I’ve been thinking of this for some time now, and I’m bloody tired of all the talk about who’s the winner in the current console war. Why is this so important at all? All the consoles are different and is aiming for different segments of the market. Sure, PS3 and Xbox 360 are fighting more for the same type of audience then the Wii, but in a healthy market, there is room for them all.
To use the term “War” is an interesting choice too! I’ve never heard that about any other market. Its logically right with competitors that drives a healthy and necessary development. Maybe one could argue that the price or that they fight about is market shares, the one with the most wins the war.
The feeling I felt when listening to podcast, reading news and forums is that all the players in this game have problems, and no one is a certain winner. Heres a quick sum-up on my thoughts on each of the contesters biggest problem and advantages.
- Playstation 3: The biggest problem they have is the low consoles installment, which is correlated with the lack of “killer app” games! Many of the big games showed to market the PS3 have been ether mediocre or delayed, and many of the games that stretches over other platforms had or have problems with development for the console that have delayed the release of the PS3 version, like the Darkness. The low sales of consoles make the developers look at the other consoles. In its defense its clearly the most powerful console (if you discount PC), but that alone don’t make a winning console if it lack a great, or at least good game selection.
- Xbox 360: The earliest of the 3 consoles, with a whole year lead. In my opinion a kind of middle man between the bodybuilder PS3 and the innovative easy Wii. The one console I don’t own, so its hard to make a statement. But the biggest issue is the simple fact that the Xbox 360 breaks down, and not just one time. They overheat, or something else breaks so it have to be replaced. And story’s go about people that have sent away there console several times!
On the good side is the fact that the console is the oldest one and have a fare share of the market with many console sold and a good catalog of games, but what good is that when the consoles don’t work?
- Wii: The weakest of the consoles in category of hardware power, but with the most innovative controller. Still several month after release it isn’t the easiest console to get, but to start playing. Nintendo have foretold problem with available consoles for the Christmas shopping. Its cheap and easy to learn, but the main problem is the variety and range of good games, especially from 3rd party developers. The Wii have a great share of consoles on the market, but not even near equally as impressive games catalog. And they is far behind concerning online support in the games, with is a repeatably criticism in reviews. The question is if the console will survive in the long run with the lack in hardware power and great game content, or if this will be the turning point when games stops being about graphic and more about gameplay? I don’t think graphic is such a issue, but they better start putting out a lot of great game soon, form 3rd party too.
- PC: I just felt I had to mention the computer as a game machine too. The PC have survived all the old console generation and have a big share of the gamemarket. The computer is struggling with the same problem as it ever has, most hardware compability problem and the constant upgrading.
I won’t talk about the handheld consoles, but that doesn’t mean I don’t consider them important, they just isn’t consider a part of the “big console war”. I still don’t see why it so important for the market to appoint a winner, and thereby a loser too. My view is that all the consoles complement each other, and the competion is good for development of the industry, as I’ve stated before. Skip all the talk about who’s the winner and loser in this generation, and enjoy the ability to choose.
Heres another more humoristic view on the console “war”: