5 ms·

Video game consoles are not general computing devices. Their controlled and curated walled gardens are part of the consumer appeal, and the absence of those wou

Video game consoles are not general computing devices. Their controlled and curated walled gardens are part of the consumer appeal, and the absence of those would make consoles no different than PCs. If consumers wanted that they'd be buying PCs only.

tass 6y ago
They can continue to use the PlayStation store, continue to have exclusive games, and need not see any difference except by choice. What is the downside?
- dleslie 6y ago
  The hardware prices increase due to the loss of license fee revenue.
  - loup-vaillant 6y ago
    Console vendors aren't allowed to sell hardware at a loss. The price increase would be mild… and a truer reflection of the costs of owning a console (less hidden costs from the walled garden aspects).
    - dleslie 6y ago
      Sony took a loss on PS4 sales: https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/09/20/sony-to-take-a-loss-on-playstation-4-sales/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/09/20/sony-to-tak... This is normal. The price increase would not have been mild - at the time this was written, it was the cost of a full game. When most only own a handful of games that's a significant difference.
      - loup-vaillant 6y ago
        I stand corrected, thanks. Tells us something about the real price of that console, though. People don't see the price of the walled garden, since (i) it's always been this way, and (ii) it looks like the garden is providing flowers (in the form of a store). Such hidden (or externalised) costs are a bit of a lie. I'd rather be aware of the true price of what I'm buying.
        dleslie 6y ago
        Flowers without weeds and gardens largely free of pests.
        loup-vaillant 6y ago
        Okay, this is where the analogy breaks down: one can totally have a non exclusive app store where people are guaranteed a certain level of quality, and a reasonable expectation of not downloading malware. For instance: Steam. The only thing non-exclusive stores can't do is protect people from themselves. And even then you could still have the kid gloves on by default, yet let people take them off whenever they want. For instance by displaying some mildly scary warning about some program not being verified by the OS vendor, and then still let people click on the "install anyway" button. (The "Windows protected your PC" popup would be like that, though I think it overshoots to the point of dishonesty.)
        dleslie 6y ago
        Steam is a poor example because it's both full of shovelware and its products are plagued by cheaters. I'm a PC Gamer myself, but I also stopped playing anything ranked. There's no point.
        esperent 6y ago
        Console stores are not better in that regard though. I've heard plenty of complaints about the amount of trash in the Nintendo store, for example. All you're guaranteed with a vendor store is a lock of malware.
        smileybarry 6y ago
        Steam (almost[1]) nails the malware-free part, but people's drive to make it open to all and not fully curated (to remove AAA biases) also led to it becoming full of shovelware and "baby's first game" products. Conversely, Epic Games Store is doing the complete opposite with a heavily-curated store and a tightly-controlled catalog. [1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/steam-game-allegedly-mining-cryptocurrency/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/steam-game-allegedly-mi...
    - smileybarry 6y ago
      This is more of an anecdote as someone already linked the PS4 example, but: Sony lost on each sale of the PS3, sometimes a lot ($300 on launch), for years. After 4 years, they still lost around $18 per unit lost[1]. It was a costly bet that ended up not working out for them as the PS3 continued to be expensive to manufacture, while also being too complicated to program effectively. (Worse ports, perceived lower performance due to SMT differences compared to the 360, etc.) [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-still-losing-on-every-playstation-3-it-sells/ https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-still-losing-on-every-playsta...
jiofih 6y ago
The same can be said of Macs and iOS devices.
loup-vaillant 6y ago
Video game console are general computing devices. Their input & output tends to be limited (no keyboard nor mouse, at least by default), but they still run arbitrary programs (namely, any game). One major, technical differences from PCs, is the uniformity of the hardware. This is becoming less true, but consoles traditionally have fixed hardware. No "works on my machine" problems on consoles. This also guarantees stable performance characteristics, that developers can optimise for. (This is less true now that consoles are resembling PCs more and more internally). This is even more visible on older consoles: take an N64 (PS2), plug in a cartridge (insert a CD), and voilà you have your game, completely separated from any other program. Perhaps one of those programs could be GNU/Linux, but the default would still to be running on the bare metal, without interference from other programs. Quite unlike the PC there. Incidentally, I could see a new game console solve the Thirty Million Lines Problem. https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0031 https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0031 Fixed, powerful hardware with a well defined interface could possibly trigger the OS competition that is so sorely lacking rights now: Windows, Linux, MacOS, IOS, Android, and if you pick a particular niche (Server, Mobile, Desktop), you'd rarely see more than 2 significant contenders.
- shawnz 6y ago
  Can you still say it runs arbitrary games if you need a license to be able to run them? For example, is my microwave a general purpose computing device just because I can upgrade the firmware, even if the firmware has to be signed by the manufacturer?
  - loup-vaillant 6y ago
    If the vendor requires a license to let you run software on a powerful multi-media (sound, image, input, network) device they sold you, then I can tell you they put restrictions on what would otherwise be a general purpose computer. In my opinion, such crippling should be illegal. For instance: the iPhone. It would definitely be general purpose if you didn't have to go through the App Store™. Your microwave oven is different: minimum input, minimum display, one main purpose (heat food). Properly constructed ones can easily be bug-free on the first try, no need for patches. The firmware may even be fused into a strictly read-only chip. Clearly single purpose. Personally, I'd tentatively set the limit at programmability: if there's any way to reprogram a machine, the user should be able to do it without authorization from the vendor. (We could make exceptions, for instance break control software in cars: such software should probably be tested to death and vetted by regulation. Preventing users from rolling their own may be justified to avoid untimely deaths on the road. Though "preventing" here could mean "legally disallow" rather than "use DRM". Not sure which is best.)

tass 6y ago

They can continue to use the PlayStation store, continue to have exclusive games, and need not see any difference except by choice. What is the downside?

dleslie 6y ago
The hardware prices increase due to the loss of license fee revenue.
- loup-vaillant 6y ago
  Console vendors aren't allowed to sell hardware at a loss. The price increase would be mild… and a truer reflection of the costs of owning a console (less hidden costs from the walled garden aspects).
  - dleslie 6y ago
    Sony took a loss on PS4 sales: https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/09/20/sony-to-take-a-loss-on-playstation-4-sales/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/09/20/sony-to-tak... This is normal. The price increase would not have been mild - at the time this was written, it was the cost of a full game. When most only own a handful of games that's a significant difference.
    - loup-vaillant 6y ago
      I stand corrected, thanks. Tells us something about the real price of that console, though. People don't see the price of the walled garden, since (i) it's always been this way, and (ii) it looks like the garden is providing flowers (in the form of a store). Such hidden (or externalised) costs are a bit of a lie. I'd rather be aware of the true price of what I'm buying.
      - dleslie 6y ago
        Flowers without weeds and gardens largely free of pests.
        loup-vaillant 6y ago
        Okay, this is where the analogy breaks down: one can totally have a non exclusive app store where people are guaranteed a certain level of quality, and a reasonable expectation of not downloading malware. For instance: Steam. The only thing non-exclusive stores can't do is protect people from themselves. And even then you could still have the kid gloves on by default, yet let people take them off whenever they want. For instance by displaying some mildly scary warning about some program not being verified by the OS vendor, and then still let people click on the "install anyway" button. (The "Windows protected your PC" popup would be like that, though I think it overshoots to the point of dishonesty.)
        dleslie 6y ago
        Steam is a poor example because it's both full of shovelware and its products are plagued by cheaters. I'm a PC Gamer myself, but I also stopped playing anything ranked. There's no point.
        esperent 6y ago
        Console stores are not better in that regard though. I've heard plenty of complaints about the amount of trash in the Nintendo store, for example. All you're guaranteed with a vendor store is a lock of malware.
        smileybarry 6y ago
        Steam (almost[1]) nails the malware-free part, but people's drive to make it open to all and not fully curated (to remove AAA biases) also led to it becoming full of shovelware and "baby's first game" products. Conversely, Epic Games Store is doing the complete opposite with a heavily-curated store and a tightly-controlled catalog. [1] https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/steam-game-allegedly-mining-cryptocurrency/ https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/steam-game-allegedly-mi...
  - smileybarry 6y ago
    This is more of an anecdote as someone already linked the PS4 example, but: Sony lost on each sale of the PS3, sometimes a lot ($300 on launch), for years. After 4 years, they still lost around $18 per unit lost[1]. It was a costly bet that ended up not working out for them as the PS3 continued to be expensive to manufacture, while also being too complicated to program effectively. (Worse ports, perceived lower performance due to SMT differences compared to the 360, etc.) [1] https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-still-losing-on-every-playstation-3-it-sells/ https://www.cnet.com/news/sony-still-losing-on-every-playsta...

jiofih 6y ago

The same can be said of Macs and iOS devices.

loup-vaillant 6y ago

Video game console are general computing devices. Their input & output tends to be limited (no keyboard nor mouse, at least by default), but they still run arbitrary programs (namely, any game). One major, technical differences from PCs, is the uniformity of the hardware. This is becoming less true, but consoles traditionally have fixed hardware. No "works on my machine" problems on consoles. This also guarantees stable performance characteristics, that developers can optimise for. (This is less true now that consoles are resembling PCs more and more internally). This is even more visible on older consoles: take an N64 (PS2), plug in a cartridge (insert a CD), and voilà you have your game, completely separated from any other program. Perhaps one of those programs could be GNU/Linux, but the default would still to be running on the bare metal, without interference from other programs. Quite unlike the PC there. Incidentally, I could see a new game console solve the Thirty Million Lines Problem. https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0031 https://caseymuratori.com/blog_0031 Fixed, powerful hardware with a well defined interface could possibly trigger the OS competition that is so sorely lacking rights now: Windows, Linux, MacOS, IOS, Android, and if you pick a particular niche (Server, Mobile, Desktop), you'd rarely see more than 2 significant contenders.

shawnz 6y ago
Can you still say it runs arbitrary games if you need a license to be able to run them? For example, is my microwave a general purpose computing device just because I can upgrade the firmware, even if the firmware has to be signed by the manufacturer?
- loup-vaillant 6y ago
  If the vendor requires a license to let you run software on a powerful multi-media (sound, image, input, network) device they sold you, then I can tell you they put restrictions on what would otherwise be a general purpose computer. In my opinion, such crippling should be illegal. For instance: the iPhone. It would definitely be general purpose if you didn't have to go through the App Store™. Your microwave oven is different: minimum input, minimum display, one main purpose (heat food). Properly constructed ones can easily be bug-free on the first try, no need for patches. The firmware may even be fused into a strictly read-only chip. Clearly single purpose. Personally, I'd tentatively set the limit at programmability: if there's any way to reprogram a machine, the user should be able to do it without authorization from the vendor. (We could make exceptions, for instance break control software in cars: such software should probably be tested to death and vetted by regulation. Preventing users from rolling their own may be justified to avoid untimely deaths on the road. Though "preventing" here could mean "legally disallow" rather than "use DRM". Not sure which is best.)