The real qustion is, would we be any better off if MS dominated the market?
IMO, what we're seeing is simply the result of market forces. With the intro of the Xbox, MS has, from the start, clearly set their sights on total domination of the market. Even if it takes a decade, MS is willing to take massive loses from their gaming division, for as long as their shareholders will accept it. Sony has no such monoploy such as Windows to rely upon.
In a sense, this has painted Sony into a corner, either match MS with continual incremental upgrades, or concentrate all of their resources into one massive hardware upgrade, with the hope that it will pay off down the road, with the sale of games. That is a function of game developers.
With longer, more complex games, naturally the costs will be higher. And Sony has pledged to protect their interest, ie, stamp out piracy. We see this all across the entertainment industry, Apple, Intel ViiV, and the Motion Picture Association. Nintendo has always been proprietary, yet rarley do you hear it descibed as "evil". The larger the lead in a particular niche, the more a company stands to lose, followed by more draconian anti-piracy measures. I think the battle between hackers/corporations will never end, like a dog chasing its own tail.
Sadly, the PSP seems to have taken a back seat in the larger perspective of "the console wars". Its is also a line drawn in the sand between independant minded/fair use vs. the corporate interest camps. Full of potential, that it may never live up to, before the next "hot" item is produced.
My point is not to take a side, only to express my point of view. Ultimately, we make the choice as consumers. The best move seems to consider your choices carefully, and don't by into hype.
Bookmarks