barbanonfacitvirum

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

barbanonfacitvirum t1_iwogt9l wrote

Personally, I disagree. I wholeheartedly believe that the shortening of life cycles in order to render previous generations obsolete sooner and sell more consoles and more software over and over again across different iterations of the same console is a terrible practice and entirely anti-consumer. The PS4 is certainly getting a bit old, but in the grand scheme of things it could still go for at least several more years without its support window being unusual, let alone excessive.

I looked a few things up just to help contextualize this conversation:

NES was supported for 12 years;

Sega Master System was supported for 9 years, or even still currently depending on which region you look at;

TurboGrafx16 was supported for 7 years;

SNES was supported for 13 years;

Sega Genesis was supported for 11 years;

NeoGeo was supported for 14 years;

N64 was supported for 6 years;

GameCube was supported for 6 years;

PlayStation was supported for 12 years;

XBox was supported for 5 years;

PlayStation 2 was supported for 13 years;

XBox360 was supported for 11 years;

Wii was supported for 7 years;

PlayStation 3 was supported for 11 years;

Wii U was supported for 5 years;

Switch is currently at 5 years;

Xbox One is currently at 9 years;

PlayStation 4 is currently at 9 years.

8