The tyranny of cross-platform choice

[wraggster]

via joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/21/the-tyranny-of-cross-platform-choice/)

You kids today think you've got it so good. But ya don't! Back in my day, there was only one dominant system, and we bought all the crappy games that came out for it, and that's the way we liked it, dagnabbit!

Now you got all sorts of different systems clogging up your fancy-schmancy entertainment center, and what's worse, publishers are coming out with the same game for all of 'em. The last Madden game came out on 11 different systems, for Pete's sake!

You might think it's better to have a choice, but it's not! Now ya gotta choose between the fancy graphics on the PS3, the online features on the Xbox 360 and the swishy control scheme of the Wii. Things ain't looking so good now that you got that decision staring you in the face, eh sonny boy?

Even the portable versions are getting a second look these days. Back in my day, portable versions knew their place as the neglected, pixelated, black-and-white cousins to their console superiors. Now these upstarts are rivaling or even bettering their rightful console masters. What's the world coming to!

Hey, don't walk away while I'm ranting at'chya. I need someone to drive me to the pharmacy to get my pills. Come back here and listen to me tell you how bad things are, consarnit!

[werpu]

I cannot remember one time where one system was dominant, in the early eighties, you had the atari 2600 and about 5 major consoles besides it, then apple2 a and the ataris and commodores,
after that, nes, neo geo, c64 and later st and amiga and then snes, and the sega systems additionally, after that there was the pc, nintendo, sega and later also sony...

I think the current state of affairs is pretty much like it used to be, just the variety of cheap homecomputers was replaced by a dominant all in purpose PC and the number of console makers are now down to three.

[samthegreat68]

uhh what was the point of this article? tell us crap we already know??

[g00gy]

Yeh consoles in the old days each had their own mascot.

[JKKDARK]

There were true companies befire. Now we have crappy companies like Sony and Microsoft which aren't true video games companies. Plus these two cpmanies have A LOT of money, they get all the games on their systems and then developers make poor quality games.

[Tetris999]

uhh what was the point of this article? tell us crap we already know??

YUP

[werpu]

Well most of the old games were shit as well, same goes for the companies trying to get into the console business.

I can remember the Atari 2600 days, Hashbro, Mattel, Banday all wanted to make the quick buck out of the new business. The Atari 2600 was flooded with cheap clones of cheap clones of pacman. The problem is that the games are prefiltered by selecitve memory and mostly forgotten.

[Broadus]

You know, there are still console-exclusive games. To my great displeasure.

[Basil Zero]

Sony and Microsoft respectively made decent games:


Sony with God of War and Legend of Dragoon ,along with some intervention with some of the FF games.

Microsoft with Gears of War and Halo(LOL)


i say let it be the way it is, the end will justify who's more dominant.

[cswallstreet]

Reading that reminds me of what Grandpa Kong would say on the Donkey Kong Country on the SNES.. of couruse while hes beating you with his cane like on the game.

[woods05]

Sony and Microsoft respectively made decent games:

Sony with God of War and Legend of Dragoon



I havent heard of them

decent? maybe
great? not yet, probably not at all

[Ichijoe]

Here's the way I see it.

1) The PS2 is the greatest thing since sliced Bread
2) The PSP was supposed to be better then the DS
and live off the back of #1's success!

We all know what happened to #2.
I'm not going to debate whether or not Homebrew and or Piracy killed the Platform.

The DS™>PSP Monthly Numbers speak volumes enough as it is.

So jump ahead to the a last week (or so), and we have are Friend Phill Harrison shooting off his Mouth about the PS3™ beeing the Mercedes Benz of the Console World...

WTF?!?!

Who besides this overpaid Jerk do you know who's driving 'round in a Merc.?! I didn't think so.
I liven in a World where most people drive VW Golfs!

Be that as it may, I'm not overly put off by the Price of the PS3 as such.
But, given the immediate past History of the PSP + the uncertainty of what the PS3's role might be.

Is it any wonder why most People are "Jumping In" for the XBOX360?!

Let it be know that I FACKIN HATED the first XBOX!
I'm starting to think that Microsoft might be getting it this time though.

Then again there could just be a larger non-fanboy base out there that thinks the way I do and are just scared Sh*tless to blow another €600.00(EUR) on a PSP.

So w/no one ~actually~ buying this Crap is it any wonder why all these Third-Party Devs are in a Race to get there Sh*t ported over to a Console that has a future now!?!?!

[quzar]

I cannot remember one time where one system was dominant, in the early eighties, you had the atari 2600 and about 5 major consoles besides it, then apple2 a and the ataris and commodores,
after that, nes, neo geo, c64 and later st and amiga and then snes, and the sega systems additionally, after that there was the pc, nintendo, sega and later also sony...

I think the current state of affairs is pretty much like it used to be, just the variety of cheap homecomputers was replaced by a dominant all in purpose PC and the number of console makers are now down to three.

Not only do you have your chonology wrong (with the ordering of consoles and computers) but you are dead wrong with the assertion that there were not times with a single system being dominant. The 2600 was the only big boy back in the day, the market share was something along the lines of 80% if you were to also include the 5200 (which competed against the 2600 as they weren't compatible) and even the colecovision which could play 2600 games. While from the time the NES was released until right before the SNES came out nintendo held something like 80% of the market (although that was in large part due to their dirty tactics and strongarming)For handhelds, until just the past few years with the DS and PSP, the gameboy series was the ONLY big name for handheld gaming. The Genesis was the first console to come out to rival another that held a majority share (the NES) and began the tradition (with the TG-16/PCE) of the 3 horse race for consoles (although I've seen it been argued that the sets of three existed since the days of the 2600, but the numbers don't quite reflect that).

Since those days the typical tendency was for two of the three to only be dominant in either japan or america ( Saturn/PS and GC/Xbox) and the third to be split between them, which both makes sense, and allows for there to consistantly be 3 major systems.

Cross platform games though, simply make sense, and have always existed. Back in the day the same game might come out for NES, Genesis, PC, Amiga, and the arcade. It makes good business sense. Why ignore certain demographics? IMO though, it seems like a better idea would be to use a cross platform approach to rope people in, then when one system is failing, choose sides and release a product only on the system your last sold best on (their example was madden, what if madden went X360 exclusive, how do you think that would affect sales of madden and of the 360?) .