This sentence caught my attention. Sure, people fight for things when fighting is necessary to keep those things, or to acquire new things that they want. The phrase "fight for" implies that the person fights in order to obtain something they don't currently have. This can be the object in question, or it can be assurance that they will keep the object. Here, it makes sense. But when people fight for things that they already own and which aren't vulnerable in any way (such as games/consoles), then it stops making any sense and becomes silly. 

Nothing wrong with being silly though.

im surprised most people said they will be getting a ps4 AND wiiU
If people really wanted a wiiU surely they would have got one by now.

Should have put the vita as an option, im sure a lot of people will be getting one to remote play PS4 games.

I always planned to get a 360, even before I had a PS3 but the games kept getting better and better on PS3 so the 3 games I wanted to play on 360 i didnt mind missing them. Mass effect eventually came out on PS3 and im sure there will be a witcher collection coming out for PS. Left4dead I still want, could get it on PC for £3 but will wait for PS version.

but that's just the thing, you don't need to have a good reason to fight for something.  People fight for sports teams (trust me, ask anyone in southwestern Ontario what hockey team they root for.  A large number will say the Toronto Maple Leafs, even though they're consistently one of the worst teams in the league and haven't won the cop since 1967), and gods, and sexual orientations.  People will fight as long as they feel that what they have is inherently superior.  it's just the way it is.  

It sucks, but as long as there is something on the line for games - and there is - the console wars will continue to wage on.  

See, the thing is that, with consoles, you want to fight for your company because if you don't, then you have made a bad investment.  Say you REALLY like Halo, but everyone else hates halo.  Well, if you don't do your best to convince the world that Halo rocks, then there will be no more halo.  It's the same way with gama makers and console makers.  I happen to like the features and business of the Playstation brand and don't tend to care too greatly for microsoft's behaviour and game plan for their console.  If I want the features I like to carry on to the next generation and the features I don't want dropped next gen, then I need to not only vote with my wallet but also get as many people out there to do the same in my favor.  

For example, I did not want to have to pay to play online.  When Nintendo, sony, and Valve al allow users to play online free of charge, I don't think it's right that Microsoft forced users to pay for online play (doubly so when you consider how many features were blocked behind a paywall on the Xbx 360.)  However, it was such a successful thing for Microsoft that sony has adopted it as well.  Because my viewpoint wasn't strong enough in the community, I now have to pay for online services on the console I THOUGHT didn't support it.  as such, my side lost that battle.  On the flipide, the Xbox One now allows family sharing of features and content across accounts sharing a console, much like how PS3 allowed you to share stuff with your friends.  So we won on that front.  

As a more recent and extreme example, look at the Xbox 180.  They were going to implement things that many people WOULD NOT STAND FOR.  Problem is, many people who supported microsoft just said, "Well then don't buy it."  Well, no.  That's not good enough.  If I don't buy it, that's fine, for now, but down the line when MY company wants to adopt those policies, they will, because just enough  people dealt with it or were okay with it or flat out supported it.  

In the gaming community, you HAVE to speak your mind, and you HAVE to have your voice heard, because if you don't, then you'll get fucked with a cactus.  

At least in matters of dire consequences like that.  Most of the time it's no big deal and i think people overreact.  Sometimes a difference in a console from company to company is simply a matter of choices.  I, for instance, like inFamous, b ut I don't like Fable.  That's not a matter of fact, that's a matter of opinion.  I DO want inFamous to be successful, and I will definitely tout its merits, but not at the expense of Fable, which is a good game despite the fact that I just don't like it. 

Make sense? 

I use to be a huge Halo fan. I was even so hard core into the franchise that I use to play the first game using the PC and Xbox Connect. But when Bungie left, to me anyway, Halo left with them. Halo 4 just doesn't feel like Halo anymore.

I dont agree with this statement at all. Most people buy products for what they currently offer, not what they will off in the future.

Im a huge Nintendo fan but I would never spend $350 for a Wii U with its current line up. Up until Pikmin 3 came out the list of high quality games that cant be found on a console I already own are NSMBU, ZombiU and Lego City. For myself and most people, that doesnt justify a purchase.

Now fast forward to this holiday season and the line up of games I cant play on my PS3 or 3DS now includes Pikmin 3, Wonderful 101, Wind Waker HD, Sonic Lost World, DKC Tropical Freeze, 3D World in addition to the games I previously listed. And when u factor in holiday deals/bundles, Wii U becomes a very enticing product.

Wii U and PC for multiplats. Maybe an Xbox One at the end of the gen to play Killer Instinct and Crimson Dragon.