So, it’s been roughly 5 years since the last wave of consoles touched down on the shores of Gamemeria, and buzz about the new ones on the way has been quite loud. The Xbox 360 has already hit our shores, and is doing quite well for a console that has no real competition yet. Sure, it’s had its share of problems, but it’s doing all right. Too bad for Microsoft that the majority of the gaming buzz has drifted away from this early contender and to the two unreleased “next gen” consoles.
First, there’s the aptly named PS3. I say aptly named because Kaz Hirai proclaimed that it was not an incremental upgrade. This really sets the stage for how Sony’s been acting regarding its launch. It lambasted Xbox live, saying that a built in online setup and matchmaking service was a bad idea. But the PS3 will have a much similar setup, so it’s okay when Sony does it. It dismissed Nintendo’s Wiimote controller, saying that a motion sensitive controller was too much of a gimmick and would fail. But the Dualshock 3 has tilt sensitivity, so it’s okay when Sony does it.
Then there’s Nintendo. They’re being innovative. They’re being fun. They’re keeping their costs down. It seems that everyone wants a Nintendo Wii. It will have Zelda, so how could it go wrong? It’s not like you could ever botch a Zelda game (Um… Majora’s Mask never existed). Nintendo clearly has a different attitude than the other two companies. If they win the war, they’ll usher in a new golden age of gaming. It’ll be just like last time Nintendo was the undisputed king, and was notorious for forcing third party developers and publishers to remain with Nintendo exclusively, thereby putting a stranglehold on the industry. Because of course, having a controller that works on mechanics the other two don’t have gives you so many options for multi-platform development.
Yes, we know all about the systems, you cry, but who is going to win? That’s an awful question to ask, because it can’t be answered. For starters, how do you answer that question? What designates the winner? Market share, I think most people think automatically. Whoever sells the most units wins. But that victory doesn’t mean anything, because in half a decade another round of consoles will come up, and the tables could be turned. Don’t believe me, then look at the current crowd favorite, Nintendo. They were the cream of the crop in the 80s with the Famicom. They did well in the 16 bit generation with the Super Famicom. But in the 32/64 bit era, they tanked. The N64 had good hype preceding it, and no games following it. This, my friends, is why Sony is so strong. They took a lead and held it vigorously. Furthermore, gross units sold isn’t a fair comparison, because many American gamers love their Xboxes, but that system doesn’t sell at all in Japan solely because it’s an American product competing with Japanese products. Finally, some systems LOSE money with each sale of a console. Sony will be facing that problem soon. The 599USD PlayStation 3 costs even more to make. They’ll regain their funds in Blu-Ray DVDs and Sony-published games, but each console sold represents red ink in the books. So, the winner is the person who loses the most money? That seems backwards, don’t you? This is business we’re talking about, not charity.
Gross amount of games sold for any system is a somewhat better comparison, but still heavily flawed. What about cross-platform games? For Example, Soul Calibur II was released on all 3 major platforms. Because of this, it can’t be counted towards any system’s tally, because anyone who bought Soul Calibur II would have done so regardless of what system they had.
The only other way I can think of to compare who “wins” this round is by seeing who drops out of the console market. I am doubtful that we’ll ever find ourselves in a time where we only have 1 console to choose from. New players keep joining the fray (or at least trying to). Who expected Microsoft to start making consoles? Certainly not me. My thoughts aside, here they are, mass-producing their Xbox 360 with a smile on their faces and dollar signs reflecting in their eyes. The people in it now have good foundations. Sony and Microsoft are multi-billion dollar corporations with all kinds of other financial projects to help fund their console department, and Nintendo is still the undisputed king of hand held consoles (you can’t even give away a PSP in Japan, crazy graphics or not).
Finally, which console will win is a silly question to ask, especially before they’re even released. It’s not the console itself that make or break a console, it’s the games. Launch titles are misleading. The Nintendo DS had a very weak launch, filled with games that reeked of halfassed game design, whereas the PSP had remakes of old favorites ready to go (they also had Ape Escape, but my therapist told me not to talk about that). Now, the PSP is still stuck with mostly ports, and the Nintendo DS has all kinds of interesting and new games. Even if a winner could be declared, it’s by far still too early to tell.
Phil Horowitz
I say it will be Sony Playstation 3It’s hard to choose which console is better without seeing and playing a few games on them. In my opinion, it doesn’t really matter which console is better because it is the games that will really count. They will decide which consoles sell and which don’t. Consoles aren’t just there for home decoration; they are there to play games. If the games are horrible, then it won’t matter if the console is good or bad. Looking at the competition through the eyes of a developer rather than a consumer is much easier. Its simple, the fastest, strongest console wins the match. In the “next generation” console wars, this is supposedly going to be the Playstation 3. The powerful console is better not just for bragging rights, but because it gives less limitations and more freedom to the game developer. This makes
it possible for not only better graphics, but more immersive storytelling and character development. My money goes to the Playstation 3 because its power allows the possibility of it’s games to be better. I’m not saying that just because its powerful, all its games will be better. Far from it, there will probably be more horrible and mediocre games than good ones. But that extra power makes it possible for one game to come by that takes advantage of it and takes game play to a new level.
Although the Xbox 360 is a powerful system also, it isn’t as powerful as the specs for the upcoming PS3. The games I’ve seen on the 360 look great, but they are on par with PC graphics. I look at some of the games on the 360, like Call of Duty 2, and think that I can get the same graphics on my PC, so why would I spend all that money on an Xbox 360? The 360 doesn’t seem to be a full next generation system while the PS3 does.
The same goes for the Nintendo Wii. Yes, it’s a new system, but all it did was take the Game Cube and add some new technologies to it. It’s basically the same system as the Game Cube but it is packaged to look more high tech and modern. The graphics don’t differ too much from the Game Cube either. From the demos I’ve seen, they are about the same poly count but with higher resolution textures and they use normal maps now. It does make the graphics look better, but only through tricks.
Serozh Sarkisyan
Who Wins the Console War?
Nintendo, Sony or XBOX?
Enter Digital Journal Online, “Who Wins the Console War?” Contest by sending us your opinion in 200 to 500 words. Best articles received will be published and the top five articles published will each win a video game.
Email your articles to:
editor@digitaljournalonline.com 
