TDIRunner | 2,791 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 17 minutes ago, cartman said: No maybe not like that but they know that in a year they most likely will. Of course they know that. So does everyone else. That doesn't make it a conspiracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,569 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 42 minutes ago, cartman said: No maybe not like that but they know that in a year they most likely will. What console has had a major revision within the first calendar year of release? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tulpa said: What console has had a major revision within the first calendar year of release? Nintendo DS 2005 and Lite 2006 in Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,569 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, cartman said: Nintendo DS 2005 and Lite 2006 in Europe. Okay, that was fourteen years ago. Near as I can tell, the PS4 and Xbox One had revisions three years after the first release. Three years is a pretty long time to have to hold out for the "better" model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDIRunner | 2,791 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 The console manufacturers could release new systems every 6 months and it wouldn't change the fact that no one gets screwed over since no one is forced to buy anything they don't want to own. Technology will continue to improve. To want otherwise is irrational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boosted52405 | 178 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 This thread is straight up hilarious. OP - have you ever bought a new phone, or heaven forbid a new car? Same shit all day. Retail goods never stay the same, they are in the business to make $$$$$$ and yes screw you, if you're willing to bend over. They do this for several reasons, first is to try and maximize sales - people tend to buy the latest/greatest, but they also want those suckers who "have to" upgrade to do so. Lastly, they have to do this to keep up with the competition or they will fall behind. Look at Sony and especially Microsoft, heck even Nintendo in the handheld division for most of their history followed this trend. Yeah it's crappy, but it's business, and the consumer makes the decision to spend the $$$. The cell phone market is exponentially worse. I've held onto my Note 8 for 2 1/2 years now, she's been great, but I think I'm finally going to get the Samsung 11 (G20?) when it comes out on Feb 11th. It will be outdated within 6-12 months I expect! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splain | 2,624 Editorials Team · Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 I struggle with this too. Yeah, it sounds bad when you say that the only benefit is "they got to play those games for those 2 years" or whatever. But it was really fun for me to be playing BOTW at the same time as the rest of the internet. I bought Odyssey late, and lots of stuff had been spoiled for me already, and there was virtually no active discussion anywhere. So it's fun to early-adopt sometimes and play a game that lots of other people are playing, and the number of people playing a game will never be higher than it is the first week of release. But that's just lucky; the game company doesn't "provide" that benefit. 3DS early adopters DID get boned by Nintendo, and they knew it, which is why they did the Ambassador program. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 9 minutes ago, Boosted52405 said: This thread is straight up hilarious. OP - have you ever bought a new phone, or heaven forbid a new car? Same shit all day. Retail goods never stay the same, they are in the business to make $$$$$$ and yes screw you, if you're willing to bend over. They do this for several reasons, first is to try and maximize sales - people tend to buy the latest/greatest, but they also want those suckers who "have to" upgrade to do so. Lastly, they have to do this to keep up with the competition or they will fall behind. Look at Sony and especially Microsoft, heck even Nintendo in the handheld division for most of their history followed this trend. Yeah it's crappy, but it's business, and the consumer makes the decision to spend the $$$. The cell phone market is exponentially worse. I've held onto my Note 8 for 2 1/2 years now, she's been great, but I think I'm finally going to get the Samsung 11 (G20?) when it comes out on Feb 11th. It will be outdated within 6-12 months I expect! No i don't feel that's the same thing. With a phone it's pretty much set what a generation is and when a new starts, sure you may get 1-3 versions to choose from but they're all there from the start. When Samsung releases it's 11/20 version that will be IT it won't be no fucking 11.1, 11.2 and all this other shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 27 minutes ago, TDIRunner said: The console manufacturers could release new systems every 6 months and it wouldn't change the fact that no one gets screwed over since no one is forced to buy anything they don't want to own. Technology will continue to improve. To want otherwise is irrational. I'm not saying it should never improve i'm saying there should be better transparency in how a generation is unfolding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDIRunner | 2,791 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 3 minutes ago, cartman said: I'm not saying it should never improve i'm saying there should be better transparency in how a generation is unfolding. How much more transparent do you need it to be? Nowadays we typically know about most of this stuff at least a year or two in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 6 minutes ago, cartman said: I'm not saying it should never improve i'm saying there should be better transparency in how a generation is unfolding. Did you just wake up in the year 2020 without having lived through the last 30 years of technology and console generational cycles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boosted52405 | 178 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 9 minutes ago, cartman said: No i don't feel that's the same thing. With a phone it's pretty much set what a generation is and when a new starts, sure you may get 1-3 versions to choose from but they're all there from the start. When Samsung releases it's 11/20 version that will be IT it won't be no fucking 11.1, 11.2 and all this other shit. How is it not the same thing? They are selling you high dollar phones - which cost MORE than a high-end gaming system, and yet come out with a new model every 6-12 months. It is literally the same thing, but worse IMO Edited January 24, 2020 by Boosted52405 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 10 minutes ago, TDIRunner said: How much more transparent do you need it to be? Nowadays we typically know about most of this stuff at least a year or two in advance. Maybe transparent is the wrong word. But i think they could wait 2,3 extra years before a console is released maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDIRunner | 2,791 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, cartman said: Maybe transparent is the wrong word. But i think they could wait 2,3 extra years before a console is released maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing? Like I said before, not wanting technology to improve is irrational. No one is forcing you to buy anything. Just wait longer in between new console purchases. That's what I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 Just now, TDIRunner said: Like I said before, not wanting technology to improve is irrational. No one is forcing you to buy anything. Just wait longer in between new console purchases. That's what I do. It would still improve it's just that the previous incarnations wouldn't exist. So PS2 would've started at Slim for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abelardo | 154 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 16 minutes ago, cartman said: Maybe transparent is the wrong word. But i think they could wait 2,3 extra years before a console is released maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing? That would make no sense, maybe not you but plenty of people would be willing to buy the first version of a new console and willing to buy new games, don't release the console for 2-3 years and a good chunk of your potential buyers will go with the competition. If you don't want to buy the first version of a new console that's fine, but a bunch of people are willing to do so, so it just makes sense to release it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,569 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 26 minutes ago, cartman said: Maybe transparent is the wrong word. But i think they could wait 2,3 extra years before a console is released maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing? Why would they do that when they got people who want to buy it now? And if they did, they'd have the bizarro cartman screaming about how they never update their consoles enough. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDIRunner | 2,791 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 16 minutes ago, cartman said: It would still improve it's just that the previous incarnations wouldn't exist. So PS2 would've started at Slim for example. So you want the consoles to be a lot more expensive when they are new? Because that's what you are saying above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 2 minutes ago, Tulpa said: Why would they do that when they got people who want to buy it now? And if they did, they'd have the bizarro cartman screaming about how they never update their consoles enough. I'm not talking about what people are willing to do but whether they're getting a lesser version. Yes, they are. Yeah i guess someone would complain that a generation is too damn long then but i'm not arguing that case i'm arguing another one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 22 minutes ago, cartman said: It would still improve it's just that the previous incarnations wouldn't exist. So PS2 would've started at Slim for example. That isn't the way technology cycles work. If you want to wait the year from initial launch to get an incrementally updated version, you can do that already. But the company has invested YEARS of development to reach their release point of the initial hardware. It would make absolutely no sense, at all, to put off that release to wait for their first incremental update to be ready for production. EDIT: it sounds like the bigger issue here is that you just need to cool your heels and not be an early adopter... Edited January 24, 2020 by arch_8ngel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,569 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, cartman said: I'm not talking about what people are willing to do but whether they're getting a lesser version. Yes, they are getting a lesser version, just like everyone who bought a 7th gen console got a lesser version than a 8th generation console. The tradeoff is that they get to play the games earlier than those who wait. Every early adopter KNOWS this. 6 minutes ago, cartman said: Yeah i guess someone would complain that a generation is too damn long then but i'm not arguing that case i'm arguing another one. That's the thing. It's your opinion, and someone can have the opposite opinion. Which is fine, but companies are going to do what maximize their profits. Edited January 24, 2020 by Tulpa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splain | 2,624 Editorials Team · Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) If you don't value that gameplay time when the game/console is brand new, then you're not an early adopter, and that's just fine, especially on videogamesage. It would be kind of interesting if Nintendo said something like "here's our new console, the Switch U. We will not be releasing any upgrades or revisions to this console earlier than 3 years hence." Then people would be pretty much expecting a revision after 3 years, assuming the console does well commercially, and anyone who buys one would know how much time they have to own the "latest" version. But sales would probably dive closer and closer to 0 as the 3-year date approached. Edit: to be fair though, when a company says "eh, let's not announce this yet, it might hurt sales" they're definitely taking advantage of uninformed customers. And not every customer might be fully aware that a revision could be released at any moment when they buy a console. They definitely don't all get into the game knowing all the "rules." Edited January 24, 2020 by Splain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cartman | 195 Posted January 24, 2020 Author Share Posted January 24, 2020 4 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said: That isn't the way technology cycles work. If you want to wait the year from initial launch to get an incrementally updated version, you can do that already. But the company has invested YEARS of development to reach their release point of the initial hardware. It would make absolutely no sense, at all, to put off that release to wait for their first incremental update to be ready for production. EDIT: it sounds like the bigger issue here is that you just need to cool your heels and not be an early adopter... It would've changed what constituted a developed & releasable system by accounting those incremental updates so the timeframe would've been different but the actual "act" of having to do a certain type of work, that would've remained the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulpa | 3,569 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 (edited) 40 minutes ago, cartman said: It would still improve it's just that the previous incarnations wouldn't exist. So PS2 would've started at Slim for example. They were only able to make the slim after they made the fat version; once they knew how the hardware worked, they were able to refine it. If they could have made the slim in 2000, they would have. Unless you're suggesting Sony hold off on the PS2 until 2004, in which case Microsoft and Nintendo would have eaten their lunch for three to four years. Edited January 24, 2020 by Tulpa 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arch_8ngel | 1,597 Posted January 24, 2020 Share Posted January 24, 2020 3 minutes ago, cartman said: It would've changed what constituted a developed & releasable system by accounting those incremental updates so the timeframe would've been different but the actual "act" of having to do a certain type of work, that would've remained the same. And you would have lost a shitload of money in the process along with a loss of market share to the competing companies in the space that get to market first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now