Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

What do you want in a Next Generation Console?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
24 replies to this topic

#1 KamRandle   Members   -  Reputation: 142

Posted 15 March 2013 - 04:57 PM

Hello Fellow Developers!

 

I am working on a product and was wondering what would you like to see in a next generation console?

 

Thanks,

Kammeron Randle



Sponsor:

#2 ApochPiQ   Moderators   -  Reputation: 16392

Posted 15 March 2013 - 04:58 PM

Lots of good games.


Beyond that... who cares, really?

#3 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 31799

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:10 PM

The ability to use the consumer version as a dev-kit would be my 'must have' feature.

#4 Alpha_ProgDes   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4692

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:20 PM

< $ 300, API for indies, indies channel, keep it an offline console


Beginner in Game Development? Read here.
 
Super Mario Bros clone tutorial written in XNA 4.0 [MonoGame, ANX, and MonoXNA] by Scott Haley
 
If you have found any of the posts helpful, please show your appreciation by clicking the up arrow on those posts Posted Image
 
Spoiler

#5 Servant of the Lord   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 20990

Posted 15 March 2013 - 06:33 PM

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

 

Don't require server connections for single-player games.

 

Ease of use: Click 'download' on a game I purchased, and I boot up a different game while the first game downloads in the background.

Doesn't try to trick me: Don't make me buy your own currency. If I want to buy a $7.50 game, don't make me buy $10 worth of your money.

 

Any game available on disk should also be available for digital purchase (and buying a disk gives the digital version as well). I don't buy games at $60 or $50. If the game never decreases in price, I'm either going to buy it used (unfortunately giving you no money as a developer) or not buy it at all.

 

[minor change of topic]

 

This is why I buy on Steam. The people who want to play the game the second it comes out, they feel it's worth $60 to them - that doesn't mean it's worth $60 to everyone. After a year, it should be $40. After another year, $20. From time to time, it should go on sale for $10-15. That's when I'll pick it up... Not because I don't want developers to profit, but simply because very very few games are ever worth $60 to me personally. When I do buy a game for $15, then I want the money to go to the developers. By not decreasing the prices a reasonable amount over time, it's the developers (well, okay, the publishers) who drive customers to used-game sales and (worst case) to piracy.

 

The annual amount I spend on games? Less than $100 total. If your products aren't within my price range, then I won't buy your games, or I'll buy them used. I'm fine buying 4-year old games - but if you don't make them available to me (because once they stop selling, then you stop producing disks) then I can't buy them. Digital distribution has reduced your: A) disk manufacturing costs, B) distribution costs, C) middlemen costs. Instead of $50 dollar games decreasing in prices, they rose to $60 prices instead. huh.png Okay, so I'm oversimplifying, and ignoring rising game development costs, rising marketing costs, and the economic downturn. But if the economic downturn hurt studios so badly, how do you think they hurt consumers? The response should've been cutting costs, not raising prices, otherwise you drive more customers to used-sales and piracy.

 

I don't want $1 games on the iPhone either. Give me a happy middle. $10-$20 games (several years after release) for 10-20 hours of gameplay. No hidden fees and no monthly fees.

 

[/derail]

 

Other than that, lots of cooperative splitscreen games. I like local coop and local multiplayer.


Edited by Servant of the Lord, 15 March 2013 - 06:34 PM.

It's perfectly fine to abbreviate my username to 'Servant' rather than copy+pasting it all the time.
All glory be to the Man at the right hand... On David's throne the King will reign, and the Government will rest upon His shoulders. All the earth will see the salvation of God.
Of Stranger Flames - [indie turn-based rpg set in a para-historical French colony] | Indie RPG development journal

[Fly with me on Twitter] [Google+] [My broken website]

[Need web hosting? I personally like A Small Orange]


#6 sunandshadow   Moderators   -  Reputation: 5057

Posted 15 March 2013 - 07:43 PM

Would it be unhelpful to say I really wish consoles would go away and all new games would come out for the PC...? unsure.png  Though, I wouldn't say no to a tablet phone (like a smart phone with a much bigger screen and a little usb gamepad and headphones, and I could read my ebooks on it while listening to my mp3s).


Phone game idea available free to someone who will develop it (Alphadoku game - the only existing phone game of this type is both for windows phone only and awful. PM for details.)


I want to help design a "sandpark" MMO. Optional interactive story with quests and deeply characterized NPCs, plus sandbox elements like player-craftable housing and lots of other crafting. If you are starting a design of this type, please PM me. I also love pet-breeding games.


#7 Khatharr   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 3038

Posted 15 March 2013 - 08:23 PM

Wow.

First two responses got straight to the top 2 issues. I'm left with nothing to say except, "Yup."
void hurrrrrrrr() {__asm sub [ebp+4],5;}

There are ten kinds of people in this world: those who understand binary and those who don't.

#8 Promit   Moderators   -  Reputation: 7587

Posted 15 March 2013 - 08:44 PM

I want familiar APIs and easy access to devkits. Also lots of memory.

 

Oh, and a userbase. Definitely need a userbase.


Edited by Promit, 15 March 2013 - 08:50 PM.


#9 MarkS   Prime Members   -  Reputation: 887

Posted 16 March 2013 - 07:03 PM

It would be nice if console manufacturers would stop thinking indie developers have cooties or whatever. We wont kill game sells by creating indie content.



#10 KamRandle   Members   -  Reputation: 142

Posted 16 March 2013 - 07:31 PM

Hello Everyone!

 

Thanks, all the information you are providing is really helpful.

 

It would be nice if console manufacturers would stop thinking indie developers have cooties or whatever. We wont kill game sells by creating indie content.

 

I know right! This is not going to be the case with my product.  wink.png

 

 

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

 

Don't require server connections for single-player games.

 

Ease of use: Click 'download' on a game I purchased, and I boot up a different game while the first game downloads in the background.

Doesn't try to trick me: Don't make me buy your own currency. If I want to buy a $7.50 game, don't make me buy $10 worth of your money.

 

Any game available on disk should also be available for digital purchase (and buying a disk gives the digital version as well). I don't buy games at $60 or $50. If the game never decreases in price, I'm either going to buy it used (unfortunately giving you no money as a developer) or not buy it at all.

 

[minor change of topic]

 

This is why I buy on Steam. The people who want to play the game the second it comes out, they feel it's worth $60 to them - that doesn't mean it's worth $60 to everyone. After a year, it should be $40. After another year, $20. From time to time, it should go on sale for $10-15. That's when I'll pick it up... Not because I don't want developers to profit, but simply because very very few games are ever worth $60 to me personally. When I do buy a game for $15, then I want the money to go to the developers. By not decreasing the prices a reasonable amount over time, it's the developers (well, okay, the publishers) who drive customers to used-game sales and (worst case) to piracy.

 

The annual amount I spend on games? Less than $100 total. If your products aren't within my price range, then I won't buy your games, or I'll buy them used. I'm fine buying 4-year old games - but if you don't make them available to me (because once they stop selling, then you stop producing disks) then I can't buy them. Digital distribution has reduced your: A) disk manufacturing costs, B) distribution costs, C) middlemen costs. Instead of $50 dollar games decreasing in prices, they rose to $60 prices instead. huh.png Okay, so I'm oversimplifying, and ignoring rising game development costs, rising marketing costs, and the economic downturn. But if the economic downturn hurt studios so badly, how do you think they hurt consumers? The response should've been cutting costs, not raising prices, otherwise you drive more customers to used-sales and piracy.

 

I don't want $1 games on the iPhone either. Give me a happy middle. $10-$20 games (several years after release) for 10-20 hours of gameplay. No hidden fees and no monthly fees.

 

[/derail]

 

Other than that, lots of cooperative splitscreen games. I like local coop and local multiplayer.

 

Great info and ideas. smile.png

 

< $ 300, API for indies, indies channel, keep it an offline console

 

You read my mind for the most part. biggrin.png  Thanks. smile.png

 

 

I want familiar APIs and easy access to devkits. Also lots of memory.

 

Oh, and a userbase. Definitely need a userbase.

 

Thanks! Trust me, it will have lots of memory. wink.png

 

Lots of good games.


Beyond that... who cares, really?

 

Thanks smile.png

 

The ability to use the consumer version as a dev-kit would be my 'must have' feature.

 

Thanks smile.png

 

Thanks again! Continue to leave replies about what you would want to see in a next generation console. Kickstarter coming soon. wink.png 



#11 TheChubu   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4756

Posted 16 March 2013 - 07:53 PM

Probably the capacity to install a regular Linux distro on it (Debian for example). One can never have enough cheap Linux systems around :D


"I AM ZE EMPRAH OPENGL 3.3 THE CORE, I DEMAND FROM THEE ZE SHADERZ AND MATRIXEZ"

 

My journals: dustArtemis ECS framework and Making a Terrain Generator


#12 Alpha_ProgDes   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4692

Posted 16 March 2013 - 09:00 PM

Probably the capacity to install a regular Linux distro on it (Debian for example). One can never have enough cheap Linux systems around biggrin.png

 

I'd be surprised if this console is not similar to Ouya (which has Android which is a Linux.... as you may already know).


Beginner in Game Development? Read here.
 
Super Mario Bros clone tutorial written in XNA 4.0 [MonoGame, ANX, and MonoXNA] by Scott Haley
 
If you have found any of the posts helpful, please show your appreciation by clicking the up arrow on those posts Posted Image
 
Spoiler

#13 TheChubu   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4756

Posted 17 March 2013 - 11:11 PM

I dunno how possible is to install a regular (ie, not Android) distro on the Ouya.

 

Anyway I mean't a more-or-less supported way to install a Linux distro on the device rather than just "Hack your way through it, we'll look the other side"

 

I've seen other distros installed on Android based devices but the procedure is not as easy as installing it on a desktop.


"I AM ZE EMPRAH OPENGL 3.3 THE CORE, I DEMAND FROM THEE ZE SHADERZ AND MATRIXEZ"

 

My journals: dustArtemis ECS framework and Making a Terrain Generator


#14 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 18 March 2013 - 06:34 AM

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

Just out of curiousity, how would you feel about a $15-$30 subscription that gives you access to any game at any time, but you don't own the games if you stop subscribing?

I think it would be interesting if consoles opened up more ways for monetization. A lot of people think f2p is dirty, but I would love to see what might happen if f2p was allowed to exist. I think if the console manufacturers were still involved you could get some really high quality f2p games on the console without as much of the trash. Mostly I'm just interested in more viable models than what exists now; unlike phones where you have to be more democratic, consoles could keep a really high quality bar for their different models.

#15 GeneralQuery   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1263

Posted 18 March 2013 - 07:24 AM

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

Just out of curiousity, how would you feel about a $15-$30 subscription that gives you access to any game at any time, but you don't own the games if you stop subscribing?

The problem with this model is how does one divide up the subscription in terms of royalties, especially for such a small amount?



#16 Servant of the Lord   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 20990

Posted 18 March 2013 - 11:21 AM

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

Just out of curiousity, how would you feel about a $15-$30 subscription that gives you access to any game at any time, but you don't own the games if you stop subscribing?

OnLive's model? I think it's a good idea. I do the same thing with Netflix - I don't own any of the movies I watch, I just pay a monthly fee and access them as much as I want.

The problem is, it'd have to have the games I want for me to be interested, and live-streaming is most conducive to online multiplayer gaming (because the servers and the clients would run in the same datacenter), and unlikely to support many split-screen or local multiplayer games, which is what I enjoy most.

I recently started playing League of Legends, but I play it with one or two of my siblings sitting a few feet away from me on their laptops. It's just so much more fun that way for me.
I greatly enjoyed playing the old Halo games split-screen coop, and local multiplayer. Online multiplayer, while fun, was a different experience and just wasn't a good enough experience to be worth my time. I've played some of the Modern Warfare games online, just myself, and they're fun, but what I really enjoy (as a rather anti-social individual) is the social experience of playing with friends and family either competitively, or even better, cooperatively.

I think MMO subscriptions should be shared, though. Maybe two or three companies, each with a small MMO or two, unable to compete with World of Warcraft, let anyone subscribed to one of the games, play the others as well using the same account and subscription. $15 a month, and you can log into any one of 5 or 6 different MMOs of wildly different natures? If the user spends 75 hours online that month, his $15 is divided between whichever MMOs he played, based on how long he played. I think it'll be a viable strategy for smaller studios (50-200 employees) working together.

 

I think it would be interesting if consoles opened up more ways for monetization. A lot of people think f2p is dirty, but I would love to see what might happen if f2p was allowed to exist. I think if the console manufacturers were still involved you could get some really high quality f2p games on the console without as much of the trash.

Sony is permitting it with CPP's (maker of Eve Online) Dust 514 online FPS. It will be free-to-play, PS3/PS4 exclusive, and interacts with players playing Eve Online on the PC, but hasn't yet been released.


It's perfectly fine to abbreviate my username to 'Servant' rather than copy+pasting it all the time.
All glory be to the Man at the right hand... On David's throne the King will reign, and the Government will rest upon His shoulders. All the earth will see the salvation of God.
Of Stranger Flames - [indie turn-based rpg set in a para-historical French colony] | Indie RPG development journal

[Fly with me on Twitter] [Google+] [My broken website]

[Need web hosting? I personally like A Small Orange]


#17 kseh   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2199

Posted 18 March 2013 - 12:04 PM

Just out of curiousity, how would you feel about a $15-$30 subscription that gives you access to any game at any time, but you don't own the games if you stop subscribing?

 

I haven't tried OnLive but I did this for awhile with shockwave.com. For quite a few years I felt like it was worth it then it seemed like the quality of the games started going down hill. Or maybe I felt like nothing innovative was coming out. I kinda also remember it being hard to search for games that interested me. Whatever it was, they didn't have games I wanted to play anymore and what they did have that caught my interest could be found on other flash sites for free. It was great for awhile and was how I found World of Goo, Diner Dash (original), and Plant Tycoon. Quite a few others as well. Probably not likely to do it again more because of gaming time being more limited these days.

 

I don't buy games at $60 or $50. If the game never decreases in price, I'm either going to buy it used (unfortunately giving you no money as a developer) or not buy it at all.

 

Personally, I don't mind paying > $50 for a game but when I'm done I had better feel like the game has enriched my life in the way that my English teachers had hoped that reading Shakespeare would. If I know that a game isn't going to do that then maybe somewhere around the $10 mark works for me.
 



#18 TheChubu   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4756

Posted 18 March 2013 - 06:03 PM

 

Ownership of my games: Either DRM-free, so I can copy them, or at the very least, future versions of the same console shouldn't make me repurchase the same downloadable games.

Just out of curiousity, how would you feel about a $15-$30 subscription that gives you access to any game at any time, but you don't own the games if you stop subscribing?

The problem with this model is how does one divide up the subscription in terms of royalties, especially for such a small amount?

My guess, a monthly payment based on how many players played your game that month. Or more accurately, how many hours your game has been played that month.

 

Though you'd probably be running the whole thing at a loss for a while.


"I AM ZE EMPRAH OPENGL 3.3 THE CORE, I DEMAND FROM THEE ZE SHADERZ AND MATRIXEZ"

 

My journals: dustArtemis ECS framework and Making a Terrain Generator


#19 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 18 March 2013 - 08:35 PM

Quite a few others as well. Probably not likely to do it again more because of gaming time being more limited these days.

I actually like it specifically because my game time is limited. As much as I wish I could play all the games as much as I want, I often either lost interest or want to move to something else.

I was thinking more like gamefly originally, but yea I guess it's similar to onlive as well or netflix. What I had in mind was probably closer to playstation plus, but yea.

#20 Ravyne   GDNet+   -  Reputation: 8130

Posted 19 March 2013 - 12:27 AM

It would be nice if console manufacturers would stop thinking indie developers have cooties or whatever. We wont kill game sells by creating indie content.

 

Its frankly not the console manufacturers that are worried about it, its the publishers who threaten to take their ball and go home if they give indies too much sway--that's what worries the manufacturers.

 

The reality, of course is that there's plenty of room for both large and small titles to exist and to thrive, but the established powers in any market never like ceding away any of their power, and most are paranoid-delusional about masses of nimble, unknown competitors because its such a foreign concept that they haven't any idea of what to expect or how to respond.






Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS