There May Be No Consoles In The Future - According to EA - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Consoles, as they are traditionally known, may be going the way of the Dodo bird. That's according to Electronic Arts Chief Competition Officer Peter Moore, who said in a new interview that the rise of streaming may signal an end to consoles as we know them. "I'm not sure there will be consoles, as we know them anymore," Moore told [URL="http://dailyorange.com/2016/05/sarconi-5-takeaways-from-ea-sports-peter-moore/"]The Daily Orange[/URL]. "Games will be accessed by streaming technology, so we don't need hardware intermediaries in between the two." He added: "If you and I want to play Battlefield 12 against each other, we'll just jump into a game via whatever monitor we happen to have in our homes. It'll be on a chip, rather than in a box."[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.gamespot.com/articles/there-may-be-no-consoles-in-the-future-ea-exec-say/1100-6439591/[/url]

[QUOTE]"I'm not sure there will be consoles, as we know them anymore," [/QUOTE] that sounds less like "There will be no consoles" and more like "consoles will transcend into a new form" which if you think about it, is 100% exactly what is happening. Consoles are becoming something totally different from what they traditionally are. Buying a console has been and always will be a viable option.

[QUOTE]"I'm not sure there will be consoles, as we know them anymore,"[/QUOTE] So, Steambox?

[QUOTE=Plaster;50326990]So, Steambox?[/QUOTE] only not terrible

Game streaming will not be good enough, without some sort of local prediction, which would be idiotic. The speed of light dictates that.

Humanity will find a way to grow and harvest consoles for food. They'll finally serve as a proper potato replacement.

[QUOTE=nikomo;50326994]Game streaming will not be good enough, without some sort of local prediction, which would be idiotic. The speed of light dictates that.[/QUOTE] Streaming will eventually become fast enough that peoples brains won't be able to tell anyways so it won't really matter ('I'm talking in house streaming, as a note, should have said that way before :v:)

[QUOTE=Drury;50326996]Humanity will find a way to grow and harvest consoles for food. They'll finally serve as a proper potato replacement.[/QUOTE] But potatoes are superior to most consoles by far. Without a major revolution in what consoles are; I just don't see a way they could ever reach potatoes.

[QUOTE=nikomo;50326994]Game streaming will not be good enough, without some sort of local prediction, which would be idiotic. The speed of light dictates that.[/QUOTE] maybe not over the internet, but in-house streaming is actually pretty good nowadays. i can play dark souls 3 on my bed with negligible input lag. i like the idea of having a box connected to my home network and playing games on the couch, on my desk, in bed, etc.

[QUOTE=Plaster;50326990]So, Steambox?[/QUOTE] More of a steamlink, except instead of streaming from something you own you will be getting it from a server like Onlive

Well, all these big companies have consistently been turning their consoles into shitty computers. What, with the whole heavy drm focus, updates and downloads and the Fucking Always online bullshit. I actually think there could be a resurgence of consoles at some point, but it wont come from these idiots.

[QUOTE=J!NX;50327008]Streaming will eventually become fast enough that peoples brains won't be able to tell anyways so it won't really matter[/QUOTE] Just like the human eye can't see above 30 frames per second; and 24 frames per second is the absolute optimal for anything because of cinematics and honestly, running things at 60 or 120 frames per second is just stupid. Also thumbsticks are objectively better than keyboard and mouse, xbox360 has more ram than any PC can possibly have, and 720p is the optimum, perfect resolution. [editline]15th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=elitehakor;50327015]maybe not over the internet, but in-house streaming is actually pretty good nowadays. i can play dark souls 3 on my bed with negligible input lag. i like the idea of having a box connected to my home network and playing games on the couch, on my desk, in bed, etc.[/QUOTE] What; really? 'cause the input lag I get from running a wired HDMI from my desktop to my TV is more than enough for me to have to feel it and have to move back to my PC for some of the more finicky stuff in Dark Souls 1.

[QUOTE=Cmx;50327026]More of a steamlink, except instead of streaming from something you own you will be getting it from a server like Onlive[/QUOTE] That's so incredibly consumer unfriendly I can totally believe it's going to happen. Not for a long-ass time, though. Onlive was awful.

Consoles will probably soon become media boxes with gaming one of a number of prime features. Frankly they'll need pricing of games akin to steam where publishers can put their titles on sale when they want to. There'll also need to be some form of open source when it comes to being able to develop for them. The architecture will eventually become that of a custom PC running a DRM OS.

I don't see game streaming happening until internet improves in america. Before that, good luck.

[QUOTE=Riller;50327044]What; really? 'cause the input lag I get from running a wired HDMI from my desktop to my TV is more than enough for me to have to feel it and have to move back to my PC for some of the more finicky stuff in Dark Souls 1.[/QUOTE] It's probably the TV, not the cable.

I really don't like that future scenario of streaming being everything. t would leave basically everything in the hands of publishers that may happily pull the plug on games they want people to buy again as remakes or sequels, or they simply get rid of old servers fairly regularly and screw over people that love browsing through old nostalgic titles or that are interested in preserving the history's medium. Which isn't just important for the sake of it, but also to educate future developers that need to learn from the past. There's also technical difficulties to consider like a magnification of current issues for Always Online games, so you may not even be able to play Singleplayer during launch/patch hell or the occasional DDoS attacks. It would also probably favor development of games that can be played even with some lag, just like console games have encouraged development of simpler control schemes and two-weapons shooters with aim assist. Assuming games would still be produced cross-platform in the future and there'd be a big push to take advantage of these streaming capabilities/working around its disadvantages, it would also most likely affect the PC gaming community and completely screw over user-generated content, from fan patch support and workarounds requiring file edits to datamining for secrets and scrapped content - and modding in general of course. Basically it would take away a lot of user control in exchange for convenience. Which I find to be a disturbing modern trend in general.

I'm fine with in-home streaming, it's not a bad idea. But I particulary hate the idea of everything being served up from central servers. It's even worse than the current state of "you don't own the things you buy" shit we have with steam, origin, etc..

Something that I suspect will occur is that video game consoles will soon come built into televisions, but you would still buy games similar to how you buy DVDs. Another thing which is pretty much guaranteed to occur is personal computers will most likely become the cable television of the future, as more and more people begin to simply subscribe to Netflix and Hulu online, while watching streams of new episodes of thier favorite TV shows. That or we'll see a rise in internert television, which I'm all for as it bypasses most FCC regulations.

[QUOTE=Riller;50327044]Just like the human eye can't see above 30 frames per second; and 24 frames per second is the absolute optimal for anything because of cinematics and honestly, running things at 60 or 120 frames per second is just stupid. Also thumbsticks are objectively better than keyboard and mouse, xbox360 has more ram than any PC can possibly have, and 720p is the optimum, perfect resolution.[/QUOTE] are you seriously trying to compare me to those retards? What is this :v: What are you doing? Do you even understand what I said? Do people somehow not get that when tech gets better, streaming in-house will be fast enough that you won't really be able to tell the difference? Remember when wireless controllers weren't good enough to really bother with? Now we ONLY have wireless controllers. [editline]15th May 2016[/editline] Streaming will eventually be good enough that the only people who will complain are the types who would spend 200$ on a gold PSU cable because "It makes the sound more betterer"

[QUOTE=J!NX;50327414]Remember when wireless controllers weren't good enough to really bother with? Now we ONLY have wireless controllers.[/QUOTE] And that sucks because I hate having to charge it.

[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;50327445]And that sucks because I hate having to charge it.[/QUOTE] then just purchase thermo-nuclear battery cells duh

[QUOTE=J!NX;50327414]are you seriously trying to compare me to those retards? What is this :v: What are you doing? Do you even understand what I said? Do people somehow not get that when tech gets better, streaming in-house will be fast enough that you won't really be able to tell the difference? Remember when wireless controllers weren't good enough to really bother with? Now we ONLY have wireless controllers. [editline]15th May 2016[/editline] Streaming will eventually be good enough that the only people who will complain are the types who would spend 200$ on a gold PSU cable because "It makes the sound more betterer"[/QUOTE] You never said 'in-house'. I sort of agree with you there, yeah; it's technically possible to be almost as good. But the article implies from-a-server streaming, and that shit ain't [I]ever[/I] gonna work right.

[QUOTE=Riller;50327509]You never said 'in-house'. I sort of agree with you there, yeah; it's technically possible to be almost as good. But the article implies from-a-server streaming, and that shit ain't [I]ever[/I] gonna work right.[/QUOTE] We went from 64mb of RAM to 16gb+ being the norm, and that is just ram It can and will get faster, out of house maybe not, that we just have to see

[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;50327247]I really don't like that future scenario of streaming being everything. t would leave basically everything in the hands of publishers that may happily pull the plug on games they want people to buy again as remakes or sequels, or they simply get rid of old servers fairly regularly and screw over people that love browsing through old nostalgic titles or that are interested in preserving the history's medium. Which isn't just important for the sake of it, but also to educate future developers that need to learn from the past. There's also technical difficulties to consider like a magnification of current issues for Always Online games, so you may not even be able to play Singleplayer during launch/patch hell or the occasional DDoS attacks. It would also probably favor development of games that can be played even with some lag, just like console games have encouraged development of simpler control schemes and two-weapons shooters with aim assist. Assuming games would still be produced cross-platform in the future and there'd be a big push to take advantage of these streaming capabilities/working around its disadvantages, it would also most likely affect the PC gaming community and completely screw over user-generated content, from fan patch support and workarounds requiring file edits to datamining for secrets and scrapped content - and modding in general of course. Basically it would take away a lot of user control in exchange for convenience. Which I find to be a disturbing modern trend in general.[/QUOTE] Don't worry, the streaming only thing will not fucking work. If The American ISP's willl see to that. Also Modding, and datamining will never go away because the PC crowd will always reverse engineer file formats

[quote]If you and I want to play[B] Battlefield 12[/B][/quote] So......not long then.

[QUOTE=Source;50327663]So......not long then.[/QUOTE] What? Battlefield games only come out every few years, at most. If we even see a Battlefield 12, its well over a decade away. What are you even trying to say?

[QUOTE=MightyLOLZOR;50327445]And that sucks because I hate having to charge it.[/QUOTE] At least it's better than like what the Wii and 360 had where you have to spend money on batteries to keep it charged.

[QUOTE=Plaster;50326990]So, Steambox?[/QUOTE] No, but it will basically come down to who can provide the best software for developers. The hardware really isn't a roadblock anymore

[QUOTE=J!NX;50327008]Streaming will eventually become fast enough that peoples brains won't be able to tell anyways so it won't really matter[/QUOTE] Not over the internet it won't. There is a hard limit on how fast you can send information (literally the speed of light), so the further the information has to be sent the worse the delay will be. We live in a world where the 5-8ms delay common on monitors and TVs is considered too much, an internet connection will only make that worse. Combine that with the ever increasing complexity of games, both in their visuals and what they're processing, which quickly becomes a lot of information to send results in difficulty maintaining (or even achieving) 60fps at 1080p, which for many people isn't good enough any more. Internet streaming is an impractical and inefficient way to play games and will remain a niche for the foreseeable future. In home streaming, an entirely different beast, is rapidly improving but will never quite match having everything hooked up by cables. Even if only because cables are much less vulnerable to interference.