On one hand, it's obviously the smart thing to keep your architecture standard in a world where most games are released cross-platform. Consoles are essentially just PCs with a set spec and in a clean wrapper at this point. But on the other hand it's also a bit disappointing that it's not really an option to make strange/interesting new architectures for a console.
Consoles are one of the last holdovers from the era where computers were designed with the hardware and software built and integrated from the bottom up into a cohesive package. Where they'll do a new one only every 7 years or so, and users just expect to have to buy new software for them every time. So it sounds like a space where they could get away with weird innovations and risks, but because of the need to keep cross-platform development feasible, it's not really an option.
I don't know. I see why it is the way it is, but I'd like to live in a world where consoles could get away with weirder things. Nintendo has kind of occupied that space with their touch screens and motion controls and whatnot, but the Switch is also more standard than ever before. Probably a net good for consumers though, with how much software is able to be ported to it.
What's the benefit of being weird today? A console can achieve pretty amazing graphics with basically off-the-shelf components, so the company isn't really buying much buy rolling their own solution.
The 3d was still being figured out in the 90s, which is what lead to so much diversity in product lineups. Not just for game consoles, but video cards, graphics API, etc. Being weird/unique was necessary because everyone was treading in uncharted territory.
Prior to the 3d era, game consoles had repurposed/customized off the shelf components. The 6502 and it's variants were used in all kinds of consoles and computers. And the 68000 was used in many, many more.
Interestingly, Apple is moving back towards the old console model. You now have a bespoke CPU/GPU platform from Apple running their own OS. I'd say we're already seeing the performance benefits of owning/designing/developing the whole stack.
Apple likes to have their own platform tools (Swift, Metal, etc), but I wouldn’t exactly call ARM and PowerVR[0] bespoke.
[0]Yeah Apple says the GPU[1]is entirely their design at this point, but then quietly reached some kind of agreement with Imagination in the past year or so.
[1]Though considering how often GPU drivers need game specific updates and how fast GPUs change and improve, each GPU is almost like it’s own little bespoke platform.
Consoles are one of the last holdovers from the era where computers were designed with the hardware and software built and integrated from the bottom up into a cohesive package. Where they'll do a new one only every 7 years or so, and users just expect to have to buy new software for them every time. So it sounds like a space where they could get away with weird innovations and risks, but because of the need to keep cross-platform development feasible, it's not really an option.
I don't know. I see why it is the way it is, but I'd like to live in a world where consoles could get away with weirder things. Nintendo has kind of occupied that space with their touch screens and motion controls and whatnot, but the Switch is also more standard than ever before. Probably a net good for consumers though, with how much software is able to be ported to it.