Competition is NOT a good thing

This is what I hate about System Wars: people don't think for themselves. "Oh, of course competition is good, it means lower prices!!"

In fact, I believe that having 3-man horse race is hurting us more than it is helping us. Here are why some common assumptions about competition are dead wrong:

1. Without competition, we would get charged $800 per console!

I hear this a lot in other Blu-ray vs HD-DVD forums too. "If blu-ray won, they would charge us whatever they wanted!" Wake up, DVD didn't have any competition for years and price just kept going down. Same thing with consoles. The market has a lot of control over pricing. If there were one console, priced at $800, no one would buy it! Look at the PS3. It was priced too high, and no one bought it. Did every PS2 owner get a 360 or Wii instead? Nope, most 360 owners were XBOX owners, and Wii sells mostly to non-gamers. A lot of PS2 owners are just buying PS2s, or waiting until PS3's price drops. If there is only one console, the price would come down over time like all consumer electronics.

Still not convinced? Think about it. Why is it that the most competitive gen, the consoles are priced the highest? Doesn't make sense right?

2. We have all these great games because of many consoles!

Sega isn't in the console race anymore and we still get Sonic games. Sure, they're not as good as before, but that's more due to the developers' fault. Did Dreamcast magically make a Sonic game better? Of course not. Would Bungie just not make Halo if the XBOX didn't exist? No, they probably would have still made it for the PS2.

3. There would be no quality control! No alternatives! Imagine 360 as the only console! What if I don't want RROD?

Think about it. The reason for RROD is BECAUSE of competition. MS wanted to beat Sony by getting out its console earlier, that's why they didn't work out RROD before releasing the 360. Most problems stem from competition. If Sony wasn't worried about MS, they could have (and probably would have) delayed the PS3 until production costs came down and priced it lower.

4. We would be stuffed with unnecessary things like blu-ray!

Again, this is because of competition. If Sony wasn't rushing out the PS3 to catch up to MS, they would have waited until blu-ray was more proven of a format, and costs came down more. Sony didn't want to sell the PS3 at $599. Don't believe me? PS2 came out about 3 years after DVD players appeared. DVD was already a proven format.

Think about it this way: if there was no competition with HD DVD, Sony wouldn't even need to push blu-ray so hard. They wouldn't even need to rush it out with the PS3.

Reasons why competition is harming us:

1. To play all the good games, you have to buy all the consoles. I'm sure no one likes spending about $1000 to play all the good games whereas with one console, you'd only have to pay $200-400 in a one-console world.

2. Bad ports. With one console the developers could optimize the game for that console, and everyone who owns the game could enjoy it to its maximum potential.

3. Multiplatform. Now in order to recoup costs, most games need to be multiplat. That means a lot more time and development. If they only need to develop for one console, there's less time in development so we get our games faster, and lower production costs which means lower prices for games.

Still don't believe me? Just take a look at last gen, when the PS2 DOMINATED everything. I think we can all agree that, aside from better technology, the PS2 is easily a better console than the Wii, 360, or PS3. It was cheaper, reliable (after 1st gen with DRE), and it had the best library of any console to date. Everything I've said is reflected in the PS2. Price was not inflated, we still get tons of AAA games with a lot of variety, all on one console. Sony fixed DRE and even came out with a better, slim model. We didn't have unnecessary built-ins, just a proven format in DVD. No bad ports, and games were cheaper.

Okay, so competition does bring us a few good things. For example, if there were only one console, online probably wouldn't be as good as it is now. Also, wiimote probably would not be as popular, although it could easily be an accessory, like eye-toy. I'm not saying competition is all bad or it's the devil. I'm just saying, grow a brain. Think for yourselves. Don't automatically go "competition good!" just because everyone else is saying it. 3-console gen is really not all it's cracked up to be.

Nintendo in 1985 was a bastard - you want that to happen again?

And their hubris lead them to make stupid mistakes with the N64 hardware. Sony KILLED them with the PS1. Sony actually improved the game industry by offering mature content and titles.

So, competition IS a good thing, provided game makers learn something.

why don't you move to china you communist because that was what a world without competition would be.

The competition is what drives anything forward, from weapons (cold war) to toys if there was no competition the market would be at a standstill.

Experience has taught us different. Yeah, remember when it was nothing but nintendo? Does anyone remember the Game n Watch?!?! The bottom line is, monoplies AREN'T GOOD! Think about it, Microsoft and their HD-DVD Peripheral (before) it was $150, why could they overprice it? Because no-one else manufactured it but Microsoft. Then why could they overprice HD-DVD's themselves? Because microsoft was able to control that market. In the end, that one Good always outweighs the bad. Do you know Andrew Carnagie? Yeah, the only reason he was able to sleep well at night, was because he believed in Social Darwanism, survival of the fitest. That is a monopoly, then someone controls every sing level of the whole industry. For example! I make hamburgers. I own/bought the following companies:

• Stove Makers
• Cow Farmers
• Wheat Farmers

I basically own the whole industry. Imagine what evil's will come about if that were to happen.

Nintendo in 1985 was a bastard - you want that to happen again?

And their hubris lead them to make stupid mistakes with the N64 hardware. Sony KILLED them with the PS1. Sony actually improved the game industry by offering mature content and titles.

So, competition IS a good thing, provided game makers learn something.

Demetri_OS

I'm not saying a Monopoly is a good thing, but neither is too much competition. And if you'll remember, PS1 pretty much dominated the N64. It wasn't that competitive of a gen, the gaming industry was just moving in a new direction, which happened to be the direction of the PS1.

why don't you move to china you communist because that was what a world without compition would be.

The compition is what drives anything forward, from wepons (cold war) to toys if there was no compition the market would be at a standstill.

Jacobistheman

Why don't you stop lashing out at me and come up with a good argument? I'm talking about competition in gaming, not the Cold War. Even when PS2 dominated the market, there was still a lot of advancement in graphics and gameplay.

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

Nintendo in 1985 was a bastard - you want that to happen again?

And their hubris lead them to make stupid mistakes with the N64 hardware. Sony KILLED them with the PS1. Sony actually improved the game industry by offering mature content and titles.

So, competition IS a good thing, provided game makers learn something.

iamanehero

I'm not saying a Monopoly is a good thing, but neither is too much competition. And if you'll remember, PS1 pretty much dominated the N64. It wasn't that competitive of a gen, the gaming industry was just moving in a new direction, which happened to be the direction of the PS1.

why don't you move to china you communist because that was what a world without compition would be.

The compition is what drives anything forward, from wepons (cold war) to toys if there was no compition the market would be at a standstill.

Jacobistheman

Why don't you stop lashing out at me and come up with a good argument? I'm talking about competition in gaming, not the Cold War. Even when PS2 dominated the market, there was still a lot of advancement in graphics and gameplay.

well if there is no cometition it is a monopoly and i have an argument that is 100 times better than you because it is true.

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

Nintendo in 1985 was a - you want that to happen again?

And their hubris lead them to make stupid mistakes with the N64 hardware. Sony KILLED them with the PS1. Sony actually improved the game industry by offering mature content and titles.

So, competition IS a good thing, provided game makers learn something.

iamanehero

I'm not saying a Monopoly is a good thing, but neither is too much competition. And if you'll remember, PS1 pretty much ted the N64. It wasn't that competitive of a gen, the gaming industry was just moving in a new direction, which happened to be the direction of the PS1.

why don't you move to china you communist because that was what a world without compition would be.

The compition is what drives anything forward, from wepons (cold war) to toys if there was no compition the market would be at a standstill.

Jacobistheman

Why don't you stop lashing out at me and come up with a good argument? I'm talking about competition in gaming, not the Cold War. Even when PS2 ted the market, there was still a lot of advancement in graphics and gameplay.

for me it is only competition between two consoles, the ps3 and 360, and I think it has pushed both of them to offer better services and better games.

All the pretentious adults who need another status symbol like an ipod, and senior citizens and soccor moms in the world, wont make me care are even feel nintendos impact.

You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!jigglebilly1983

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!darkslider99

I cant believe this guy actually makes a lot of good points.

Sounds like someone failed high school economics.Benevolentbob

High-school economics nothing. What the TC fails to grasp should be goddamned common sense.

OK I deleted my first post because I only read the first half of this guy's rant.

So basically he is a cow that want's his god Sony to lord over everything because PS2 was the perfect system.

Sorry...no...Gamecube and XBOX were superior systems and provided experiences you could not get on the PS2.

Competition is good. There are a few items where the debate over competition's benefits can go either way but the video game market isn't one of them.

I cant believe this guy actually makes a lot of good points.

xTHExJUICEx

what post did you read? because all of the points he made are not true

Oh wow. The TC's post is just soooooo bad.

If we didn't have competitiion we would have a CD based console for $500, with plenty of RROD/DRE problems, no rumble, $100 online fees without ingame XMB, and all games published by EA.

If you think that ANY of the consoles would be the way they are in their current state if competition didn't exist, you are laughable wrong.

[QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!MattUD1

OK I deleted my first post because I only read the first half of this guy's rant.

So basically he is a cow that want's his god Sony to lord over everything because PS2 was the perfect system.

Sorry...no...Gamecube and XBOX were superior systems and provided experiences you could not get on the PS2.

Competition is good. There are a few items where the debate over competition's benefits can go either way but the video game market isn't one of them.

JiveT

[QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!darkslider99

[QUOTE="Demetri_OS"]

Nintendo in 1985 was a bastard - you want that to happen again?

And their hubris lead them to make stupid mistakes with the N64 hardware. Sony KILLED them with the PS1. Sony actually improved the game industry by offering mature content and titles.

So, competition IS a good thing, provided game makers learn something.

iamanehero

I'm not saying a Monopoly is a good thing, but neither is too much competition. And if you'll remember, PS1 pretty much dominated the N64. It wasn't that competitive of a gen, the gaming industry was just moving in a new direction, which happened to be the direction of the PS1.

What the hell are you talking about? You had the Sega Saturn, the N64 and the PS1. There was plenty of competition, but Nintendo was too stubborn to see the trend.

It was common and expected to get 3D games with mature content and feeling - THAT was the direction, not the platform. The platform's success was determined by offering what developers wanted (more space at much less cost of a cartridge) and ditching the traditional bubble gum image Nintendo wrote in stone for everyone to follow.

[QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!kage_53

For those who do not know what communism is, goggle it or read a book. Communism does not exist. What we've seen with China and Russian is NOT communism.

Read a book - contrary to what "yer Ma n Pa" told you, reading a book on Communism is not a "gosh dern bad thing".

You mixed up some concepts.

Consoles don't compete amongst each other. Each, console is a monopoly as it is controlled exclusively by one company and all games only exist when they are approved by it.

If there were real competition, meaning a developer game could be played in any platform, independent of the manufacturer's approval and without the necessity of paying plublishing royalties then we'd have real competition between developers. We all care for better games not systems.

[QUOTE="kage_53"][QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!darkslider99

Do you even know what communism is? :|
darkslider99

in theory, it's where everyone is equal and there is no one to rule over anyone. in practical (as in, done in real life) sense, it's more like a totalitarian state in which the state owns everything.

This is what I hate about System Wars: people don't think for themselves. "Oh, of course competition is good, it means lower prices!!"

In fact, I believe that having 3-man horse race is hurting us more than it is helping us. Here are why some common assumptions about competition are dead wrong:

1. Without competition, we would get charged $800 per console!

I hear this a lot in other Blu-ray vs HD-DVD forums too. "If blu-ray won, they would charge us whatever they wanted!" Wake up, DVD didn't have any competition for years and price just kept going down. Same thing with consoles. The market has a lot of control over pricing. If there were one console, priced at $800, no one would buy it! Look at the PS3. It was priced too high, and no one bought it. Did every PS2 owner get a 360 or Wii instead? Nope, most 360 owners were XBOX owners, and Wii sells mostly to non-gamers. A lot of PS2 owners are just buying PS2s, or waiting until PS3's price drops. If there is only one console, the price would come down over time like all consumer electronics.

iamanehero

I was just reading this one... As for DVD having no competition, that's totaly untrue. DVD compagnies had competition among themselfs... that's the reason why price dropped.

Competition is absolutely essential to make forward progress in almost any industry. If Nintendo (for example) was the only company putting out consoles we'd still be (relatively) in the stoneage as far as gaming is concerned. Wed probably be playing N64s right now.

Why do consoles keep getting better and better at such a fast pace? Because the companies are constantly trying to keep up/get ahead of the competition. When one raises the bar to get more market share the other companies follow suit because if they don't they won't be in business for much longer. Competition breeds innovation.

[QUOTE="kage_53"][QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!darkslider99

and to think system wars couldn't get any worse, here we have communists coming on the forums.

Look, no competition means monopoly. And we all know what happens then...........*cough*MS*cough*

[QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="kage_53"][QUOTE="darkslider99"][QUOTE="jigglebilly1983"]You know who thinks that way too?................................COMMUNISTS!kage_53

If you believe competition is not a good thing, then your post isn't worth reading at all...(I did read it btw)

I disagree wholeheartedly.