Is competition really good for us ?

I often read that competition is good for customers and monopolies is bad. but is it really for us gamers ?

When it comes to games, sure it's a good thing. developers trying to make their game the best of its genre to get good sales can only be a good thing for us.

But when it comes to gaming systems, i think in the end competition is a bad thing for us.

If there was only 1 console this gen, be it ps3 or 360 (Not counting WII, it doesn't target the same customers), the games wouldn't be any less good, probably would be even better as they all would be optimized for that console, no more multi-plat and bad ports. We would just need to buy one console to have access to every games, no need to make a choice between xbox games or ps3 games and miss out on the other console's games, they would all be on the same console.

Well, of course we can just buy both consoles and have access to all games, but not everyone can afford it and the fact that we can doesn't make it a good deal just to have access to a few exclusives that could run on both consoles.

ps : Sorry if my english isn't all that good, it isn't my native language.

It's like argueing who's going to be the president in the gaming world.

Each to his own opinion.

if it weren't for competition, the optical disk medium would have been adopted much later, and we probably wouldn't have nice things like Xbox Live. competition encourages change and improvement.

without competition, how would the one company be motivated to have a good online service, cheaper games and systems, or reliable hardware?

Competition is the reason the PS3 has a hard drive, the reason both the Wii and PS3 are getting better online capabilities and the reason the Xbox 360 is getting more than just shooters. Competition drives the evolution of gaming :D.SpigleyMcCheese

True. We would still be playing either SNES or PS1 if there was no competition in the gaming market. :)

I often read that competition is good for customers and monopolies is bad. but is it really for us gamers ?

When it comes to games, sure it's a good thing. developers trying to make their game the best of its genre to get good sales can only be a good thing for us.

But when it comes to gaming systems, i think in the end competition is a bad thing for us.

If there was only 1 console this gen, be it ps3 or 360 (Not counting WII, it doesn't target the same customers), the games wouldn't be any less good, probably would be even better as they all would be optimized for that console, no more multi-plat and bad ports. We would just need to buy one console to have access to every games, no need to make a choice between xbox games or ps3 games and miss out on the other console's games, they would all be on the same console.

Well, of course we can just buy both consoles and have access to all games, but not everyone can afford it and the fact that we can doesn't make it a good deal just to have access to a few exclusives that could run on both consoles.

ps : Sorry if my english isn't all that good, it isn't my native language.

Tykain

Your first error in logic is that you excluded the Wii. The Wii is a direct result of competition in the prior generationS. Nintendo as a corporate entity decided that they could not compete in the environment as it was; they decided they would would have to change direction. Motion sensitivity was a result of competition.

Games like Halo, MGS4, GTA4, all of the various sports franchises etc. haven't really benefited greatly from the console wars, but when you think of the ground breaking things on the horizon (e.g., Home, Little Big Planet) if there were no competition these things wouldn't exist.

The quest for the next great thing drives developers to push the envelope of what technology can do. On the flip side, the quest to take advantage the next great thing pushes technology to make the most of what it can do.

There are games in development for the PS3 that can't be done on the 360. There are games on the 360 that can't be done on the Wii. If there were only one console, who's to say that one console wouldn't be the Wii, (or the PS2 for that matter). The drive to be the console everyone wants to develop for pushes what can be done.

When there was only the ps1 left, the price kept droping over time regardless of having no competition.

You guys have good points tho but i'll reword what i said : competition is bad in the long run when there isn't a definite winner for a given gen. Just like with blu-ray and hd dvd, one had to win to set a standard, having both coexisting would be bad as you would need both players to have access to all movies.

[QUOTE="Tykain"]

I often read that competition is good for customers and monopolies is bad. but is it really for us gamers ?

When it comes to games, sure it's a good thing. developers trying to make their game the best of its genre to get good sales can only be a good thing for us.

But when it comes to gaming systems, i think in the end competition is a bad thing for us.

If there was only 1 console this gen, be it ps3 or 360 (Not counting WII, it doesn't target the same customers), the games wouldn't be any less good, probably would be even better as they all would be optimized for that console, no more multi-plat and bad ports. We would just need to buy one console to have access to every games, no need to make a choice between xbox games or ps3 games and miss out on the other console's games, they would all be on the same console.

Well, of course we can just buy both consoles and have access to all games, but not everyone can afford it and the fact that we can doesn't make it a good deal just to have access to a few exclusives that could run on both consoles.

ps : Sorry if my english isn't all that good, it isn't my native language.

Sheonmd

Your first error in logic is that you excluded the Wii. The Wii is a direct result of competition in the prior generationS. Nintendo as a corporate entity decided that they could not compete in the environment as it was; they decided they would would have to change direction. Motion sensitivity was a result of competition.

Games like Halo, MGS4, GTA4, all of the various sports franchises etc. haven't really benefited greatly from the console wars, but when you think of the ground breaking things on the horizon (e.g., Home, Little Big Planet) if there were no competition these things wouldn't exist.

The quest for the next great thing drives developers to push the envelope of what technology can do. On the flip side, the quest to take advantage the next great thing pushes technology to make the most of what it can do.

There are games in development for the PS3 that can't be done on the 360. There are games on the 360 that can't be done on the Wii. If there were only one console, who's to say that one console wouldn't be the Wii, (or the PS2 for that matter). The drive to be the console everyone wants to develop for pushes what can be done.

The WII targets a different customer base, therefor it can coexist with the PS3 / Xbox . The WII wasn't an evolution to last consoles gen, but a different approach to gaming. If there was only the WII this gen, id stick to my old PS2, the WII just doesn't appeal to me.

And no, any PS3 games currently in development could be made on 360 and vice-versa. But you're right that there are games on the PS3 / 360 that can't be made on the WII, and WII games that can't be made on the other consoles.

shut up you communist. JK

but compition is good for the market if we only had one system there would be improvement. The developer would just sit around and not improve anything. think about the monopoly microsoft has on Operating systems.

As i said before about the price, it would be no different without competition.

The ps1 price kept dropping even when it was the only console left that gen. they don't make money with the consoles but with the games. And games prices has always stayed more or less the same in every gen, and it's more dependent on the developers / editors than on the console's constructor.

shut up you communist. JK

but compition is good for the market if we only had one system there would be improvement. The developer would just sit around and not improve anything. think about the monopoly microsoft has on Operating systems.

Jacobistheman

The point you make about M$ is one reason I no longer care to support them. They are now trying to slowly do the same thing with gaming and other things there getting into.

Competition is bad in that we are probably going to see a new console in 2010 or 2011. I don't care what Sony says, if Microsoft brings out a new console in 2010-2011 they will have to match it.TheSystemLord1

Who said they wouldn't?

Competition is bad in that we are probably going to see a new console in 2010 or 2011. I don't care what Sony says, if Microsoft brings out a new console in 2010-2011 they will have to match it.TheSystemLord1

For the 11 billionth time. When Sony says that their console will last 10 years, they don't mean it'll be 10 years before they release a new one. They mean that they will continue to support it for 10 years, or at least they're SAYING they will.