One Console To Rule Them All

In today's slightly late (sorry!) edition of Speak Up on Kotaku, commenter Gusi A. Rincon puts forth the idea for a unified console. Forget the console wars! If the big console makers would all just declare peace, everyone would benefit.

Right now the best that could happen to the Game industry (just hypothetically speaking) would be a "band together" of the 3 big M N S. there are several reason why this benefits both gamers, the industry, and the companies themselves.

Making all the 3 companies work together means there will be only 1 Console. with the best from all the companies,

From Sony: The Blu Ray technology.

From Microsoft: The Online Service.

From Nintendo: Their share of the market that is composed of Casual Players.

This will also benefits Developers.

-They licence cost will be down from 2 or 3 consoles to just 1.

-There will be no problems with ports or compatibilities.

And gamers.

-End of the console wars.

-We would enjoy of the exclusives special for those who will benefits from 1st Party line Games like Nintendo games.

About Speak Up on Kotaku: Our readers have a lot to say, and sometimes what they have to say has nothing to do with the stories we run. That's why we have a forum on Kotaku called Speak Up. That's the place to post anecdotes, photos, game tips and hints, and anything you want to share with Kotaku at large. Every weekday we'll pull one of the best Speak Up posts we can find and highlight it here.

WATCH MORE: Gaming News


Comments

    inb4 the PC players point out they are better than even an amalgamation of all consoles could be.

      Better? Nah, not really. Already there? Sure. Steam is better than Xbox Live + Blurays, and Facebook/F2P is a bigger draw than Nintendo, I reckon.

      There are, however, a few obvious downsides that PC has, too. Incompatibilities. Peripheral madness ("what do you mean it doesn't come with a controller?!" / "It has -how- many buttons?!"). And most cripplingly, cost of hardware. Can't say you don't get what you pay for, though.

      I completely agree I would LOVE for there to be one console but the chance of these people working together in next to zero :(

    Well yes this would be nice but would never happen.

    from nintendo > zeldas, Metroids, etc etc etc

      I really hope that when the WiiU hits the market it doesn't penetrate sufficiently to keep Nintendo afloat as a platform-maker. I cannot wait for Metroid and Pokémon games on other platforms.

      Mobile Pokémon! Want!

        I would rather they make a proper Pokemon game using today's graphics, I do enjoy the current Pokemon games but I would love to see a massive open world version.

        Toatly agree, i would love to see legit mario games on my ipad or 360. Nintendo collapsing as a consol maker would be absolutly fantastic!

    pipe dream

    Then we would have the issue of high prices cause there would be no competition

    Yeah, because declaring peace worked so well with HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.

    Competition is good for the soul...and prices

      Not when the competition signs exclusive agreements with major movie producers. See any HD-DVD players around? No? Wheres the competition. Certainly isn't any soul left.

    Wouldn't you rather the console makers compete it out? Why would they even try if they're monopolising the console (non pc) market?

      Yes and no

      It's good to see each platform try and outdo the other, but wouldn't we rather see a unified attempt at revolution for the good of the consumer? We could take the best aspects of each and put them together and have a functioning, fantastic standardised platform, for a reasonable price!

        Well yeah, if you put it that way of course I'd want a unified attempt! I'm too cynical though and imo, I see it as more likely that we'll get ripped off rather than this being for the good of the consumer.

        Imagine paying for increases in Xbox Live prices all the time because there's no other console to move onto. Imagine if you couldn't play second hand games! etc etc!

          Ah, but as soon as the console made a misstep, there would be riots, complaints up the wazoo, etc. If everybody is playing on one console, everyone is judging one console. Plus, nowadays, with things like the Ouya being made possible in less than a day, somebody would step in with an alternative.

    Shades of Denis Dyack. He used to say this sort of thing all the time. Seems marginally - but only marginally - less crazy now.

    You only get into making video game consoles in order to get the licensing fees that each game producer must pay per game sold. First party games wouldn't be such a problem, but how would they distribute the licence fee profits made from a games like GTA 5 (or 6 or 7?) You'd also end up with a monopoly which might stifle innovation in the hardware space.

    Not to be rude but if I were submitting an article for Kotaku to post, I would be making a bit more of an effort than two sentences and a handful of bullet points.

      More of an effort than this amazing piece about the console equivalent of how great it would be if Batman and Spider-Man could pal around? Unpossible, Sir!

      that is what a comment is, a comment

      Really did anyone expect more? I will be rude. The above 'article' is both embarrassing and devoid of ANY real thought.

    how about an independent networking solution that connects all three consoles and brings them into 1 home screen like say android.

    Speaking objectively, I think it would be good for consumers if Nintendo failed as a maker of hardware. They have so many beloved franchises that people crave, but those are almost always the only things that attract consumers to their consoles (and after they've played them all, the consoles gather dust [looking at you, Wii]). If Nintendo stopped making consoles that polarise and ostracise developers, and start letting their first-party games onto the other consoles, everybody (except Nintendo) would be a little happier, I think.

    Btw - Sony does not exclusively own the blu ray format and the other two can always license it. This is truly up there with the Trent Reznor article.

    Oh yeah. In response - shareholders.

    No, no, no. This is completely wrong. If you remove competition then everything will get more expensive and at lower quality. The only reason that consoles have kept developing at the pace they have is competition between them. Even the most basic understanding of economics will tell you that this would be the worst possible thing for gamers.

    This is why fanboy wars are intrinsically stupid. If you could get in your time machine and travel back to cancel development of your consoles biggest competitor you would return to find everything for your console in a worse rather than better position.

    Also, "exclusives" get money pumped into them to help sell the console (not just the game) so if you remove competition, then you remove that motivation to fund exclusives and lots of the money that was put into them does not get spent and instead remains as profit for the company.

      Console gamers don't really understand this

    STEAM-BOX

    Not really on the same topic, but I think we should focus instead on a Lord of the Rings + Avengers crossover movie where the good forces of the universe must travel to Mordor to stop the creation of a new evil ring to be used by Green Lantern, aka Deadpool.

    http://www.kotaku.com.au/2007/09/sony_invites_microsoft_to_blur/

    I don't think a unified console would be a good thing. Competition is what drives innovation. All three consoles at the moment bring a varied range of features, that without, I don't believe we would have some of the great gaming experiences we have today.

    This is a pretty awful idea, from both a business and a consumer standpoint.

    Business:
    -Everyone would only buy one console, instead of 2-3. Thats A LOT less money. Unified console or not, no ones going to pay 2-3 times as much for it. So they lose money.
    -Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo have competing philosophies about what makes a good console. You wouldn't get the best of all worlds, you'd get something thats a jack of all trades and a master of none. It wouldn't be "worth 3 consoles".

    Consumer:
    -An end to the "console war" is a BAD thing, not a benefit. No competition = worse prices on consoles and games.
    -Less innovation in consoles. No competition also means no need to innovate.
    -No exclusives = less games. Not because they aren't exclusives anymore, but because Microsoft/Sony cut deals with developers that they wouldn't otherwise make. ie. From Software wouldn't have got the funding to make Flow, Flower or Journey.

    Also I actually fielded this question at Gametech last year to the Sony and Microsoft representitives and they laughed it off, it just wouldn't work because their philosophies are different. Partnering is one thing, but a unified console is just silly from all perspectives.

    One console = No competition
    No competition = High prices
    High prices = The end of gaming

    Monopolies are the opposite of good for consumers.

    I don't want a single console on the market, it would take away the competitive-ness of the market, and one of the best parts about going to a friends house for a console party is playing on a different console than usual

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now