Who doesn't want the latest version of their favorite electronic device? Whether we have internalized narratives of innovation, are driven by FOMO, or simply enjoy testing the newest gadget on the market, the latest versions of the devices we use daily — for entertainment and/or work — are always appealing. Videogames are one of the fields where this desire most deeply affects the industry and the consumption of games.
Traditionally, the history of the gaming world is subdivided into console generations. We are currently in the ninth generation with the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series S and X — with the Nintendo Switch still considered part of the eighth, even though it launched closer to the end of that generation than its beginning. Generations are defined precisely by the innovations they bring in terms of implemented technologies. Some generational shifts have been marked by transitions from 16-bit to 32-bit, the spread of 3D graphics, internet connectivity for multiplayer, and so on.
Each new technology added to consoles gives game developers new creative possibilities, enabling new experiences and new ways to play. For example: consoles with more and faster RAM made loading screens shorter, opening the door to open-world games with seamless, uninterrupted environments; greater processing power allows — among other things — denser populations of NPCs, since their individual AI can be processed without impacting performance, giving us games with cities full of life and activity happening independently of the player's actions; constant internet connectivity enabled connected game experiences that influence one another, and so on.
What we see in this relationship is a feedback loop of value between technological innovations in consoles and the possibility of innovative games being developed. Since the available hardware delimits the range of possibilities for developers, a clear order exists — at least to a point. But in terms of consumption and perceived value, the relationship is cyclical: I want the new console to play new games, and I want new games to play on my new console. This same logic, in some ways, explains part of the difficulty the latest generation had in maintaining cross-generational compatibility and simultaneous launches — and the decisions about backward incompatibility between console generations that were previously taken so frequently.
Seen this way, the pursuit of ever newer, technologically advanced console versions seems beneficial on both ends: for creators, artistic visions expand alongside the capacity to realize them, and increasingly interesting and innovative games flourish; for consumers, a market full of options that constantly surpass each other is like an infinitely expanding library of experiences to be acquired. But is that really so? My aim here is to explore the current market, some trends I see emerging, and what this might mean for the traditional feedback model between novelty and technological hardware innovation on one side, and game innovation on the other.
Mobile, PC, and Cloud Gaming
Let us begin with the emergence of a gigantic mobile market — that is, games for smartphones and tablets. Today one can find in app stores not just games from exclusively mobile brands like Candy Crush and Clash of Clans, but also traditional console brands bringing both versions specifically designed for the platform (like Call of Duty Mobile) and remakes of classic games (like many in the Final Fantasy series). This entire range of games operates under a completely different innovation logic from that of console generations. In other words, the innovations that allow such games to expand are more closely tied to what Apple, Google, or Samsung decide to bring to the smartphone market than to any concern with games per se. And consumers in this category rarely buy or avoid their devices because of a specific game, just as developers aim for the broadest possible reach.
Another space where players are increasingly common is the PC. Not only through the wave of esports and free-to-play models — League of Legends, Fortnite, Valorant, Counter-Strike — but through the success of established platforms like Steam, the emergence of new ones like Epic, and the entry of console brands like Xbox Game Pass, each with a very distinct logic. On one side, traditional games are tied to consoles but carry their own specifics. The PC paradigm differs greatly from consoles: despite some standardization of components, different computers come with vastly different configurations. Beyond that — especially for desktops — there is the possibility of swapping individual components over time, and new generations of components launch annually, while consoles have fixed hardware for each generation (the latest generation being an exception, largely to avoid that rigidity). This environment leads to a balance between hardware coverage and a narrowing around technologies.
On the other side, free-to-play and esports games operate much like mobile games. You can play League of Legends on almost any modern-processor computer without even needing a dedicated GPU. The same goes for Fortnite or Counter-Strike. Other games, like Overwatch and Valorant, occupy a middle ground — more graphically demanding, but not to the level of traditional console games — and must balance the relationship between coverage and technological specificity more carefully. In the world of consoles there is a battle for platform exclusives — as in the case of Final Fantasy XVI, which launched exclusively on PlayStation 5 — while in the PC world the fight is over support for specific technologies and performance optimization.
There is also cloud gaming, an area that has received several years of industry investment. As with cloud computing, the idea is to no longer depend on the end consumer's device for graphical processing. Instead, the game runs on machines "in the cloud" — vast warehouses filled with thousands of machines running 24/7, with sophisticated climate control — while the interaction device (desktop, laptop, tablet, smartphone, or smart TV) is only responsible for connection speed and latency, relaying player inputs and displaying the game as close as possible to running it locally.
Indie and Nintendo: Questioning the Model
Finally, I see two more movements that have questioned the model of relentless technological innovation in games: the indie movement, which has matured considerably, and Nintendo. Indie games are those created by independent developers — usually small or even individual groups of hobbyists-turned-prosumers, made possible in large part by advances in the availability of accessible game development tools. Because of their limitations — in resources, expertise, time, and people — these games tend to be technologically simple but mechanically complex and visually distinctive. Today, the truly unique and innovative experiences — and very likely the best ones — are in the indie world, not in games made by major publishers. For this market, the relationship between technological innovation and game development possibilities is very different: an innovation is absorbed and valuable when it is accessible and broadly available. And for the end consumer, almost any available computing device is sufficient to run indie games — it is practically a non-concern.
As for Nintendo — several generations back, the company stopped betting on bleeding-edge technology and instead doubled down on the good, reliable, well-known, and mature. Its current console, the Switch, is closer to a mobile device than to any Sony or Microsoft console, having launched in 2017 with a 2015 SoC originally created for tablets — the Tegra X1. Even so, not only was the launch title, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, a commercial and critical success, but its 2023 sequel, The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, managed to surpass it on both fronts. The innovation of the console was not in having more graphical power, more memory, or more cores — it was in a new arrangement of existing and mature technologies: a hybrid console bridging portability and the traditional living-room experience. Along with small but meaningful hardware implementations that were not merely added and forgotten by developers, but actively enabled games to be designed around them — a good gyroscope, detachable controls for two-player local multiplayer, and a touchscreen.
Both the existence of critically and commercially successful games on the Switch, and the presence of the greatest innovations and most singular experiences in the indie universe, indicate how the traditional feedback model of constant novelty and technological hardware innovation seems to make less and less sense. Hype and consumerism seem to be its only remaining firm pillars. As the industry changes — and especially as consumer desires shift toward other formats — the traditional model may become unviable. Today, the industry's financial success is undeniable, but I find myself wondering how long it can last.
// Note: This is a translated and lightly adapted version of the original Portuguese text. The author will review and revise this translation.