Today a Senior Executive at Electronic Arts, Gerhard Florin, said that “We want an open, standard platform which is much easier than having five which are not compatible”. He also said that the web and set-top boxes would grow in importance to the industry.
There are many upsides to this, namely the cost. An Open platform means that the software engine and the hardware base would be designed, built, tested, and upgraded by an open source community - Open source hardware already exists, like the daisy MP3 player, which is entirely open source, with the schematics and designs openly available to anyone. An open hardware platform would be freely developed, and the only cost would be parts, which can be minimised.
The other upside of an Open gaming platform is that games would only need work with one standard. So one set of standards, one set of hardware, and one software engine to test and develop for. This would reduce development time, and cost too - these savings could be passed on to the gamers themselves.
But an Open platform may not be such a good plan. Open platforms may give rise to hardware and software hackers, which is fine - but it could lead to exactly the diversity that lead the games market to have 3 major gaming consoles, splitting the gaming market.
But what do you think? Are you a developer, or maybe a gamer? Let me know what you think about this idea, does the gaming market need a new console, or do you think the majority of gamers will move to this new idea?
Hit the comments with your thoughts.
Graham
[via BBC UK - article here]