| Seece said: Nobody should be under any illusions, any of the big 3 could be number one next gen. |
Yes, as always, there's that "anything is possible."
However, I think it's pretty clear Nintendo's chances are higher than that of its current competitors.
As for competition in hardware leading to better games, I disagree. The Playstation dominated gens weren't exactly poor, if one favors the 16-bit era it's likely due to the type of games (2D) rather than the quality. Besides, many of the great SNES titles had nothing to do with competition with Sega, seeing as how the Genesis / Mega Drive was irrelevant in Japan.
Really, though, why do we want 3 consoles tied in the race? It means we need to buy hardware for all 3 to get the games we want (controllers included), and worst of all, the online is segregated for multiplat titles. Nothing sucks more than having to choose between which half of my friends I want to be able to play Modern Warfare with...
It's fine (or preferable, even) if a console holds 70% of the market share. It just means the competition is in the software. It'd be awesome if I had more money to spend on great games, instead of more controllers...
