curious. Has any really expensive game-realted item ever caught on? $300 seems to be the cut-off point, though it's probably half that for a handheld. I'm not quite sure, though. I haven't been old enough to pay much attention to the industry for much of its history. Anybody want to put together a list of things over that price, and whether or not they've failed?

uh you ever see a playstation?

the 3DO ran me about $500 on launch date..

the TG16 stackset ran me about $300 or more, so did my turbo express.

tne first neo geo gold set i bought ran me $600 with games

and my pcengine LT is still worth $600 to $900 used.

[hu6800]

NEC And SEGA ... even SNK needs to come out with a hardcore system
that can blow the xbox away.
but thats easier said then done i guess.

NEC had stuff like TZD And other fan related clubs to order from.
I miss that alot.

Matter of fact.. Digital Press should have a PCENGINE+TG16 collector only
forum, that system has some of the best shooters and rpg's
even to this date.

Most of the NEC systems ever made cost about $300 or more at launch.

[Ed Oscuro]

Most of the NEC systems ever made cost about $300 or more at launch.

Which were supported by games from Japan. Even those great shooters didn't keep the TG-16's head above the surface long enough, unfortunately. I would like to know what the various types of PC-E sold at in Japan...

[hu6800]

Most of the NEC systems ever made cost about $300 or more at launch.

Which were supported by games from Japan. Even those great shooters didn't keep the TG-16's head above the surface long enough, unfortunately. I would like to know what the various types of PC-E sold at in Japan...

Well,,,,,,,, what games in america supported the ,, like what 7 japanese only
NEC systems made?

those were over $300 as well..

And who's to say i wasnt talking about both?
what you dont buy the import systems before they are launched here in the states? I DO because i am a collector ...... and it usually cost more.

The neo geo was the biggest bitch for me because i had to pay out the ass for the system, then scout around without using the internet and find games.. and those carts cost me alot.
then SNK started sending me flyers to my home making it easier to keep track of what was comming out. sometimes i would try to order
from mags..
but i do remember when funcoland and EB first started to carry SNK games and mem cards.

Id say the NEO GEO was the hardest stuff to get for my game collection.

the TG16 wasnt even close to that.
i could score pretty much any SCD or hucart i needed.

THEN ....... stores started to get less in.. thats when i knew something
was gonna happen shitty for the NEC systems.

and yes,,,,,,,, ill say it again..
NEC put a big chip in the SHOOTER and RPG rock.
even to this day.....

first home cdrom game system having shooters and RPG's i might add.
pcengine.

[Ed Oscuro]

You miss my point. I'm saying that the TG-16's hits were all developed by Japanese companies for the Japanese market which was actually buying PC-E games. Quite a different scenario than with the SNES or the current day consoles, where a lot of stuff is domestic.

The real reason is that these great games were created for the PC-Engine which was was pretty well off due to not being sold for ridiculous prices. I don't know what the average PC-Engine cost, but I remember one being about 20K yen (one of the Core Grafx variants?) which certainly isn't over $500 in today's money. Even if the TurboGrafx was poorly off here, the cost of porting a solid PC-Engine game to the Turbo and translating it would be easily offset by sales of said game.

If anybody could give me some better information on the PC-E, again, I'd truly appreciate it. I have the feeling its release price wasn't too high, though.

[Spoony Bard]

Somebody needs to bring back the package system with a FRESH launch game. Two controllers, system, and FRESH game for $299.99. I'd buy that if the game was FRESH enough. Otherwise I'll just continue to live in 1994.

Yea, i have hated that since the N64. Systems used to come with everything you needed to play at least one game. Now you dont even get a game. I am waiting for the day when you wont even get a controller, just the system and the cables. even if a new system came out at 299, after you got a 2nd controller, memory card, and game, your at 400 + just to play one game on a new system.
That's the trap. You're actually paying $400 for a new system at launch (more if you have to buy one of those rediculous bundles). Its really a beautiful ploy; I'm sure they would sell the AV and power cables separately if they thought they could get away with it.

[hu6800]

You miss my point. I'm saying that the TG-16's hits were all developed by Japanese companies for the Japanese market which was actually buying PC-E games. Quite a different scenario than with the SNES or the current day consoles, where a lot of stuff is domestic.

The real reason is that these great games were created for the PC-Engine which was was pretty well off due to not being sold for ridiculous prices. I don't know what the average PC-Engine cost, but I remember one being about 20K yen (one of the Core Grafx variants?) which certainly isn't over $500 in today's money. Even if the TurboGrafx was poorly off here, the cost of porting a solid PC-Engine game to the Turbo and translating it would be easily offset by sales of said game.

If anybody could give me some better information on the PC-E, again, I'd truly appreciate it. I have the feeling its release price wasn't too high, though.


Yeah i know and YOUR MY FU#)($# friend and all,, its just ive been in
this mood latlely with TG16 stuff where i still cant get over the system dying..

sorry for being retarded.

[maxlords]

3D0 actually came out at $799.99, and then dropped to $399.99 after about 6 or 7 months. :) I saw it at that price, and remember it well...and my 3D0 still has the $399.99 reciept with it :D


No. (To answer the question posed on post#1 of this thread):

Taken from a post from the Phantom forums by myself: (You need to reg for these forums, and if you ask me, you're wating your time)
http://forum.phantom.net/index.php?showtopic=2078

Playstation: $300
Playstation2: $300
XBox: $300
GameCube: $200
Nintendo 64: $250
Saturn $400
Neo Geo: $700
3D0: $700
Genesis: $200
SNES: $200
Jaguar: $300
Dreamcast: $200

Some of these may be wrong. But $300 is definitely the make-or-break barrier.

dave

[Ed Oscuro]

Yeah i know and YOUR MY FU#)($# friend and all,, its just ive been in
this mood latlely with TG16 stuff where i still cant get over the system dying..

It's alright, I don't want to start spouting nonsense so if anybody points out my being wrong, that's cool. I do think NEC/TTI could've done better promoting the Turbo here in the states, though.

@ Max: Wow, the 3DO dropped THAT fast? I wonder if the high release price scared away many developers. Heck, at $399 you could buy two systems for just $100 more than the system started at...crazy, insane, and also rather greedy :/

[FF6]

With the graphics reaching the level that they are at now, I don't know what they will do to make it look like I need that new system. There better be some great launch games or a TiVo like use for it, or something to get me to shell out the cash (whatever the cost). They can't just show me some more pretty pictures to get me excited anymore.

This is the smartest coment made on this topic. What are they trying to accomplish? The graphics are awesome and there still IMPROVING using the same consoles that have been out for a couple of years.
Nintendo had 8 bit graphics then snes had 16 big then the sega came out with that 32x then the Nintendo 64. So I guess there GameCube is 128 bit graphics (I guess they drop thenumber for this console).
Anyways, like "Intvgene" said, "They can't just show me some more pretty pictures to get me excited anymore".

[Dahne]

I think the reason no one talks about bits anymore is, because of some new way the hardware works, it doesn't really matter now. I'm not sure, you'd have to ask somebody who knows more about the guts of a system.

I've always been the sort who holds out on buying a new system until the price has dropped and all of the developers have moved on. The five-year cycle has indeed become tradition. I wonder what they'll do once we've got photo-quality graphics and there's nothing left to improve upon?

[Ze_ro]

What are they trying to accomplish? The graphics are awesome and there still IMPROVING using the same consoles that have been out for a couple of years.

I think the only real limit on the graphics of the current consoles is the skill/deadline of the programmers... and since neither of those will increase much by the time the next generation comes around, I very much doubt things will be much more impressive. I'm guessing that out of all the generational gaps so far, this one will be the least impressive.

--Zero

[spoon]

I wonder what they'll do once we've got photo-quality graphics and there's nothing left to improve upon?

Actually focus on games with great gameplay. Or atleast having solid games that are fun to play. Adding more features making it a Great Gizmo, or Multi Machine, seems to be the route things are headed. The all in one happy fun-time machine.

If they really wanted to raise the intro price, they would have to start with this generation and raise the price every generation or two thereafter.300,350, 400, You get the idea. Then it becomes," It's cool, playstation 6 was 450, so 500 isn't that bad"

[Ed Oscuro]

Heh, there will always be stuff to improve on. HDTV is proof enough of that...people don't wanna play on their crappy little RF boxes (old TVs) anymore, so they go buy a new TV with composite + stereo jacks on the front. Then they notice lines faintly visible while playing, so they buy some S-video cables...then there's a leap to HDTV, but do you think everybody who buys a TV will just stick with the old stuff? Nah.

MMO and persistent worlds are going to be a big component of PC games for a while to come...I don't particularly hope that, say, Nintendo games start adopting those tactics (at all), but even so the future of human/machine interaction isn't at all limited to sound and video! Stuff will change, and a lot at that.

[FF6]

I'm guessing that out of all the generational gaps so far, this one will be the least impressive.--Zero

AGREE! This one will definetly be the least impresive.


And like "SPOON" said, "They have to stop focusing so much on graphics and visuals. I think they should start focusing more on gameplay. Thats why so many people still love to play there old games and consoles. It wasn't about the visual effects but the gameplay.

[Ze_ro]

Alright, so aside from graphics, what kind of stuff would you guys like to see in a new console? Here's some ideas I was thinking of:
A hard drive in every console, so all the X-Box-like features are available... including ripping music to play in any game, and of course, moves to abolish the memory card.
Better network support. Take a hint from the Dreamcast and the X-Box, and include a broadband adaptor WITH the system. I'm not a big fan of online games, but there's almost no hope of having a large online community when you have to pay an extra $50 for an adaptor. It could be interesting having a major online community with organized tournaments, high score lists (or "best time" lists for speed runs), chat rooms, and the ability to trade save games with other people (I don't have an X-Box, so forgive me if all this stuff is already done).
If they're going to stuff these things full of Tivo-like features, then I think it would be really neat if games were able to take advantage of this to some degree. For example, if you walk past a TV in a video game, it could be showing an actual show that you saved to the machine earlier... or you could record your games and send them to other people via the internet. There are probably other possibilities here that could be really interesting, like merging TV and video games so that you could play Dance Dance Revolution to MTV's videos and such.
Bring back the virtual light machine
Anyone else got any neat ideas for future systems?

--Zero

[SegaTecToy]

I would like to see some hardware support for artificial intelligence. Like an AI card. Maybe neural nets.

I'm tired to have to fight dumb enemies and to have to talk to dumb, repetitive NPC morons.

[Dahne]

A hard drive in every console, so all the X-Box-like features are available... including ripping music to play in any game, and of course, moves to abolish the memory card.

If the only use was to store data a la an internal memory card: yes.

Anything else: no.

PC games have their own set of benefits and drawbacks. To me, the drawbacks (installation and uninstallation, frequent bugs, the epidemic of releasing an unfinished game with the excuse that it will be patched later) outweigh the benefits, except in a few cases. PCs and consoles are both fine and dandy. I hope they get kept separate.

[Ze_ro]

I'm worried that once decent network support and hard drives become standard, then we'll eventually fall into the "release now, patch later" pattern that is plaguing PC's... One of the great things with console games is that companies usually make sure to fix all the bugs before release, since they know they only get one chance at it. PC games with incomplete features and tons of bugs are one of the reasons I don't game on my PC anymore (except emulators).

Of course, any network-applied patches would also be a huge headaches for classic gamers in the years to come.

--Zero

[zmweasel]

N/A

[FF6]

The Pc vs Console has always been a subject I know little about. To me it seems as though the console games always look better and play much more flawless. Ive baught a couple of pc games and if you pc is old the game will play slow with slow delays. Shouldn't pc games look so much better cause there always making a new graphics card or adding more memory to there pc's. A console pritty much is left alone for some years until the next one comes out.....but still it looks like there no competition. Does anyone agree or disagree. Im curious to hear some of your thoughts about this.

[NintendoMan]

If any system hits over $300, and if the price DOESN'T drop, the system won't last. I am a dedicated nintendo fanboy so if Nintendo decided to put a system out there for $600, I would buy it, but it wouldn't last.
I have actually paid those high launch day prices of 200-400 for the SNES, Genesis, Saturn, Nintendo 64, and gamecube.

[Ze_ro]

To me it seems as though the console games always look better and play much more flawless.

It always used to frustrate my brother that the Dreamcast, with it's (rather old) PowerVR2 chipset was easily able to outperform his computer (at least as far as graphics are concerned), despite the fact that his PC was essentially top of the line.

Doing Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 2 on PC of about the same power as the Dreamcast probably wouldn't have come out looking nearly as good somehow.

--Zero

[tholly]

Doing Soul Calibur or Dead or Alive 2 on PC of about the same power as the Dreamcast probably wouldn't have come out looking nearly as good somehow.

--Zero
Thats the problem with computers though....the developers of games have to make the game able to be used on countless system configurations which video console developers on have to deal with one type of hardware configuration.

[Ze_ro]

Yeah, but even back then DirectX was around, so it's not like you have to take every video card into consideration when writing the game... perhaps DirectX and Windows just get in the way too much to get maximum speed out of a PC? I'm guessing a lot of Dreamcast games probably hit the hardware rather than going through multiple layers of API's.

--Zero

[crashdummycow01]

alright ladies calm down, calm down.. for over $300 you will obviously be getting something worth more than $300

i'm sure PS3 will have a Hard drive/internet ports built in. It will be able to play DVD's, it will have a built in Tivo more than likely. Probably more but thats all i can think of right now

yall mentioned that the level of our games graphics right now are so high that there isnt much that u can do to improve? I'm sure the graphics will be getting better, but also they will probably be working alot on the speed of the console, cutting down on loading time would be quite nice in my opinion.

Now Ps3 will be able to play playstation 1, playstation 2, and playstation 3 games. The ps2 played ps2 and ps1 games and cost $299 at launch, so ps3's core price would be between $299-$400 maybe? +built in Tivo, +Hard drive [$99] +internet port [$30] +it will play dvd's.

I believe that the ps3 is gonna come with the internet ports. Ps2 didnt come with them, but they left room for one to be added because they were gonna try it out and see how it went. Now that they know more about Online gaming and connectivity and crap and that ppl will play games online, they will probably have the adapter built in.. [maybe have an online launch game ? or 2?]

that is my justification for PS3 being more than $300..

All that stuff i mentioned, Xbox already has.. so i dont know WHAT they're planning on adding to make it cost more than $300 besides better graphics and faster processor..

also i just started wondering what the next gen controllers will be like.. sony may keep its same controller like usual.. maybe add a couple of buttons for pinky/ring finger, but thats the only thing i could see them changing. Nintendo's will almost definitely change, and i have no clue about xbox.

I also believe that nintendo's next system will be selling lower than the Ps3 and the next Xbox.. mainly b/c it will probably not have a dvd player, or Tivo.. nintendo is the only system that really seems almost 100% about a gaming console, and not a game console/dvd player/... but it will probably sell for cheaper, and its also gonna be released before Ps3 and the next Xbox.. this may be good or bad.. ppl may be like.. hey its a new console.. I MUST HAVE IT!! or they may be like.. Ps3 and Xbox2 are coming out, i gotta save my money for them!..but then again when xbox2/ps3 are released at much higher prices, the Nintendo's sales might go up.

Also i just thought about it.. when the next consoles come out they may try to start weeding out the PS2/Xbox/GC games.. kinda like they did N64 and DC.. but psx games are still being stocked up on the shelves..

Also i thought i would include this .. in my opinion,the gaming companies should release one stripped down version of the console for cheap and another version with all the bells and whistles for the more expensive price..

THATS ALL I GOT RIGHT NOW.. BYYYYYE