Comments
I predict a strong start out of the gate with a small smattering of first party titles and some ports of multiplatform titles. Then, I predict a vast gulf of time where nothing worthwhile trickles out except one or two titles a year. After that, I predict the system will be all but abandoned by publishers and it will sit uselessly on everyone’s shelf (the online service having already rotted on the vine some time previous).
/Won’t get fooled a third time. See: Gamecube, Wii.
/Seriously. From a glance, the only thing that newly released 3D system has going for it is a bunch of internet people salivating desperately over a remake of a 13-year old Zelda game they’ve all played 5 or 6 times over.
I’ve achieved console fatigue. This is pretty much why I’ve got zero interest in playing PC games, as I think it’s a waste of money to update my computer more than once every six or seven years. When I’m on my Xbox, I don’t crave anything more powerful. I’m happy with what it can do. If, by some impossible twist, developers decided to stop making new systems forever, I’d be fine with what we’ve got.
I think Nintendo’s the big offender now… they’re blurping out new several hundred dollar consoles every year.
I mostly agree, with one point of contention: I think the PC is the only place where I’m still getting excited about games. And ever since we hit the 2ghz CPU about 2004-2005, or so, I don’t think there’s been any major escalation in game requirements. With the exception of the Far Cry games which are noteworthy almost solely for their boundary pushing 3D engines, there are few if any games coming out now that wouldn’t run just fine on a machine purchased in 2006 or 2007. And the games that do run poorly? They run poorly on any machine (I’m looking at you, Civ V and Sim City 4). But developers don’t even try to put those games out on consoles cause they could never run them, so it’s still a win, I think.
