Sections

Harada: Sony, Nintendo and MS should make one console

Wednesday, 8th August 2012 12:48 GMT By Dave Cook

Tekken producer Katsuhiro Harada has said he believes the merging of formats into one unified platform would fuel innovation in the industry going forward.

Speaking with news.com.au, Harada explained his vision of a unified future, “For a long time, the game industry has been able to control the way people play games. There was a platform that people used solely for their gaming needs, and the industry had control of the trends and such that occurred.”

Harada then explained that due to the growth of social platforms, “people are able to not be tied down by consoles. I think it would be interesting if Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo got together just to make one console. It makes me very happy to think about all the possibilities that could occur because of that.”

One platform for all. Do you think that could work? Let us know below.

Breaking news

34 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. Maximum Payne

    I don’t think that would change design of games.Same could be said about taken history :D

    #1 2 years ago
  2. Christopher Jack

    Sorry to sound like Erth but you just pick up a PC. Would truly love to see Linux gaming pick up some speed.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. flashfv

    One console would decrease innovation in my opinion. It won’t ever happen anyway because they are a business after all and this would make there profits less.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. ManuOtaku

    As much positive things this unification would bring, i dont think is a likely scenario mainly because theres to much differences between the companies, especially in their overall strategies and way to see things, i think it will be hard to merge all that different styles under a same idea or product.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. Da Man

    Tekken producer talking about innovation..

    No.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. Dragon246

    A world where gamers get no choice to select platforms and are just stuck to one box without any competition?
    NOT IN A MILLION YEARS would I want that. Competition breeds excellence.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Gheritt White

    Who cares, consoles won’t even exist by 2025.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. RandomTiger

    This is nonsense.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. Deacon

    As #6 said, competition does indeed breed excellence.

    Though even with one unified platform we’d still see devs competing for our money, so I don’t think we’d lose any quality if this were to happen at some point.

    I actually think it would help devs make MORE money, and thus we’d see less closures.

    I’d love this to happen (I realise it won’t) primarily to stop the fanboy bullshit but more importantly so that I wouldn’t have to worry about being on the same platform as my mates for online MP.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. KrazyKraut

    http://www.gadgetvenue.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/console-mock-up.jpg

    lololololol

    #10 2 years ago
  11. Craig E

    Yes, Harada. Because the best way to fuel innovation is to eliminate competition. You’re a clown shoe.

    Innovation has lead to stagnation because video games are now a mass market, dominated by large corporations, and just as in any other industry with those concerns the bean counters dont want to take risks.

    If the big players were somehow duty-bound to contribute part of their profits into a universal fund for smaller indie developers you’d see innovation. Otherwise, so long as you’re happy to pick up your substantial paycheque from you woefully non-innovative Tekken series I’d say you were one of the least well placed people to even comment on the matter.

    #11 2 years ago
  12. OlderGamer

    Competition does not breed excelence. Not in the video game world.

    In todays day and age most of the big name pubs are multiplat anyways. Having multi system just means having the chance to play each ones exclusives. Something that wouldn’t be necesary if there was only one system.

    Imagine, Mario, Halo, and Uncharted without the need to invest hundreds into three different systems. One system to buy controlers, wheels, headsets, etc, instead of three. All of your friends on one system. Larger in game comunity all of the FIFA/BF/CoD/F1/etc players located on one system instead of being split across three. Lower dev/pub cost could mean lower game prices. And so on.

    Btw, just playing devils advocite.

    Realisticly.

    I don’t think we will ever see a unified console market. What I do think we will see is the removel of spesific piece of hardware. It doesn’t matter what TV/DVDplayer/Tablet/Phone/PC/Console/etc you have, you can still play the same selection of movies and TV shows from Netflix. Games will be just like that someday in the not so distance future. I think we will be looking at publishers turning into content venders that will offer us a service to stream and play their libary of games. We will prolly need a unique subscription to play each EA, Acti, MS, Sony or Nintendo games.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. viralshag

    I would rather see unified servers for multi-plat games before seeing a unified console.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. OlderGamer

    Well, if I am being honest, I wouldn’t mind one console. But only if it was an open platform. Last thing I would want would be for MS to have complete control over the entire console market. They would charge you for everything.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. Clupula

    One console would mean the end of console gaming. Competition is what keeps the industry going. The fact that everything is already available on every system is part of why the industry is in such a slump and also why I feel the Wii U is going to be a huge failure. Why buy a new system when you can already get all the games for it on a system you already own?

    Back in the day of the PS1, N64, and Saturn, there were distinct exclusives for each system and they helped keep the gen strong. Same for the PS2, Gamecube, and X-Box days. Competition keeps things alive.

    One system would turn innovation into mud.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. Dragon246

    If anyone wants a unified console, they might as well turn into a pc gamer.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. Gadzooks!

    #2

    I’ll never be a PC gamer. Like hundreds of millions of console-only gamers I dont have the time or inclination to maintain a gaming rig (well, second rig. The misses loves her MMO’s).

    Anyone can stuff a disc in a console, press a single button and be playing. Average Joe Gamer couldnt work a PC game if his life depended on it.

    Now before you get menstrual on me, I’m not belittling PCs in any way. But, they work for some people and not others so a blanket ‘get a PC’ statement doesnt work here.

    #9

    True, dat.

    Developers should be competing, not platform holders.

    Software, and more recently services, has always been the money spinner. Hardware is just a facilitator, and a horrifically costly one at that, both to consumer and supplier.

    #17 2 years ago
  18. OlderGamer

    I have to disagree with the competition thing. The PC has some of the most inovative gameplay on the market. Consoles aren’t all they are made out to be, not even what they used to be.

    “Back in the day of the PS1, N64, and Saturn, there were distinct exclusives for each system and they helped keep the gen strong”

    I would agree with that statment. But we no longer live back in the day.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. freedoms_stain

    Software innovation and hardware competition, in this thread they’re the same. Apparently.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. Cobra951

    Things would be easier for developers with a single console. Things would be terrible for consumers. That console would be overly expensive and never upgraded. Here in the US, the 8-bit Nintendo NES owned the market for too many years. Had Sega not come along with the 16-bit Genesis, the SNES may have never come to pass. Without competition, there is no drive for hardware innovation. And without that, we’d still be playing 2D games at low res while listening to chip tunes.

    #20 2 years ago
  21. Khan979

    “One console to rule them all!”….

    Actually I think the competition beteen the different companies is a good thing, but I agree with others that cross plat play would be nice.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. Da Man

    Please no cross platform play with PC. Wouldn’t want to run into the worst of manic depressive people from the internet.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. Dannybuoy

    “I have a dream. I have a dream that little white consoles will share games with big black consoles”

    #23 2 years ago
  24. Christopher Jack

    @17, Set Steam to launch at start & you’ve solved your problem, you’ve even skipped the whole ‘insert disc’ part. In this day & age a toddler could operate Windows’ basic functions, there’s also hundreds of options for controllers if you insist on them, including Xbox 360 & PS3 ones. Also, it’s not expensive to buy a gaming PC, it’s only when you demand 60+ frames per second on ultra settings that only the extreme enthusiasts want that it becomes expensive.

    I bought a $400 laptop several months back & it’s capable of running Skyrim & BF3 on high @30~fps. I mean, you could build what the PS4 & Xbox 720 are rumoured to have for around $400-450 right now but if you get Microsoft’s alternative, you’re going to pay like $50 every year & that’s $500 after 10 years. In fact, I’d like you to count the price you’ve spent on your Xbox 360(s) & then factor in XBL Gold & the premium attached to every single game- are you really sure you’re saving anything at all? You’ve probably paid more for a lower graphical experience.

    The only reason I continue to own a 360 is for the console exclusives like Red Dead Redemption & the fact that I only paid $50 for it (used) in the first place & I’d get next to nothing if I sold it today.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. DrDamn

    @24
    The premium attached to every game that you can trade in when you are done, or take round a friends place? That one? :)

    #25 2 years ago
  26. Christopher Jack

    @25, No, the licensing fee. I don’t buy games with the intent on selling them. Although I’d like to see PC games start offering splitscreen. LANing is fine but requires two capable PCs & normally 2 copies of the game too.

    #26 2 years ago
  27. fearmonkey

    @17 – “Like hundreds of millions of console-only gamers I dont have the time or inclination to maintain a gaming rig….”

    I bought the parts and built my PC in Feb 2007, and the only parts I have upgraded were a video card (because the original died) and and a power supply as the first one died (which was a carryover from a previous PC). My computer is over 5 years old, yet with my video card I can play 90 percent of today’s games at the highest resolution and most at the highest settings and have a playable framerate. The days where you had to upgrade your entire PC for gaming have been over for a long time.

    I’ll probably build a new PC next year and that will probably last me another 5 years, or the same amount of years as a console generation.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. Clupula

    @17 – My computer could probably not run Half-Life 1. I had Steam on there, when I got the PS3 version of Portal 2, but I eventually deleted it because it made my computer run too slow. I have no urge to buy a gaming rig. I just want a computer I can watch Youtube on and type in Word. I’ll srick with consoles when I want to play a game.

    #28 2 years ago
  29. Clupula

    “Back in the day of the PS1, N64, and Saturn, there were distinct exclusives for each system and they helped keep the gen strong

    I would agree with that statment. But we no longer live back in the day.”

    Which is why the console market is as stagnant as it is these days. We’ve watered down the difference between systems too much. If anything there should be MORE exclusives, not less.

    #29 2 years ago
  30. ManuOtaku

    #29 “Which is why the console market is as stagnant as it is these days. We’ve watered down the difference between systems too much. If anything there should be MORE exclusives, not less”

    Clupula that can be one of the many reasons,sure, but i think they are more of them, like development costs going up, price of games, annualization of franchises, etc, etc, therefore i think is a sum of its parts here, not only less exclusives, although i dont know to at which point we have less exclusives than before, i think they are in the same ammount as in previous generations,it will be great to do a comparition, the key thing is rather new ips, which i think is diminishing with each passing generation, but thats something for another post.

    #30 2 years ago
  31. OlderGamer

    Never happen Clupula. The diversity is gone. Not just between systems, but between software. And when I say diversity is gone, I am talking about Tirp A titles. And even when it comes to console experiences, each platform holder likes to duplicate the experiences found on other systems.

    Look at LBP Kart and Sony All Stars as two recent examples. One platform has GT, the other has Forza. And the very fact that more 3rd parties are turning to multiplat releases is further proff that the diversity is fading.

    Console development is crazy expensive. That reduces diversity, it also often forces 3rd parties to port their games to as many platforms as possible.

    Here is an “out there notion”, the console market is stagnet because of handhelds. What I mean is that JP backs handhelds and handheld focus keeps many of japans top talent away from consoles. The result is that the console market has becomes extremly western focused. Even to a point of some JP studios have been looking to “westernize” their own products. At the end of the day, that means less different and unique kids of games to found on your consoles(the XB360 is particulrly w/o a lot of JPN support). I have long felt that a western dominated console market could lead to an overflow of OMP Shooters and a lack of unique games.

    I don’t know if that single reason is behind the current state of console gaming. I highly doubt any one reason is a culpert.

    But I can say with confidence, that in this age of multiplat focus, big budget games, online MP, the idea that more systems breed competetion is wrong. Of course I think the entire console biz model is outdated by at least 5 years(and in a tech field, that is an eternity).

    And really it is very ironic and funny, that people say they need more choices, when the horse they favor is a closed system phillie that seeks to control everything you have from price to game selection. If you want a gaming eviroment that breeds competetion. That favors openess. That promotes fresh new inovations. That doesn’t stagnet. The option is starring you right in the face.

    Buy a PC.

    I just bought me a brand new desktop. I spent 500-600usd on it. I expect it will last me about 5years. Very reasonable. I then spent 60usd on Steams Summer Sale, and have so many games it will take me until Steams next blow out sale to play them all. For less then 600usd I have a new system, and 10 to 15 new games. Can the same be said when we all buy new next gen consoles? So stop with the PC is too much money junk, and if your smart enough to post here, your smart enough to turn a PC on, the only thing left to download Steam. Pretty sure most of can figure that out too.

    #31 2 years ago
  32. Unlimax

    Sony with Nintendo maybe , but M$ no !?

    #32 2 years ago
  33. hitnrun

    Then you would have a hole in the market, either because the One Console doesn’t do everything and meet expectations or, if it does, it would be prohibitively expensive.

    Then that hole would be filled by, say, Apple or Valve, and you would be right back to having multiple consoles.

    Basic economics are not the strong suit of many industry commentators. The current situation exists not because the powers-that-be are greedy, but because WE demand choice through the medium of our wallets. This will not be overcome by the semi-annual futurist blog fodder about the One Console.

    #33 2 years ago
  34. Gadzooks!

    #24

    Not sure why you bring cost of ownership into the conversation as its not relevant. Simplicity and convenience is why so many console-only gamers stay console-only. PC gaming could be 100% free and I still wouldnt want it. Not because its ‘bad’, but because it doesnt suit me.

    Having to be tech support for most of my family has proven to me time and time again that Average Joe Gamer does not have the knowledge to keep them PC gaming, unless it’s FreeCell.

    If I said to them ‘set steam to auto launch’ they would look at me as if I just explained quantum entanglement theory: “Steam? Are you saying you want me to put the kettle on?”

    #34 2 years ago