This week for Would You Rather we have a question in response to something we experience (and some participate in) everyday, the console war.
With companies merging to create larger studios, hardware manufactuers losing billions of dollars to maintain market awareness by undercutting consoles and exclusive games staying out of some hands because of our system selections where does it end? Are we heading into a one console future? Probably not. Or maybe. Well, it isn't our idea to judge -- it's yours! So this week we wonder, would you prefer a one console future and enjoy all games or do you crave the smell of napalm in the morning in this, the console war? Discuss.
Feel free to share the reasons for your vote in the comments. We'll share the results of the poll during the next edition of Would You Rather ... which hits X3F every Wednesday.
Last weeks WUR results can be find after the jump!
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 3)
6-25-2008 @ 6:14PM
webster1990 said...
I like that i have a choice.
All 3 of the current consoles all bring something different and people get to choose what they prefer.
Plus, like a few other people have said, competition is good for the industry and leads to companies constantly trying to push the boundaries and try new things.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:26PM
AoE said...
Competition is important for the industry, and the different consoles actually seem to server different groups of gamers. One console might not be a bad idea at first blush, but what if for example the only console this gen had been the Wii? ;)
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:26PM
c4v3man said...
Dumb question, I agree. In a perfect world, yes having only one system would be optimal, look at MAME on the PC as an example. However, competition breeds innovation, and keeps things affordable for the consumer. Yes, having only 1 console would mean that you only have to purchase 1 console instead of 2-3 $3-400 ones, however that one console would cost $700, since there's no incentive to lower the price. Console makers would risk less, extend console lifetimes to further increase profit, and there would be less pressure from the console makers to the game developers, since they no longer need to sell games to turn a profit. This would be a disaster for the gaming industry.
There will never be a 1 console world, as there is obviously room in the market for more than one. No one product can satisfy all users. That's why capitalism is great, we can get what we want, instead of having to choose between simply having a gaming console or not. I can specify if I want a multimedia hub (PS3), a multimedia hub that can play games (X360), and a party games console (Wii).
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:29PM
Professor Lario said...
Open market competition FTW!
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:39PM
DaveC said...
Competition brings improvement :D
Look at the next firmware update for the PS3 for example.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:41PM
BFBeast666 said...
I guess I'm in the minority here, but apart from economic reasons I see no point in having more than one console in the house.
OK, I have all three major last-gen systems PLUS several older systems, but this gen I'm planning on being mono-consolar (hehe). So far, the PS3 has nothing that forces me to buy it (although MGS4 comes pretty close), and I don't have enough room in my gamer closet to fully utilize the Wii. And if the future holds only one console, I won't complain - as long as there's more than one software company...
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 6:47PM
[edude05] said...
As long as all the games come to PC I really don't care. Although I agree that competition is good, the only problem is that you have to spend multiple hundreds of dollars to get the same thing multiple times. IE: you have to buy PS3 for Heavenly Sword and Haze and X360 for Halo 3, Gears of War Shadowrun ETC, while other than that they share the same games.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:06PM
lysernix said...
Wow it would be so boring without compeition / more than one vendor. For one, you couldn't really be a "fanboy" because that title usually assumes you prefer one brand over their competitors no matter what and won't hear anything else -- if there's just one you no longer meet the definition.
Plus... just how boring would that be!? And you'd totally be at the mercy of whatever company it was... all innovation would be stiffled... in short: WORST IDEA EVER!
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:07PM
yost said...
GIVE ME WAR!!!!.... a war keeps competition alive...which means good games ..having good games means we won't have another gravesite for thouands of unwanted games(see e.t. for the atari)...besides I like the sound of thousands of sony fanboys screaming in terror...
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:15PM
Jonman said...
Remember kids, arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 7:42PM
Jayslacks said...
I think if developers had to deal with more competition from each other, they would create better games. The games they are making are good, but I think a one console future would push it even further along. And it wouldn't end. Microsoft and Sony would both have game studios.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 8:39PM
LoyalistRevolt said...
It is a well know fact that competition is the best for the customers...Gamestop is a monopoly and no one likes that place but for some it is the only chose they have.
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 8:47PM
Adam said...
I think it was someone from EA, or someone like that, that had the good but very unlikely vision of different hardwares running the same basic architecture software-wise, meaning you'd still have your differences in hardware (this gen being a good example, xbox for multimedia and ps3 for bluray/interwebs) but making multi-platform games a hell of a lot easier and cheaper to make as they'll be almost identical on all the systems. This could also mean more chance of cross-platform multiplayer and all that jazz...
But obviously that's overly hopeful :-/
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 9:18PM
Cory said...
I guess I have to go with the second option but i could really care less for all the console bashing. I just like having a choice for my system.
If there was only one it would get boring. If all that was on the market was the Wii I honestly don't know how much I would play games. I like variety. This point is moot if this one console to rule them all gave me options on how to play a game all in one nice package. But then again the price for said machine would be outrageous!
Reply
6-25-2008 @ 9:20PM
Michael said...
I think that the different consoles on the market you get different experiences. For example, the wii. The motion controls are a totally different experience than the other consoles. I don't think that all the experiences could fit on one console for a reasonable price.
Reply
6-26-2008 @ 1:16AM
UNSCleric said...
The people voting for one console only are the same people who will welcome a one world Government. Idiots.
Reply
6-27-2008 @ 11:28AM
BerNasty said...
You're the idiot for believing everyone should think like you.
Both alternatives have their pros and cons. If you dont want the latest next gen super console than dont buy it. I think what people fail to understand is that companies dont always innovate because the saturation of consoles, they innovate because they want to survive in the market. They want people to buy their product. I guarantee you that if everyone stopped buying Guitar Hero downloadable content, they would either a) reduce the price or b) stop making it.
Having one console doesnt mean that all the innovation would be gone, it just means that the gamers would have to be smart and not purchase stupid games. The consumer determines everything not the companies that produce the content. Its the fact that people buy into the fluff and throw away their money that allows the companies to continue putting out crap. Thats why I am officially starting the "No-Crap" campaign.
6-26-2008 @ 1:46AM
Vcize said...
How the HELL have 546 people voted for one console? Do people really want every game and even the console itself to turn into what the Madden franchise has become?
Reply
6-26-2008 @ 3:13PM
BFBeast666 said...
One console, yes.
One software developer: HELL NO.
There's a subtle difference, don't you think?
6-26-2008 @ 3:15AM
Johnny said...
The industry must always have at least 2 consoles.
If it only had one, the growth of the gaming industry would be stunted.
consoles are built by learning from competitor success and mistakes.
Reply