heres a good idea that could compete with PC on the console era

theres not doubt that pc and mobile pc have the latest tech every so often in a year. as a console is updated every 5 to 10 years.

but what if the next console launching after this one thats coming up between sony and microsoft. what if someone made a gpu chip that is interchangable in your console that is aloud to work with what ever spec is in the console.


you think that would push the life span of theres consoles another couple of years? as for mobile gaming in laptops spending a nice paycheck on a good laptop will allow you to upgrade you chips later on.
i wouldnt be so sure console makers would do a interchangable gpu because they already make enough on what they make.

but say microsoft comes out with the new xbox 1080 or something and there was a slot like the harddrive to switch out the graphics for a new powerful one that probly microsoft and amd or nvidia make exclusive chips to sell to you for console?


seeing how almost all the rumors and users and developers are saying consoles are turning out to be pretty much like a pc with a fixed operating system..

 

nah I am sure they will just use one gpu for another +5 years. After all developers do NOT want to push the technology too often as it is rather expensive.

 

yea but they could charge an arm an a leg for those slot gpus lol

 

I see no reason not to get a console if someone is into gaming gaming(or not get a pc vice versa), consider the amount of good exclusive title on each.

Good graphic make a game better, doesnt make game good imo.

 

what about the eye candy addicts tho?

 

Developers instead of wasting time with stupid crud like lense flare and motion blur and depth of field and all the other things that are only seen on really bad films using really bad cameras... And focused more on the texture and designs, we'd have plenty of eye candy.

 

Well, eye candy addicts will not only need better gpu but also modding ability (i.e skyrim ) for that to work on consoles.

 

yea true. i think that this idea would benefit console gamers to there eye candy needs.and also get hit with more money spending habbits lol.
i am a big pc gamer. but if they had a slot to interchange the gpu that could compete IMO

 

The reason they succeed is that it's a stable and consistent platform to develop for. You will never see this. Also for this same reason, people don't want to have to feel like they have to upgrade it to play a game. Those that do are in the small edge case minority. Those people can buy PC's and upgrade to their hearts content.

 

Bad idea... not only has something similar already been tried (N64 Memory Expansion)... but you instantly split your gaming audience with the "haves" and "have not’s". This is why console add-ons usually don't do well. Developers can't guarantee that someone owns the hardware so they develop the game for the base system. You might get some tweaks for the ones that own the upgraded hardware, but nothing like you’re thinking. Developers simply wouldn't waste their time.

 

Exactly. The whole idea with a console is that you buy a box and a game, and it just works out of the box. No need to check required specs or update drivers. As I see it, hardware upgrades are for PCs only.

 

I dunno. If they added a "graphics update" option so that the game played fine on regular consoles, but improved graphics with the add-on. I mean there are Kinect exclusive titles on the Xbox which requires you to buy the Kinect device to play the games, I don't see how this is any different. The thing would have to be plug and play essentially, like the SLI graphics option on the Lenovo Y400/Y500. I just think if they start using more common tech that they are able to, and should, release a new console ever 5 years instead of every 7 or 8. That's too long in the tech industry.

 

While I do like the idea, I don't see it happening. While a comparison to Kinect makes sense, it isn't a straight apples to apples comparison. A lot of the xbox/ps console bundles ship with move/kinect, providing a wider install base. Also, the kinect/move exclusives seem more like tech demos than full fledged games. Console add-ons prior to this generation of move/kinect didn't do so well. Any other old timers here remember the sega 32x?
The 6 Worst Console Add-Ons | Casualty Gamer

I believe Angry Video Game Nerd did a show about console addons. Can't find a link to post at work, but worth watching.

 

Just about every kinect or move game I've seen has been poor (my opinion obviously). But that's off topic.

The people that kinect and move are targeted at are not going to care to spend console accessory level premiums (GPU are Expensive with a capital E if you noticed) to play the same game with a couple eye candy additions. It just makes zero sense for the manufacturer, developer and consumer. Let's not even bring up the fact that the GPU is on the same die as the cpu. Too complex to manufacture and support from a development standpoint. Devs are going to target the least common denominator to maximize defect rates and dev/qa budget. Complication breeds failure. Kinect is a pack-in now so games can target it with more confidence in consumer adoption, the GPU would be an edge case not worth pursuing.

Kinect and move give the consumer a new WAY to play games, they are not the same kind of upgrade as a GPU.