I only plan on having one console this generation because I cannot really afford more and I do not spend anywhere near enough time gaming to make it worthwhile.

I've had my Wii since December and have yet to finish any of the games I have bought for it.

Actually the theory was supported by the fact that there would be no PS2 dominant console this generation. I don't know how you figure that contradicts it. Reading comprehension my friend.

Though to be honest we both know there will be one dominant console this generation, just not to level the PS2 was though, the Wii.

As a video game fan I value the integrity of the console as much as I do the games and I have no problem waiting a generation or two to get a game worth having.

Sigh, if it wasn't for credit cards I feel the 360 and PS3 would probably be in trouble by now.

Yeah, I'm agreeing that there will not be a PS2 this generation. That's why I don't see why people would be threatened by 1 console owners. The only reason is still fearing dominance by the 1 console they don't have, but I think most of the 2 console owners have a Wii. Of course, we disagree about how dominant the Wii will be, but we both knew that, heh. What do you mean by the integrity of the console? Your last comments seems to imply you only buy cheap consoles, if that's what you mean. With inflation calculated, the 360 and PS3 are not more expensive now than previous generations. The Wii is one of the cheapest.

That's right, and that's why i have a Wii... and a DS... :)

And i don't have the time or money to play more games: why spend 400-500 euros on a PS3/360 when with that money, i may buy 10 to 20 games (new or secondhand) for my two favorite consoles?

But if i was very rich and wanted to play ALL the best home console games out there, i think i'd have a PS2/Wii/360 combo... with backward compatibility and all the arcade/virtual console games, you'll then have access to most of the best games of the last 20 years released on Nintendo, Sony, Sega and Microsoft consoles... and only miss a handful of PS3 exclusives, not worth the price of the console yet...

I don't think there's going to be any bitterness from any multi-console gamer, even in the extremely unlikely event that one console tanks prematurely like the Dreamcast. Typically, the only bitter gamers are the ones who bet on one horse that doesn't even finish the race.

The Wii should finish this generation on top, sales wise, but it will do so without any of the exclusive stand out gaming experiences offered on the 360 or PS3.

Some seem to believe that because the Wii will maintain market share dominance, that by default, all developers will eventually transition their best efforts and development teams to Wii R&D, but this is wishful thinking at best.

As long as third party softs stay profitable (easier due to the roughly 1/4 cost of Wii development compared to the others), there is little need for developing more expensive halo projects for the Wii. If anyone wants to argue that there is no money in third party Wii development, you're essentially saying that only Nintendo published titles will continue to drive Wii sales.

You can't have only one console or quality takes a hit. Without competition, the drive for innovating disappears and your product is poorly done (For example WWE.

So at first you disagreed with me because this will not be a PS2 generation, now you agree with me because this will be a PS2 generation. It might benefit you to get your story strait before trying to pick fights like this.

So according to you inflation is responsable for consoles going from $200-$300 to $400-$600 in just five years. Great, I'd love to see some evidence for that. I guess that's why a typical family car in the $18,000 range five years ago now costs $36,000? I'm afraid this inflation you speak must only affect gaming as I don't see it anywhere else in the form of prices literally doubling in half a decade.

Oh, but don't mind me and my "CHEAP" console, *snickers*

 I just love Ace combat games sooo much. My computer can't play Mass Effect, so I will just borrow the 360 game from a friend

"So according to you inflation is responsable for consoles going from $200-$300 to $400-$600 in just five years. Great, I'd love to see some evidence for that. I guess that's why a typical family car in the $18,000 range five years ago now costs $36,000? LOL!!! I'm afraid this inflation you speak must only affect gaming as I don't see it anywhere else in the form of prices literally doubling in half a decade."

The Saturn debuted at $399 back in 1995. That was supposed to be a mainstream console. It was only when Sony announced $299 for the PS1 at E3 that Sega went into a furor claiming Sony was product dumping at that price.

As for that $600 initial price for the PS3, I don't see how anyone realistically expected them to fly off retailer's shelves at that price, even if it had been accompanied by a stellar initial game catalog.

But no, inflation hasn't been the source of generally higher console prices; the increasing complexity, cost of manufacturing and R&D budgets have been. Everyone knows the U.S. dollar has become the new peso as of late, but it's nowhere near so bad that it's effecting consumer A/V electronics. Yet.

$600 was definitely one of the highest launch prices. I am referring to the current $400 price for PS3 and $350 for 360 (I think those are the most purchased). Anyway, we've had threads about this before and a graph was posted that listed the inflation-adjusted launch prices. Wii was the cheapest, 360 was about average, and PS3 was one of the highest. The rapid drop from $600 to $400 (60GB and now 40Gb being the most purchased) got the PS3 price down to about average at this point using inflation-adjusted numbers. Inflaton-adjusting is necessary if you are going to compare Box Office numbers for movies as well. Check out www.the-numbers.com for charts of both the top-20 grossing all-time and the inflaton-adjusted one. Anyway, Onimusha12: I actually wanted to know what you meant by the "integrity" of a console. I was interested. I know we are arguiing in other threads but there's no need to do it here. I was merely asking if you meant that the console had to be lowly priced for you to consider it.