Rumour: EA wants to enter console market in 2010?

[iconoclast]

Originally Posted by webshark

thinking about this and about what insight just said about how it would suck to only have one console, i really think the industry is eventually going to go to a single company neutral console that plays all games and can be made by anyone (aka DVD players, but for games) i really dont think its quite as impossible or far off as it might seem.

It's called a PC.

[webshark]

Originally Posted by iconoclast

It's called a PC.

god i hope not. the idea is that even tho the traditional concept of "consoles" is gone, the core values of it would remain i.e. no installs and a guarantee that the game will play on your hardware.

[PirateThom]

Originally Posted by webshark

the core values of it would remain i.e. no installs and a guarantee that the game will play on your hardware.

Haven't these "core values" already been lost this gen?

Sony brand installs.
Microsoft brand unable to play games online without a harddrive.
Wii not having a DL disc drive.

[iconoclast]

Oh and btw, you know how many companies have failed in the console market? Atari, SEGA, Phillips, Neo Geo, NEC.... EA doesn't even have any hardware producing experience. If it weren't for their deep pockets and patience, even Microsoft may not have been able to survive. Generally, nexgen systems sell at a loss for the first year or so...is EA prepared to take such a risk??? What would be the reward? Except for Nintendo, I think console makers generally make their money off software, accessories, and licensing fees....and lose in hardware sales. EA can just rake in cash from software (although they have to pay licensing). It's a lot less risky, and it's a business model they know.

[PirateThom]

Originally Posted by iconoclast

Oh and btw, you know how many companies have failed in the console market? Atari, SEGA, Phillips, Neo Geo, NEC.... EA doesn't even have any hardware producing experience. If it weren't for their deep pockets and patience, even Microsoft may not have been able to survive. Generally, nexgen systems sell at a loss for the first year or so...is EA prepared to take such a risk??? What would be the reward? Except for Nintendo, I think console makers generally make their money off software, accessories, and licensing fees....and lose in hardware sales. EA can just rake in cash from software (although they have to pay licensing). It's a lot less risky, and it's a business model they know.

Yeah, I really don't see the gain for EA to make a console.

[Aeron]

Wait, before I check all the links. I want to know if its an EGM rumour.
Is it an EGM rumour?

[downphoenix]

I think EA would do very well if they established their own console.

Of course former CEO of EA Trip Hawkins made 3D0, and EA was a big supporter of that system, but times were different then, EA wasn't THAT big of a studio back in those days, they were medium sized, and they were better known on the PC and Genesis than any of the other platforms they made for. Times have changed though. EA would still be larger than if many medium sized companies like Atlus, Koei, and Eidos decided to combine and try to make a large company (just an example), EA would still probably dwarf them. Heck, Ubisoft is one of the biggest 3rd parties these days, and EA has the muscle to do a hostile takeover of them. If a console had Madden and Fifa EXCLUSIVE to its system, it would practically win the console wars in America and Europe respectively with just that alone. Plus you have to factor that some of the 3rd parties would actually be a big part of the project, because being a game developer, EA would better understand what those companies want for the console than Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo would, as Sony has some very strange game design philosophy, Microsoft's whole strategy is "if it can be done in windows, our console can do it" and Nintendo makes systems that are easy to design for, but then offer little support or incentive to 3rd party developers to choose them over the other companies. The only reason people are making a lot of games on Wii now is because of the great sales and lower development costs.

I think that EA would still "partner" with another company to help lessen the burden of the costs associated, I think Microsoft would actually be a likely partner given their great relationship with EA (Microsoft has basically been EA's Sega of this decade, between XBOXs and Windows games), but given EA's history to go wishy washy (they dumped Sega after the Saturn bombed, which was a shame, because full EA support for the Dreamcast could have really helped turn the tide for Sega there) I think EA would go outside of the normal game companies and partner with a major electronics brand like Apple or Philips.

[InsightGoalie]

Originally Posted by Chibi Kitsune

owning a single console always meant missing out on some games

Yes, but EA makes a lot of decent-good mostly multi platform games. If you take away those games from Sony and Microsoft you end up with a lot less games. Right now you can own one of the systems and get a majority of what you want, granted you will miss the others exclusives. However, if you take away the EA titles you end up with a lot less games and many more games that become exclusives that you can't play. I'd miss the NHL series, Mass Effect 3? (and any future bioware game), Need for Speed, etc... It would be a considerable blow to people like me with financial constraints. It would make multi console owning almost mandatory.

[Shpeshal Ed]

Originally Posted by PirateThom

That would be even worse, I hate Apple more than EA

I hate Apple more than YOU hate Apple

[Chibi Kitsune]

Chibi hates apple-tards

is that close enough?