Ok, the 2 main contenders after the last gen were Microsoft and Sony. 

Sony had a huge marker share, they were the ones who will lead us into the next gen.  They decide to turn the games console into an entertainment hub, top notch graphics, huge power, loads and loads of non-gaming features.  It will be the future.  Yes, it comes with a big price tag, but it'll be worth it, no home can be without one.

Microsoft do roughly the same thing, not quite a feature packed, not quite as expensive, but the idea is pretty much the same. 

Then along comes Nintendo, who shouldn't have a say in this gen.  They should really follow what the big 2 are doing and try and do it a bit better.  But no, they don't.  They decide to go with the gaming is fun and should be cheap option.  The majority of the public agree and flock to this cheap and cheerful games system.

We all know, pretty much, that Sony + Microsofts vision for the future is probably right.  One box in the home to do just about everything.  But because of Nintendo this vision is still just that, a vision. 

Did Nintendo spoil it for the rest of them?  Would consumers just have accepted that this was the price to pay for the future and bought 42.62 million (Wii+360+PS3) consoles so far this gen?  Or has Nintendo just tapped into a market the Sony + Microsoft were never planning on tapping into anyway?

yeah...who wants to buy a video game system to just play games....that makes perfect sense--also your bias is so obvious its not funny--"Then along comes Nintendo, who shouldn't have a say in this gen"--considering they have been in counsel games longer then the other two combined

"Ok, the 2 main contenders after the last gen were Microsoft and Sony. "

Would i be mistaken if i were to say that xbox only sold about a million or two more than gamecube at the end of last gen?

i will just say this. NINTENDO IS ORIGINAL!! thsy would not try to do the same thing that everybody else does! (that's just like telling your mom that you started smoking because everybody else is doing it! also, nintendo had done the smart thing. the hardcore market is not as big the casual market. nintendo is aiming at them and the hardcore with there mega titles like brawl! (which might also, cater to the casual if they advertise this right.) how would the market be if microsoft may a 360-mote for the 360, sony makes a ps3-mote for the wii, while nintendo makes the wiimote? it would seem so dumb for everyone to do the same thing! at the rate the wii is going getting the different audience it seems hard to see it not sell more than 90 million!! because nintendo is original!!

Sorry, should probably add that I currently have 2 DS's and a Wii sitting in a bag under my desk in work (waiting for the boss to go home, so I can hook the Wii up to the big screen)

Nintendo is essentially the dominate force of this generation I easily see it becoming the relative "PS1" to Sony and MS's "N64 and Saturn" in sales this generation.

Call it a fad, say it has nothing but casual and party games, claim its graphics won't last the generation, tout all the sequels to pre-existing franchises slated for the other consoles, make all the excuses you want, but can you really say you're in anyway comfortable with the power Nintendo has accumulated this generation? Do you honestly think with a first year like the 360 had, that the Wii has shown us all its got? I'm sure you certainly hope so.

@Mr Me--then why complain---besides you can buy a media PC that trumps what the 360 and Ps3 do for home entertainment

Even with the PS2 being the dominant home console on the market, Nintendo was (potentially) the most important company in videogames because of the Gameboy line and their massive success as a first party publisher. Being that Microsoft is the smallest first party publisher, has never sold many systems, and has failed to turn a profit I don't think you can claim that they were  ever a main contender.

Beyond that the vision for a gaming console should be judged based on how it makes videogames better; Sony and Microsoft's vision is to produce the exact same videogames we have been playing for over a decade now with prettier graphics, to push development budgets to a level where even well established publishers and developers can not afford to make any mistakes, and to raise the cost of entry so that only the rich can play videogames ...

^hahahaha---so very true

All-in-ones have been tried in the past. CD-i was a flop. N-gage didn't work. People see devices in terms of their primary purpose. Nobody plays music with their DVD player, even if it plays CDs. They have a separate stereo system, although they might feed into the same sound system. An all-in-one box was never the future.

Video games is a very branded market, whereas set-top boxes are a generic market. Tivo was the closest thing, but even there people are more than willing to settle for an off-brand DVR. The two industries have always been too incompatible, and need two completely different kinds of people marketing them.