Console companies can still sell expensive peripherals

[Alex]

Console companies can still sell expensive peripherals .

I can see an Onlive style folded into a Kinect. This makes sense to me because Peter Molyneux let it out of the bag that Kinect is a cloud camera so why not just dispense with the 360 and ad an Onlive style microconsole ($10 dollars worth of equipment) to a Kinect type unit. Throw in a Sony Move style motion controller. Throw in a set of augmented reality or virtual reality goggles.

There is enough hardware there to charge $300-$400 for a relatively small package of solid state hardware that will provide a deeply immersive experience. This is the sort of stuff that comes after the console (and to a lesser extent after the PC) and keeps places like Game Stop open. Some people keep insisting there will be another round of consoles but I don’t see how unless they call something like the Kinect a console and try to charge for back end hardware ala Apple and its $99 microconsole Apple TV where there is really only $10 worth of hardware there. Apple had a small dilemma that people might not take it seriously if it were $9.99 and it didn’t fit with the Apple brand and they could get payment for back end equipment while still undercutting the competition if they with a $99 price.

[gabrick]

I certainly think everyone will begin moving away from traditional consoles once they realize how cheap it is to just make your own. Computers and TV are moving to phones (if that is still what you call them). Soon everyone will just have their pad that they work from and call from and watch TV on. Then, shortly after that, we will all have ocular implants so we can use the internet, play games and make calls(maybe even work) from the comfort of your own head.

[tibbon]

1) Where do you get the idea that either the Kinect or the Microconsole would have a hardware price of $10 (even to the manufacturer)?

2) WTF is a 'cloud camera'? This whole notion of cloud computing is well... cloudy. Buzzword bingo.

[Loki421]

Then, shortly after that, we will all have ocular implants so we can use the internet, play games and make calls(maybe even work) from the comfort of your own head.

Expensive and invasive eye and possibly brain surgery so that I can watch TV. Where do i sign? I highly doubt that will ever be a realistic option that the average person would consider.

Clothes and glasses however are much more likely. You wear your cpu in your pocket in the form of a smart phone which connects wirelessly to your glasses and earpiece and you control everything via voice command and hand gestures. Anything that requires more cpu power than your phone can handle is streamed to you via services like OnLive.

In fact the tech already exists. It's just gota get cheaper, more interconnected, and way less dorky.
http://www.apple.com/iphone/
http://www.ezgear.com/ALL/ezvision_X4.html
http://www.theperegrine.com/product/

I can't wait to be old lol. I wonder what its going to be like when the stereotype of old people not be tech savy no longer applies b/c everyone will have grown up and old using computers and tech.

[Alex]

1) Where do you get the idea that either the Kinect or the Microconsole would have a hardware price of $10 (even to the manufacturer)?

2) WTF is a 'cloud camera'? This whole notion of cloud computing is well... cloudy. Buzzword bingo.

From Steve Perlman- yes 10 dollars because per Steve the innards of the console are less expensive than the plastic case they are wrapped in- so what do you think the upper range on that plastic case is? Multiply that by 2 and you'er going to have something less than $10

Cloud camera: Go review Lion Head head's comments on face recognition how that is enabled by cloud camera devices like connect.

At this point trying to be skeptical about this server side cloud stuff is just moronic. Consoles are dead or will be so much faster than Blockbuster or Hollywood Video.

[MAG1270]

(...)

At this point trying to be skeptical about this server side cloud stuff is just moronic. Consoles are dead or will be so much faster than Blockbuster or Hollywood Video.

I believe you are right. It's just a matter of time. Perhaps 10 years would be a fair time frame.

Why 10 years? Because it's not just a question of how fast OnLive grows, but also how fast the internet technologies improve and how fast consumers are to take advantage of these improved technologies. Also, I believe we today have a tendency to project certain things to happen way earlier than they actually do happen.