[small](Apologies if this has been done before. I didn't find anything on the search bar, but you never know.)[/small] Anyway:
With the Wii U on it's way and new Microsoft and Sony consoles around the corner, I can't help but wonder what the point is in having three different consoles on the market. While Nintendo kind of does its own thing, the Xbox and PlayStation are essentially the same console owned by different companies. While you can debate over which is better hardware, and which has better exclusives, pretty much every 3rd party game that matters appears on both systems. The whole thing seems pointless to me.
If say, we had the three main companies make one system, and split the profits, a few things would probably happen. On the upside, developers wouldn't have to waste resources making a multi-platform game. We consumers wouldn't have to buy multiple consoles just to play the exclusives. Nintendo could forget their gimmicky nonsense and become one of the best 3rd party developers in the industry. Most importantly though, is that we'd have less fanboys getting into asinine flamewars over which console is best.
The problem (which anyone who's taken economics has noticed since the title) is that having one console turns the industry into a monopoly and we consumers could lose all our power. This could be offset by a number of things. For one, they'd still have to compete with the PC and Mobile market, but that's probably not enough; we'd need a very powerful and very stubborn consumer advocacy group. All of us would need to be willing to not buy hardware unless it's well made and at a reasonable price.
If this were to happen, do you see us gamers gaining or losing from the situation? Your thoughts please.
With the Wii U on it's way and new Microsoft and Sony consoles around the corner, I can't help but wonder what the point is in having three different consoles on the market. While Nintendo kind of does its own thing, the Xbox and PlayStation are essentially the same console owned by different companies. While you can debate over which is better hardware, and which has better exclusives, pretty much every 3rd party game that matters appears on both systems. The whole thing seems pointless to me.
If say, we had the three main companies make one system, and split the profits, a few things would probably happen. On the upside, developers wouldn't have to waste resources making a multi-platform game. We consumers wouldn't have to buy multiple consoles just to play the exclusives. Nintendo could forget their gimmicky nonsense and become one of the best 3rd party developers in the industry. Most importantly though, is that we'd have less fanboys getting into asinine flamewars over which console is best.
The problem (which anyone who's taken economics has noticed since the title) is that having one console turns the industry into a monopoly and we consumers could lose all our power. This could be offset by a number of things. For one, they'd still have to compete with the PC and Mobile market, but that's probably not enough; we'd need a very powerful and very stubborn consumer advocacy group. All of us would need to be willing to not buy hardware unless it's well made and at a reasonable price.
If this were to happen, do you see us gamers gaining or losing from the situation? Your thoughts please.
.
