🚀 go-pugleaf

pa...@mfltd.co.uk (Paul Spencer) wrote:



>The one constant thing is that over the years the PC is still a great
>platform, how many people still want a NES.

And how many people want their 286 that they had at the time?

The fact is, "upgrading" your console to the newer version usually
costs a hell of a lot less than upgrading your PC every year.  And
hell, I'm a PC booster- but for the variety of games and other uses it
offers.  But let's not delude ourselves on the "life expectancy" of
these products- both are in the realm of electronic entertainment are
have more in common than not, and as such both are obsolete pretty
quickly.

My 486DX2/66 may be a "PC" like my 386 running DOS 4.0 was, but other
than running a Microsoft operating system and a X86 compatible chip,
there is not much similar.  I've upgraded my motherboard, ram, hard
drives, monitor, joystick, sound cards, etc- and usually to play the
latest games better and faster.  Frankly, shelling out for a $300-$400
console every two years is hardly impractical in comparison.
Someone's NES is gathering dust in a closet?  So what, so is my 386
motherboard and 40meg hard drive.

But on a technological point I agree with you.  There's a great
columnist for PC Gamer, can't recall his name but he's usually the
last and discusses emerging technology.  He responded to the "console
threat" a few issues back, noting that all technology companies dip in
the same pool.  And he was right- because you see these technologies
on a $400 console, what will prevent some company from sticking it on
a $300 PC board?  And they are.  The open market and expandability of
PC's is the #1 reason they dominate.