I see the console wars as good for the console makers, as long as they aren't sega. I think that with the focus on moving unts and software, the selection of games offered suffers. Small games get squeezed out. I think the console makers tend to go with safe sequels and movie/TV licensed crap games, cuz no matter how bad they are, folks will buy them. I know this has been the case sence the NES, but with the exploding video game scene of the past years, it has truly gotten out of hand. Now huge teams make games focused on graphics, licenses and sound. Soulless chaff sans gameplay.
Lowest common denominator,shit floats, think EA.
When i think of cosole wars i think of the war Sony lost years ago; VHS vs Beta. Beta was a better format, smaller, better sound, better picture. Even though it had the better format, Sony lost that war, badly, but seemed to have learned quite well that an inferior product has nothing to do with how well it will succeed; marketing,advertising and placement are what win these wars, not quality of the product or the games.
For me, console wars always turn out badly, as i tend to like innovation and that ain't popular and won't sell in Amurika. but more people are gaming so i'd say these wars are good for gaming by increasing the number of gamers via adds and product placement and licenses, but gameplay suffers as smaller,influential games don't get published or even attempted.
Me? I'm off to buy Madden '09 and Tomb Raider 7. Maybe i'll buy me a NASCAR game too. EA rules dude !! Nah, i think i need a little metal slug on my neo-geo. sigh
