I think there are reasonable gamers out there that have a system of choice.

Please don't hate but Wii U. As always, Nintendo will provide the best games for the generation. I don't forsee anything astounding like Super Mario Galaxy or anything that utilizes the GamePad like Wii Sports did with the Wiimote, but I still think there will be solid, hardhitting games. As for 3rd party, maybe 3 or 4 unique titles. Rayman Legends already came out, so maybe only about 2 more really good 3rd party titles left.

There are but that doesn't mean they chose their console because of reasons that could be defended in a debate.

In the end both sides could only argue for themselves. But that wouldn't be a debate anymore. A debate is about deconstructing the other side's arguments which just isn't possible with this particular topic.

I disagree. Every debate starts with 2 people having preference. One example, from many, is that one could say that console'x' has better games then the other person could provide Metacritic  stats to prove them wrong. If the person that prefers console 'x' is reasonable and can't provide a counter reply then they would have to agree with the person that prefers console 'y'.

There are a lot of things to debate over for each console. Some might change the other guys opinon if you put across strong points, some will be agree to disagree but this is the nature of debates. There winner of the debate will be who puts out the better case for their console of choice.

First of all, you won't change the opinion of the other side. If both are reasonable people they both made an educated choice and you won't enlighten them with points that they already know and already decided if they're worth it or not.

Second, better games is highly subjective and a high metacritic score is absolutely no argument to buy a game or a console. Both sides will be arguing that they have better games. And no one will convince them otherwise because it's preference. One console will have 10 shooters that all got 100 on metacritic while the other console has just one RPG that has 85. Person 1 will choose console B because he doesn't care about shooters but likes RPGs. Did he make the right choice? Yes.  Person 2 will get console A because he likes shooters. Did he make the right choice? Yes.

Now you tell me which is the better console when both reasonable people made the right choice.

Just for 3dworld really? What about all 3rd party games that it is going to miss for the next 5 - 8 years because third party ignore it?

You know names like Grand theft auto, Batman: Arkham, Borderlands, Destiny and a long list of new/old third party ips the Wii U won't see. 

I will get it started, PS4 best 1st party devs, cheaper, stronger, and PS+.

Not sure if you get what this is about. It's not trying to get the other side to some to theire side. The put there case why their choice is better and the same with the other side. Sometime they might have to concede on sub-debates if the other puts a better case across sometime they might meet in the middle.

The whole point of this is for us on the outside see 2 people debate it out and we get to make the descision at the end of who but a better case across.

My Metacritic point was just an example of many ways a debate could go if the debate turned to games. I was just using it theoretically.

A topic that only concerns each one of the debaters separately is not a valid debate topic. It's a debate without counter arguments, no chance to attack the opposition. Every point brought by each of the debaters will be irrefutable because each argument will only account to the person's preference.

The only thing this will be is 2 lists of product features with arbitrary points that each debater will put a different weight on.

Also, who will decide which one made the "better" points?

Pfft. Who needs all that when you have Hello Kitty Kruisers?! ( Yes. I was joking with this post and with the another one as well.)