I am wondering about one thing in the videogaming industry: when a console generation ends, the company which sold the most just gives up this userbase and starts from zero. in earlier generations, this was quite understandable, because the graphics improved so much that it really became time upgrading. but i think the sixth generation reached a point were we can say graphics are good enough. x360 and ps3 show us that it could be better, but i think what the sixth generation offers reaches to make games look good.

now my question is: what would have happenend if sony said "we are not going to release a new console until, lets say 2010." At fist, this seems stupid, but when i think about it, it seems to me as if this would have destroyed nintendo (at least in the consoles sector, they would still have had the ds) and would have made microsoft lose even more money.

I think if it would have happened, third parties would just have sticked with the ps2 and consumers would have been happy as well, because they could have used their system much longer then they expected.

this question also becomes interesting at the end of this seventh generation, because most likely the three competitors won't release their new systems at the same time.

ps2 graphics are shit comapred to PS3..... Already 360 verisons of the same game sell better then PS2 versions. 

yes that's true, but i think videogaming graphics are at a point were the improvement doesn't really matter that much anymore, and the current success of the wii seems to prove me right.

graphics physics enviroment size AI more things on screen, yahh it matters alot. Wii has a gimmick and is half price thats why it sales.

Look at succes of Gears a short average shooter, but its the best looking thing out there and look at the sales.

I think the Wii and PS2 are good competitors for the lower end market, the Wii has the advantage of great new contoller for a new style of gameplay, but not that good for many types of traditional games and complex games you need to use both hands on the controller for pushing buttons. The PS2 has a larger library of games and addtitional strongpoints with games like Eyetoy games, dance revolution and Singstar.

The PS3 is currently great for hardcore gamers (Resistance and Motorstorm rock, also very strong online, motion sensing is great in Motorstorm and PSN games like Flow and Super Ruba Dub) and multimedia ethusiasts (high definition/Blu-Ray movies/7.1 Audio/HDMI 1.3, etc) for the high end market, later when the price goes down and replaces the PS2 the console can be targeted at the lower end market.

The XBox 360 in its various version IMO is positioned somewhere in between, but currently offers a wider software library compared to the PS3 considering the year headstart, but IMO seems less sturdy considering all the user complaints.

Considering the PS3's backwards compatibility, to have the PS2 still performing well for the lower end market is an asset to the PS3's long term viability.

I think the retirement of the GameCube contributes to Wii sales, although IMO apart from the new controller and games, new form factor and Mii it's not a big step up from the GameCube technically. I think for the long run sales will be effected by weaker graphics, AI and general game complexity of higher specced platforms, at least when the entry price comes down. Also developing complex games to really take advantage of the more powerful platforms take more time, so I think there's more than enough time for the Nintendo Wii to continue to shine for quite a while.

You wanna talk about game enviroments.

Wii gets... Farcry Vengance. (vomit)

PS3 gets Crysis game

The Wii does not have the power to run a massive open world like FarCry. Not to mention the game that came out 4 years later.

The Wii gets CRAP quality large scale games, or Low quality, small scale games.

The PS3 can do both quite well right now, however due to the lack of software, the extent is unknown. 

This thread seems to into the wrong direction. my question is: could sony (if they would not have released the ps3) beat their competitors by staying with the ps2?

I say yes, because third parties would stick with ps2 and wii/x360 would probably have sold as many units as they have now but then the sales would slow down because many consumers and third parties would not shift away from ps2.

NO!

 360 game versions out sold PS2 versions.... yet there are 11 times as many PS2...

  GRAPHICS matter.... every guy wants the cheerleader not the fat ugly old cow.

At no point in videogame history the console with the better graphis won. It´s always the console with the best games and graphics don´t matter THAT much just look at PSP and DS. I get the feeling this "Wii will lose in the long term because of it´s weak graphics" is sometimes the last hope for Sony fans to prove their console will win - causo nobody can say what will happen so you can feel save.

Look at Super Mario Galaxy - honestly if it was in HD you could think it was a 360 game. The Wii is double as powerfull as the GC was and games like Umbrella Cronicles and Nintendos first party games prove that graphics on the system look pretty good. Just look at any Metroid Trailer the graphics ARE good and well what I saw in Twilight princess as an overworld was pretty huge in size even compared to Oblivion it still stood tall and impressed me. And this was a GC game...