Slashdot Mirror
The Console War Is Not Good For Gaming
Seleeke Flingai writes "Of all the loose baggage the videogame industry prides itself on, the famed 'console wars' are probably the most divisive. Every four or so years, we hungry gamers gather round and clamor for our favorite side. But you know what? Screw the console wars. They are NOT good for gaming. Why?" From the article: "The console war brings with it great competition, which has created some of the best consoles around. But the console war has also had its share of casualties - some of which were some of the best consoles around. And that is why I think the console war, despite all of its good intentions, is not good for gaming."
BS.
Good consoles (both from technological stand point and a game stand point) survive. Bad ones die.
Sega genesis was good, but Sega Saturn was designed to be the best 2D console ever. It was, but it came out around the time of the N64.
Well, if Sony says they are on track to have 4 million PS3's in stores by year's end, it must be true.
We have absolutely no reason to doubt them.
Don't forget that Friday is Hawaiian shirt day.
On the other end of the spectrum, I'd like to see commodity game hardware. I think they did it, after a fashion, in the old atari 2600 days. Let Phillips, Microsoft, Samsung, &c. all make game machines using a unified format rather than the silly overpriced hardware lockin we've got today.
Unfortunately, it'll never happen. It might be technically feasible, but it doesn't fit with the current business plans. The big three have too much to lose in giving up the "My way or no Zelda/Halo/Final Fantasy" approach.