New Consoles

[WolvenOne]

Well if you could find some shorthand for for Xbox360 that didn't sound like some obscure internal sever component I might use that.

XB360.... er... no

Xn360.... bleah

XBO..... maybe.

[Vuldari]

Well if you could find some shorthand for for Xbox360 that didn't sound like some obscure internal sever component I might use that.

XB360.... er... no

Xn360.... bleah

XBO..... maybe.

How about skipping the "X-Box" part and just calling it the 360 like I do?

PS3-360-? ? ?

Since we don't know what Nintendo's new console will actually be called yet, (it might just turn out to be "Revolution" after all, as the DS code-name turned out to be the official name also), it is hard to guess what abbriviation will be applicable to that one. GameCube is GCN or just the CUBE. (Why it is "Game Cube, Nintendo" and not NGC "NIntendo Game Cube" I do not know.)

NRV? RVN? Rev?

[WolvenOne]

I don't want to call it the 360 because it feels like a serial number or something, plus I'll always feel like I'm going in circles when I'm talking about it.

[Vuldari]

I don't want to call it the 360 because it feels like a serial number or something, plus I'll always feel like I'm going in circles when I'm talking about it.

N64 was a stupid name for a console as well, but people would think I was crazy if I started calling it the "REALITY" system instead. (Which was the code name for that one, before "ULTRA 64")

It is NOT the "Xenon". Most folks are not familiar with that code name anyway. Calling it that will just prove to be far more confusing. If you are not going to refer to it by it's actual name, you may as well call it the i-BOX (as it looks more like an Apple Product than a Microsoft one anyway.)

[WolvenOne]

I'm thinking of reffering to it as "The Microsoft thingy." Rolls off the tongue more naturally then a lot of the alternatives at least.

[Vuldari]

I'm thinking of reffering to it as "The Microsoft thingy." Rolls off the tongue more naturally then a lot of the alternatives at least.

I think "The Three-Sixty" rolls off the tongue just fine...but that's just me.

[WolvenOne]

I would call it "The Circle," before the 360. It irked me that Microsoft used a math term, go fig.

[Terastas]

I'm in with the 'love to, but I'm f---ing broke' crowd, though if I did have the money, I'd probably only get the PS3.

I wouldn't get the X-Box 360 because there's only one halfway decent game for it (Oblivion, of course), and I don't have a whole lot of faith that Microsoft will be producing any other such titles. Most of the X-Box titles I have seen were either previously available for PS2, or cheap generic copies of games previously available for PS2. I would therefore rather just get the PS3 because, even if there is only one halfway decent game coming out for it, I have faith that there will be plenty more coming out afterwards.

That and the fact that Bill Gates is pure evil (yes, I'm a Firefox and WordPerfect user).

And I used to be a big time Nintendo fan, but the titles are getting stale. Every system all the way back to the original 8-bit has had a host of Mario games, a Zelda game, a Metroid game, a Donkey Kong game, a Street Fighter game... It's getting old is what I'm saying, and as long as Nintendo assumes it can just recycle the old crap and none of us will be able to tell the difference, I see no reason to spend my hard-earned money on something I already have packed up in the attic from four years ago.

And in defense of the Playstation systems:

- Backwards compatability.
- Final Fantasy.


Right now I'm on a serious budget, but as soon as they come down in price (or start popping up on e-bay), I'll pick up one for sure. After that though, I think I'd rather skip the other two systems and save up for the PS4.

[Figarou]

Right now I'm on a serious budget, but as soon as they come down in price (or start popping up on e-bay), I'll pick up one for sure. After that though, I think I'd rather skip the other two systems and save up for the PS4.

Well, don't get one on Ebay until the madness has dropped. Some actually spent close to $1,000 for a PS2. Maybe higher. Also, you can get ripped off if you don't read the description carefully.

Someone placed a PS2 box up for bids at Ebay. Someone thought she was getting a PS2 so she placed a bid. She was very disapointed to spend almost $400 for just a PS2 box. No game console was inside.



Also, one thing I hate about price drops is that they take something out. It could be a video connection. Or it may not have the port for use with a cable modem. To me, thats cheating the customer. Its like buying a car with no A/C.

[Vuldari]

And I used to be a big time Nintendo fan, but the titles are getting stale. Every system all the way back to the original 8-bit has had a host of Mario games, a Zelda game, a Metroid game, a Donkey Kong game, a Street Fighter game... It's getting old is what I'm saying, and as long as Nintendo assumes it can just recycle the old crap and none of us will be able to tell the difference, I see no reason to spend my hard-earned money on something I already have packed up in the attic from four years ago.

Nintendo's long-running franchises are the REASON why people, (like myself) play Nintendo games.

*Deep Inhale*

Stale? ...How is Zelda: Twilight Princess any more stale and unoriginal than Final Fantasy XII? Almost every Zelda, Mario, Metroid, etc. has rocked and continue to be the gold standards by which all other games of the same genres are judged.

Would "Zelda: Ocarina of Time" have been a better game if Nintendo had placed different characters in place of Link, Ganon and Zelda and claimed the game to be a totally different franchise? If you are conplaining about repeating the "be the hero...save the world" plotline...ummm...in case you havent realized, EVERYONE is recycling that one.

(oh...and there has not been a Street Fighter game on a nintendo console since the SNES...in fact...that was the ONLY nintendo system that had Street Fighter games.)

I just don't see where you are getting this attitude from.
"Recycled old C***"?..."Something I allready have packed in the attic"?...

Each new installment of a classic Nintedo franchise consistantly turnes out to be one of, if not THE the best of it's genre. If you happen to not like Platformers and Adventure games at all, then fine. THAT would be a valid excuse for not having much interest in Nintendo Games, as those are their specialty. However, if you DO like to play those genres, then you are doing youself a great injustice by refusing to play them because of a familiar face on the cover. Nintedo games are fun to play...plain and simple.

Nintendo LEADS THE WAY in the genres they create games for, usually being the First to inplement something NEW and innovative. Really, about the only thing they have not been doing lately is jumping on the Bandwagon and Creating Free-Roaming Games ("GTA-Clones"), or Karma Games ("KOTOR/B&W/Fable-Clones") like everyone else is doing.

...which is more of that "recycling old C***" that you are complaining about...except those ideas and scenarios are NOT "C***" and deserve to be re-done, because they are fun...just as the core GamePlay scenarios behind most Nintedo Games are not "C***" either, but consistantly and genuinely satisfying and entertaining to play.


I don't understand why it has become so popular to hate on Nintendo. It seems that if one want's to be a "cool" gamer, then they have to join in the crowd and start talking about how they are just Too Cool to play those stupid, "kiddy" Nintendo games. Why is that?

Most people who are adding to this trend have not even played a Nintendo game in years, becasue their "cool" freinds told them that they are lame (even thugh they themselves have not played them either, for more than 30-seconds on a store demo or something), and just pass on this attitude to thier other friends and revel in their high and mighty status of beeing "too cool for Nintendo". ...all the while, turning a blind eye to the fact that all these new Nintendo games are consistantly getting higher review scores than their own favorite games, and are endlessly praised for thier excelence by those who take the time to play and enjoy them.



...*exhale and sigh*

Okay...I feel better now that I got that off my chest.

Give NINTENDO a chance. You won't regret it.

[Set]

As far as uniqueness in games: Nintendo owns. I mean with things like Super Mario Sunshine how can it be recycled? You run around washing graffiti off of walls and spray monsters with water, ride on the back of squid, and get to freak out at the "Mama Peach" thing. More unique games include Animal Crossing, Lost Kingdoms, Cubivore, Super Monkey Ball, the Harvest Moon series (a farming rpg. Who else would make a farming rpg?), Luigi's Mansion, Paper Mario, Banjo-Kazooie (made by Rare, but only for Nintendo), Yoshi's Story, Custom Robo, and the entire Legend of Zelda series qualifies too.

I never had any interest in the X-Box. Play Station doesn't offer me much in terms of games I'd be interested in, but I'd sooner buy one than an X-Box. Nintendo, however, has never ceased to capture my interest.

[Shadow Wulf]

lets not forget viewitful joe, even if its not made by nintendo tenshin a go go baby.

[WolvenOne]

Actually I'm gonna agree that Nintendo's not half as creative as they claim to be. No Twilight Princess does not look like a highly original title to me, I'll still buy it cause it looks good but it appears largely to be Ocarnia of Time with better graphics and a few new gameplay elements.

Mario Sunshine? Again, one or two new gameplay elements does not a make a title highly original.

Mario Kart Double Dash? Again, one or two new gameplay elements, no real biggie.

Nintendog's is somewhat creative, but it's mostly just borrowing concepts from the entire virtual-pet concept and using a few unique interfaces to add greater interactivity.

Super Monkey Ball was made by Sega, not Nintendo, it's appeared on multiple consoles. Harvest Moon also isn't a Nintendo title if I rememember correctly. Animal Crossing is pretty clever and I will give Nintendo credit on that.

It's not that Nintendo lacks creativity as they do bring out a good new concept every now and again. However Nintendo also boasts about how creative they are and in my mind that raises the bar on how creative they need to be.

Besides that, Nintendo's competition isn't half as uncreative as many Nintendo fanboys seem to think. Heck, I've even seen Nintendo steeling concepts from some of thier competitors. Just look at Nintendo's drumset for example, Namco had a drumset out for the PS2 well before Nintendo came out with thier own. Or there's Pokemon, which was ripped off from the monster collecting side game in one of the DragonQuest titles.

Heck even the seperate screen idea touted for both the GameCube and the DS was ripped off from another source. If you look back at history, you'll see that Sega was the first company to utilize a second screen for thier Dreamcast console, if you don't know what I'm talking about take a look at the UMD memory carts that you would stick in the controllers.

Ripping off ideas does not constitute creativity.

[Vuldari]

Indeed...Nintendo does not "Rule ALL" as it did back in the NES days, but as familiar as the gameplay tends to be in most of Nintendo's games, those who play them will find that they are still really fun to play. You can't expect any game publisher to invent entirely new genres every year...though some try, and it is definately awsome when they succeed.

However, I would not look down upon those who seek to perfect the existing genres to an art form, and that is what a precious few developers, such as Nintendo and Others (like some divisions of Capcom) are doing.
Yeah...I've played alot of Action, Adventure, Platformers over the years. The thing is...I've loved every minute of it. So...if Nintendo or Capcom or Square Enix or UbiSoft or whoever makes yet another game in a familiar franchise, or new franchise in a common genre, and said game is even better than those that came before it (if only a tiny bit), then all I can say is, "HELL YEAH!!!".

What Nintendo brings to the table in the current gaming market is a heaping helping of the best damn classic gameplay you can get, (and a few "overcooked" bits), sprinkled lightly with a spice of briliant imagination, all mixed together by master chefs using a mix of tried-and-true classic recipies and a touch of risky experimentation.

("Mmmmmm...Tasty...")

...admitably though, Nintendo does not seem to be entirely satisfying on its own. More like, Nintendo is just Breakfast, your old favorite meal for lunch and a spectacular Desert with no Dinner. Whereas The full 3-course meal is waiting over at the PlayStation Buffet. X-Box is sort of like that bar down the street that has the best damn ribbs in town and some killer burritoes...and not much else.

...My 3 cents and an olde english haypenny...

[WolvenOne]

Agreed, Nintendo makes fun games, they just arn't a complete package.

[Terastas]

Also, one thing I hate about price drops is that they take something out. It could be a video connection. Or it may not have the port for use with a cable modem. To me, thats cheating the customer. Its like buying a car with no A/C.

Actually, by "coming down" in price, I meant in the stores. No doubt in my mind that as soon as they hit the shelves, there will be people eager to rip each other off with it, but once the systems have been on the shelves for a few months and all the die-hard must-have gamers have bought their systems at full price, the stores will have to drop the prices to clear out their excess inventory. If you can wait long enough, you can get a new system for just a fraction of the price.

I also figure this is what will happen with e-bay. The first systems to appear up for bid will, of course, either be broken or fraud. What I've noticed, however, is that a lot of die-hards will buy more than one system, and if they prefer one much moreso over the other, they'll try to get their money back for the old one (I used to see a lot of "used but new" X-Boxes on e-bay).

Reilune and Vuldari... *deep breath*:

Mario Sunshine may seem like a new game to you, but all I see is Mario64 with somewhat better graphics and a water jet. It's still the exact same controls with only slight variations.

The same, unfortunately, can be said of the Zelda series. The transition from 2D to 3D was a big one, but again, every title after Ocarina of Time has been the same game with the same controls, just with some additional features to make it seem lightly more original. No matter how you slice it, however, swapping Link's child and adult forms for human and wolf forms does not make it a completely new game.

Granted, some Playstation titles are guilty of the same process (Crash Bandicoot, Spyro the Dragon, , etc.), but they balance this out well enough with a host of original titles as well.

And comparring Mario to Final Fantasy? That's injustice. Every Mario game has starred an Italian plumber antagonized by some odd cross of tutle and dinosaur with 90% of the action centered around jumping with only slight additions to make the game seem a little more complex (the raccoon suit to Mario3, Yoshi to SuperMario), the only real exception being the transition from side-scrolling to 3-D environments made by Mario64.

Final Fantasy, on the other hand, recycles as little as possible; the monster mascots like chocobos and some summon spells like Ifrit and Shiva (and guys named Cid) make frequent appearances, but these are hardly crucial to the game play.

FFVII:
Cloud vs. Sephiroth. Advanced Materia System. Introduction of Active Timer and "Limit" attacks. Team # reduced from 4 to 3.

FFVIII:
Squall vs. Ultimecia. GF Draw System. Junction spells to attributes. Improved Limit attacks. Active Timer. Card mini-game.

FF-Tactics:
Ramza vs. Lucavi. Job System. Turn-based Movement+Action-based fighting.

FFIX:
Zidane vs. Kuja. Specialized characters. Items=experience. Team # back to 4. Active Timer. Different card mini-game.

FFX:
Tidus vs. Sin. Specialized (but customizable) characters. Sphere Grid. In-action Character Transitions. Turn-based. No free-roaming world map. Al-Bhed. Blitzball. Mini-games up the yinyang.

FFX-2 (the only direct sequel):
Dress Sphere. Active Timer. Mission-based progression. Sphere Break.

FFXI:
Online.

My point is, it's hardly a fair comparrison.

Sure, I'll admit that every now and then I like to play games that closely resemble their predecessors. I do it all the time on my PC -- their called expansion packs. And if Mario Sunshine, Pokemon Gold & Silver, and every Zelda game after Ocarina of Time were on the PC, that's what they'd be: additions to the original.

[Vuldari]

It seems that our perspective on what makes a game good varies a bit, as we are different kinds of gamers. It appears that you are the kind of gamer who plays a game once or twice, then tires of it, sells it and buys a new one.

That kind of gamer is more interested in a "bigger bang for your buck $", wherein the very first time they play each game is the only time that matters, and what they are looking for it to be completely taken by suprise and experience something entirely new every time. The upside to those kinds of games is, of course, that they are a wonder to behold in terms of story and experience.
...once...
However, after the first, (or sometimes second or third, as many games feature multiple endings now) play, all of the games secrets and plot twists are revealed and there is little or no reason to ever play it again. The games entertainment value has been expended.

A much as I enjoy those "One shining moment" games, I personally have an undying love for "replay" games. ...that is...games in which the simple act of playing them is a joy in and of itself...games where you WANT to replay the (*Insert Generic Element themed stage*) over and over and over again because it is just so much FUN.

The 3D Mario and Zelda games all use the same basic controll schemes as thier predecesors because Nintendo got them right the first time. Do you remember the first time you played Mario 64? I'm willing to bet that the first thing you did was make Mario run around in circles and do random jumps and backflips in front of the castle like everyone else did, and I bet you had a big smile on your face while doing it like everyone else as well.

THAT is why Nintendo games are fun. You don't play a Mario game to learn the secret plot twist behind why Bowser kidnapped Princess Peach again...you play it because it just such a joy to make Mario jump around, bounce on enemies heads and go "Yahoooooooooooooooooooo!...." ...and the cookie cutter plots are just excuses do to so. Zelda games are slightly different, while they still are built upon the fact that playing with the OOT controll scheme and battling with monsters is extremely fun and satisfying, the Zelda games (more and more) include many very memorable characters, places and events which are created with such loving care that players WANT to play with them again, and again.

Apparently you feel differently, near as I can tell, but for me, Games like "Super Mario Bros. 3", "Zelda: A link to the past" , "Donkey Kong", "Metroid", "Mario 64", "Earthbound", "Metriod Prime", "Pikmin", etc. are as much fun to me today as they were the first time I played them. They never get old.

We are different kinds of gamers. I never buy a game with the intention of selling it after completing it. I buy games that are worth keeping, and rent the rest. I still own every game I have ever owned. ...and at least half or more of them are Nintendo games, because, there are few other games out there that are as fun to play on the 43rd time around as Nintendo games.

[Vuldari]

Ohh...Someone Voted for Nintendo!

YAY!!

[Terastas]

It seems that our perspective on what makes a game good varies a bit, as we are different kinds of gamers. It appears that you are the kind of gamer who plays a game once or twice, then tires of it, sells it and buys a new one.

Actually, when it comes to games, if I don't get tired or fed up with it in the first week (usually because the game sucked to begin with), I probably never will. I've had Final Fantasy Tactics since it came out, and I'm still playing it to this day.

That's why I won't give into games that look like expansion packs trying to be passed off as originals; I still like the ones they based them off of, and I'm not about to shell out sixty bucks that could have otherwise been used to buy books for college on a game that feels like one I already own.

[WolvenOne]

There are plenty of games I'll replay, though there's some criteria to it. I replayed ChronoTrigger a few times for example, largly because I enjoyed it the first time and the game wasn't rediculessly long.

Where-as I wouldn't replay Wild Arms 3 because while I enjoyed it the game wouldn't be worth the time needed to replay it. Though length won't always stop me, I've seriously been considering going back to replay Suikoden 3 despite the 80 hour gameplay time.

Disgaea of course I've played through plenty of times and I plan on playing through it 2 or 3 more times just so I can level up my characters to 9999 and beyond. Phantom Brave though, despite a good plot, is a game I'm reluctant to replay due to the frustrating battle system and the lack of a NewGame+ feature.

I've played through Final Fantasy 4 twice, Final Fantasy 7 about four times, Final Fantasy 9 two and a half times and Final Fantasy 10 one and a half times. I've yet to finish five and six and I've only beat 8 clear through to the end-boss once, largely due to a lack of interest.

As for action games, well, I partially replayed Ocarnia of Time but lost interest, I never even finished Wind Waker, however I played through Kingdom Hearts a whole three times despite the 40 hour gameplay time. I've beaten several Mario and Sonic games, though I've only gone through and beaten the ones with save systems multiple times. I'm still working on Half-Life 2, the fact that I can only play it on my brothers computer is a large contributing factor there.

Okay so I think everyone is starting to get an idea of how I judge titles to be worthy of replay.

[Vuldari]

Actually, when it comes to games, if I don't get tired or fed up with it in the first week (usually because the game sucked to begin with), I probably never will. I've had Final Fantasy Tactics since it came out, and I'm still playing it to this day.

That's why I won't give into games that look like expansion packs trying to be passed off as originals; I still like the ones they based them off of, and I'm not about to shell out sixty bucks that could have otherwise been used to buy books for college on a game that feels like one I already own.

Meh...suit yourself. I happen to own Zelda:OOT, Zelda:MM, Zelda:OOT MQ(basicly an expansion of OOT...*gasp*), and Zelda:WW, play them all, enjoy them all and confidently feel that it is totally worth owning all of them...not despite the fact that they are all based on the same game mechanic, but Because of it.

When someone completely changes the basic gameplay behind my favorite genre or franchise, I am often very displeased.

(example: "LA Rush". From what I can tell, the game will include NONE of the quirky feel and off-the-wall experience that I loved in the original "RUSH" games. The cars don't explode when you crash into walls...the only stunts and shortcuts in the game are small hills, and short ramps scattered around the city, and there will be no "stunt mode" as it existed in Rush2 and Rush 2049. Where are the "Skyscraper, rooftop to rooftop, drive through the office, crash through the window, drive on the overhead pipes and land on top of the other cars" shortcuts?! That is what set the Rush games apart, in my mind. This new one looks more like the recent NFS games.)

Why throw away good play mechanics that players love, just because, "it's allready been done like that". If that's fun...do it again.

Even the transition between the 2D and 3D Mario games retained the basic gameplay elements that made the originals fun. Make Mario Jump...Make Mario Swim...Stomp on Enemies...Wear Funny Hat's/Costumes/Gear that give Mario special abilities...Be the Hero...Save the Princess.


If SquareEnix made another "Tactics" game, based on the same game mechanics, but with a longer, deeper storyline, beautiful graphics, more characters, and more kinds of side quests, attack options and modifiable character traits, would you have no interest at all in playing that game because you, "have that one allready...minus the new bits"?

Would it be a total waste of your hard earned money to own a superior version of your favorite game? ...one with twice as much to do, all more fantastic to watch and with all of the annoying little problems from the last game refined and eliminated...

If you can enjoy battling the same monters over and over again, in the same continent, in the same arena, using the same weapons...why then is it unatractive to you to be given the opportunity to do all of that in a new continent, with new monsters, in a larger arena, with a bunch of new weapons and items that you had only wished were in the previous game...all with prettier graphics, improved music, smoother play controll, and an entirely new quest to follow? If the battle system in the last game was so great, why not use it again? Why screw it up with a totally different one that has none of the things that made you enjoy the original one so much? (Like CARD based systems...*groan*...different? YES ...interesting? YES ...more fun that traditional systems? Eeeehhh...not to me.)


Now...I am not saying that I like the trend of making one identical game after another after another... I like to play varied genres, so having a dozen free-roaming GTA clones to choose from, or two-dozen Street Racing/Tuner Car games is not what I want.

However...when someone makes another FF game, I want it to play and feel like a FF game. Mario games shoud play like Mario games. ...Racing Sims like Racing Sims...
When you make a game that only vaguely bares any resemblance to the series it is a part of, and features few or none of the in-game activities that made it's predecessors so entertaining, then what the hell is it? It is something else entirely, and has no right or reason to have the Series title of those other games slapped on the box. (*cough* ...StarFox Adventures... *Cough*)

...thinking of StarFox...

The original SNES game remains one of my favorite games ever. ...but I didn't like StarFox64 nearly as much, and the new one, StarFox Assault is totally unappealing to me. This is a situation where I am inclined to agree with you. SF Assault just feels like extended versions of the most annoying parts of SF64 and SF Adventures, and I have no desire to buy it.
...the ships fly slower in each progressive game, and the game play seems to feel more and more aquard.

I guess there is really no point in trying to convince you to like games that you don't. I don't think Halo is really that great, for example. (The first one. I've not played 2 yet.)

On the other hand...ES IV: Oblivion is just supposed to be a larger, prettier, "more everything" game compared to ES III: Morrowind, but with more talking characters to interact with and a new set of quests in the new continent. Is Oblivion not worth buying bacause you allready own, (assuming you do) Morrowind?

That is how I view Mario64 vs Mario Sunshine, or Zelda: OOT vs Zelda: TP. I am So ready to go for another round.

[outwarddoodles]

Sorry but all I can say is: Dammit, WTF?!

I Swear, it seems as though people are sneezing out new consules, why? When I was much younger, playing with our still beloved SNES and got a GameGirl that was what enertained me. We got a Nitendo 64 too, Gamecube was an amazing thing to me. It was a 'wow, a whole new cool thing!' Somehow, being the great fans we were, we did not get the Cube. Then came along the Gameboy Advanced, that was a really cool thing too, who ever had that was cool. Nitendo Power Magizine was bursting every month with information on the Gameboy Advance. Steve and Dale eventually got one.

There was the playstation, and soon a second one. Along came XBox, we got that after awhile, not untill last Christmas we got GameCube. Yet already had Nitendo came out with a new Gameboy, with the new burst of games I didn't care, and really started to lose my didication to Nitendo.

Now Look! Yet another Gameboy, now a new XBox, a new Nitendo thingy (and to prove how much I lost touch with Nitendo, I don't know what the hell the new thing is.) and even another PS. I rarely play PS anyway so I don't care but really.

Why can't they make more games for those consules and stop sneezing out new consules? It's a mess!

So sadly I'm not getting any. First, they took all my money with their other things, Second, I don't care, and Third, They're going to make another. So I'll sit here, with my Gameboy Color, SNES, and 64. Then sometimes here and there will I play XBox and Gamecuve, yet usually for our Anniversary collection things such as the Mega Man one we own.

[Fenrir]

I don't know what I'll get probably none not enough money now So Ill be forced to do the other option that is reading Yes I know I'am pathedic

[WolvenOne]

Seriously, the market can really only support 2.5 consoles at once in my opinion. Yes there are many occasions in which 3 consoles are on the market but if history repeats itself useually that's when one manufacturer is on its way out and another is on the way in.

I mean, Atari vs Nintendo, then Nintendo vs Sega, Nintendo and Sega vs Sony, then just Nintendo vs Sony, now Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft.

Consoles simply don't do well unless they own a significant portion of the market, they thrive on standards and the more standards there are the more all consoles suffer. Eventually somebody is going to be pushed out of this market, though I'm torn about whom really deserves to be pushed out.

[WolvenOne]

Okay that wasn't clear enough for my tastes.

What I meant is that the market can fully support two consoles, and can hold a 3rd console on by a thread. Right now the markets in a peculior position in that one console is more then fully supported and the remaining two are holding on by 2 or 3 threads. It's a precarious position that I do not believe can last forever, so I believe things will change during the next generation here.