[shmerl]

They support OpenGL and Vulkan now natively on their Switch console. I.e. proper support, and not some fake pseudo API.

> They sell for shit though.

All it means, that most of those who use consoles don't want to play high end games. And console makers aren't incentivized to market that, because they don't have much competitors.

Compare it to mobile hardware as I said. You could argue, that people also don't want to overpay for it. Yet, mobile hardware makers rush to refresh it way more frequently than console makers do, and prices there are more realistic. Competition helps.

> a $1000 console would be as successful as the Steambox.

It would surely sell less than cheaper ones, but same goes for regular PCs. Only a minority of enthusiasts buy high end computers. The vast majority buy weak laptops and such. But gaming market can address both use cases. I don't see how interface of controller vs mouse + keyboard is supposed to change that.

[pandaman]

> All it means, that most of those who use consoles don't want to play high end games.

It's actually opposite. Console audience (maybe with exception for Nintendo) wants to play high end games. This is why high end games sell much more on console SKUs. If by "high end" you mean AAA, of course.

[shmerl]

Well, if they really want high end games, they shell out for PCs and high end GPUs, because as you said, current consoles simply are behind. No API can work around that.

By high end I mean demanding, those which heavily load the GPU, and benefit from better ones.

So IMHO those who stick to current day consoles, are OK with not getting the max settings in demanding games. But why those who do want more, can't play their games using controller / sofa style gaming? I.e. I don't see an inherent relation between console style gaming and avoiding more expensive hardware.

[pandaman]

API works around just fine like I said. I cannot recall any recent (in the past 10 years) AAA games, which don't run on the consoles. PC exclusives have not been setting graphcis bar for a long while.

[shmerl]

> API works around just fine like I said. I cannot recall any recent (in the past 10 years) AAA games, which don't run on the consoles.

But they all run with reduced settings, and their non console versions offer higher quality on better hardware (if developers of course took care of taking advantage of that and make it all configurable).

So I'm really not sure how API can change the simple fact that current day consoles are underpowered in comparison with modern high end PC hardware.

[pandaman]

>with reduced settings

Not sure what you mean by this. MGS V, for example, runs with more effects on PS4 than on my PC with Geforce 980Ti (which alone costs as much as two PS4s btw). Anyways, this conversation is stupid. It's not a Console vs PC flamewar. Nobody forbids you from buying a $10K PC with colored lights everywhere and setting all the settings to 11. And if you think it's a good business, this being an entrepreneur site, you should starting making those and selling to others, driving stupid console developers out of business and laughing while doing so.

[pjmlp]

SteamMachines have proven how receptive the market is to such ideas.

[shmerl]

I haven't played it myself yet (waiting for Wine to support it on Linux), but I'm sure I've red somewhere, that The Witcher 3 uses reduced settings on consoles and you can't change them there. Developers explicitly recommended running the game on better hardware for those who want max graphics settings. It makes perfect sense to me. Developers use what the hardware allows.