Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

n1keym1key t1_iwq5tt9 wrote

Reply to comment by barbanonfacitvirum in Older Gen consoles need to lose support for gaming to move forward meaningfully. by Big-Golf4266

Those older consoles were mainly only supported after a new gen was released by a few third party companies.

I agree with the OP, when a new console is launched after a year or so its time for the older one to be left behind. If third party devs want to continue supporting it then that fair enough but the console manufacturer should move on to support the new one only.

The problem we have currently is that new games are still being heavily pushed by both Sony and MS on the OLDER machines. Once they allow the older machines to become legacy devices and stop making devs release the game on both gens then we will finally see some true next gen games.

It never happened back in the day because the next gen was always a major jump in tech, this time around the next gen is really just a beefed up last gen.

We had new games being released on PS2 and the same game being released on PS1, the consoles were so wildly different inside that the 2 versions would have been developed using two completely different devs/publishers and we would get a version of the game that was suited to each console and used it to its ability.

The PS4 and Xbone need to die (a horrible death) before we see the true potential of the next gen machines.

1

barbanonfacitvirum t1_iwqbvi4 wrote

My point was more that they're releasing consoles too frequently now.

1

n1keym1key t1_iwqn8er wrote

No, tech moves faster now than it did in the old days, that's the reason for shorter lifespans, that and the fact that nowadays everyone wants the next big thing as soon as they have got their hands on the current big thing.

−1

barbanonfacitvirum t1_iwqnx43 wrote

You're kind of making my point for me. It isn't that I don't understand what is happening, it's that I think it is a bad thing. Shorter lifespans for equipment that costs roughly the same (with inflation taken into account) means that if something lasts half as long and costs the same amount, over a comparable period of time it costs the consumer twice as much money. I don't see how this sort of exploitation could be viewed as defensible, but if you're fine with it that's cool.

2

n1keym1key t1_iwrrkrp wrote

Its the same with all tech though. Take TV's for instance. Back in the 90's I could go buy a Sony TV and know it was going to last for years and years barring any accidents and it wouldn't cost me £3k. TV's today just are not designed to last that long and they cost more too.

Many of those 90's/Early 00's CRT tv's are still going strong today and used by many in the retro gaming community. We won't be saying that about the flatscreens of today in 20+ years time.

1