We need one standard gaming format.

One standard gaming format. Each company could build their own system to their own quality standards, featuring their own design (both aesthetically and internally) and able to play any game off the shelf.

With these companies moving towards a central home-entertainment hub instead of a straight-ahead video gaming console, this is the best choice. It would be like DVD, one standard format that any company can make their own system for. They can have their own tweaks and differences in controller design, just like they do now--really, if you think about it, the controllers are essentially identical.

Competition would not wane, it would simply move further into the background. Honestly, do you see General Electric and Black and Decker holding massive press-conferences where they invite all the different bread-making companies to show off their respective toaster designs? "And now NEW! from Dempster's! Available only on the GE Toast-Box 360! BAGELS!"

We applaud these companies as if they're rock stars, but they're just a bunch of suits sitting around thinking up new ways to make money.

So as the hardware manufacturers and designers move into the background, it would put much more emphasis on the actual game developers. No longer would Microsoft and Sony dictate how powerful their systems will be, leaving the devs to work with whatever they're given. A gaming indsutry quality standards association would have to spring up, and from this the devs would work out and establish what specks they want to see in the next gen, and if the hardware companies don't follow through, they don't make sales.

Your choice in console puchasing would go like this: Random company X would produce a system built by leperous children in some remote corner of the world, using sub-quality hardware. This system plays the games, and works ok. You find it at Wal-Mart in the middle of an aisle, stacked atop a plastic pallet, and labelled $99.95.

Random company Y, on the other hand, produces a system built in a top-of-the-line facility in some random American research park. They use the best of the best: gold-plated HDMI ports; ultra-fast solid-state hard drives; colour-customizable and brightness-adjustable LED power indicator lights; top-quality disc drive; multiple high-speed USB ports; absolutely silent cooling systems; and a sharp, contemporary case design that fits right in beside your Bose stereo system and 64-inch 120hz LCD. This one costs $999.95, and for an extra charge the company well set up and optimize it for you in your home.

Both machines will do essentially the same thing: play games. But both are not equal. The basic specs are identical, but the little bells and whistles will be what sells each respective system. This would not eliminate competition, it would massively increase it!

Besides these two companies, there would be hundreds more making their own versions, some better than others, some absolute crap.

[Saaking]

That wouldn't work. Exclusives make a system unique and thus if they're good they make the console sell. What would be the point of multiple consoles if you can play any games on it?

[Forbidden_Darkness]

Exactly, It would be dumb.

Also, watch the last part of the Cop Out trailer on youtube and you have my answer ;)

[SilentNegotiator]

One format? Like the endless amounts of hardly different consoles that helped cause the Video game crash of '83?

I like the different consoles being very different. It gives me a reason to buy (most) of them, and allows for all sorts of unique experiences.

[darthv72]

back in the day (several years ago) a company called 3DO came out with a system. Manufactured by Panasonic (Matsushida in JP) the system wasnt so much about itself as it was the concept it offered. They licensed the tech to a few other companies to release their own "3DO" player. Sanyo and Goldstar joined Panasonic in releasing players that used the same general idea but had been tweaked to be more individual.

All of them could play the same software even though they were made by different mfgs. This was because they all had licensed tech and were meant to be the first in a series of products to offer playback of a standard software format. Unfortunately, the system never went anywhere in spite of having big titles like super street fighter 2 and samurai showdown to name a few. It did however inspire other console makers to try their hand at licensing their tech to other mfgs.

JVC and Hitachi released their own versions of the saturn from Sega and Panasonic released a DVD playback equiped version of the gamecube. There were even DVD players based on the NUON tech which essentially was an upgraded version of the Atari Jaguar system. Samsung , Toshiba and RCA all released several NUON based players in different models.

The idea of a single solitary standard is not new, by any means. The issue with trying to make it work is essentially the reason it has failed each time. The restrictions imposed by the originator leaves little room to improve the variations in models to be profitable to the individual companies releasing units. For that it is no different than the current dvd player market.

Any dvd player can play any dvd so what really makes one stand out over the other? Name value, features that enhance (or give the impression) the standard playback of the medium, price,...? You could say that the dvd format was the closest to having a standard in regards to the media used. To bad it didnt offer the potential to be played in all consoles in a true universal standard. By that I am referring to a company that make the game code for all compatible consoles all on the same disc. You have an xbox or ps2 and a single game has both formats on it. Like the days of full screen or widescreen movies. You played the one that fit your player/tv preference.

[DelbertGrady]

We will get one format. Most games will be downloadable or streamed in the future.

I know some of you disagree and say it will be disc based, but you are the same people that once said online gaming on consoles wasn't necessary, rumble was overrated and that achievements were a gimmick. So what do you know?

[eraursls84]

Atleast they were right about one thing, achievements are a gimmick

[DelbertGrady]

Until they got trophies.

[ceedubya9]

Who wouldn't want a console that offers the best of what Sony and Microsoft have, all in one? Would have saved me some money.

Nintendo on the other hand, seems like they are going in their own completely different direction than the other two.

[Jeppe]

It would require standards as Direct X etc to let the developers abstract away the hardware. Microsoft would love it.

[kwicksandz]

yes. This guy is describing PC gaming. Which is awesome!

More of you console folk should give it a go

[SlaughterMeister]

Except entertainment-based, and in your living room.

[Saryk]

I will say this again for the thousandth time. Eventually there will have to be one standard. Microsoft, Sony, Apple and Nintendo will have to bite the bullet. Sega was the smart one by getting out of the console business. Sony went from 1st place to dead last in the console market because of their system cost when first launched. People are getting tired of the Console versus Console versus PC versus Mac, blah, blah blah.

PC is the most dominate because of the versatility. But how long will that last? The consoles will be PCs by next console launch. More than likely needing liquid cooling with all of the heat problems they had this console batch. It is surprising that the business model is to lose on the console at first. And then try to make it up in software and more cost efficient production in the long run.

All is needed is a pirate proof system, that can be upgraded when necessary.

[fullmetal297]

Competition is needed to keeps prices affordable and product quality high. You guys may not realize it, but you need the company you hate so much to keep prices low and game quality high. Imagine if Sony released the PS3 without the influence of Microsoft or Nintendo. I can guarantee not only will they price to cover manufacturing cost, which was $800 at the time, but also little extra to make profit. Good thing the xbox 360 had the price point of $500, otherwise the ps3 would cost much more.

Anyway, I don't see consoles as the future of gaming because static hardware. My bets are on online-based service like Onlive that stream their games and content through local servers. The only challenge they face is latency, but once +10 mbit internet connections becomes a norm in every household these company will take off.

[SlaughterMeister]

I was in no way supporting one console over another.

[thor]

There will still be competition - only this time, the competition will be to provide the better features and the more reliable hardware, rather than simply buying games to make exclusive.

I think this is a fantastic idea. Much like how MS forces developers to include achievements, xbox live integration and to support game invites, parties and custom soundtracks, a gaming standard would include all of these things and then it would be up to the console
manufacturer to implement these features from a user's perspective.

Of course, it would mean that nobody would take maximum advantage of the hardware, and you can say goodbye to brave moves like including the cell processor. Though maybe that's a good thing.

The other major problem is the same as we have with PC games, where there is effectively one format for numerous machines. And that's that games won't necessarily be tailored to run on a lower-powered console. You'd have compatibility problems, and some games would run but would just chug along at a low framerate.

Current console manufacturers wouldn't be OK with this idea, either - I'm sure some open-source developers would make a standards-compliant piece of software running on PC, such that you could buy a cheap PC and bypass using a console altogether - a console that would cost you at least £1000 since they can't recoup money from game sales.

It wouldn't work in practice, but in theory it's great. Maybe this should have been suggested when games weren't such big business.

[leetabix]

Perhaps in many years to come when consumerism and capitalism aren't paramount. There will always be the need for competition to spur on new developments and technologies however, as long as business exists and money is more important then air there is NO WAY there will be 1 standard format i believe. I don't however claim to be a business man this is just my opinion :)

[SlaughterMeister]

Didn't you read my post?