I'm going to just break this down into the big three since it seems to make the most sense.
First off it obviously wouldn't do Sony any good since the PS3 includes just about everything that will be current for at least the next 5 years. It already has a processor more then fast enough to keep up with the quality gamers expect in graphics, it also has a structure which lets clever developers more then compensate for a smaller GPU by distributing tasks. If Metal Gear Solid 4 is possible there really isn't a huge change needed in any way until there is some huge change in presentation technology from the current standard of 42-50 inch HDTVs.
Until resolution goes up past 1080p or TVs start getting routinely larget then 60 inches the PS3 is pretty much right at the spot games need to be. Also it has the likely standard in digital media for the next 5 years already built in, advanced HDMI features, an infintately expandable hard drive (just plug in any 3rd party one, takes 2 minutes) and every other feature needed for the next half decade of gaming. Until 2012 or 2013 it makes 0 sense to upgrade to something else (by then hard drives will probably be large and cheap enough to fully switch to digital distribution for games).
Second for Nintendo a 2010 switch doesn't make much sense. Nintendo is selling mainly to people who want Nintendo games no matter what and slow adopter households that aren't really that into fast upgrades to HD. Those houses will probably eventually get a 1080p TV, but not until they cost under 1000 dollars and their current TV breaks. If anything going expensive would ruin a lot of Nintendos whole profit center model. If they turned the Wii into a 360 hardware wise they would make 100 dollars less a console, have marginal benefits since the bad graphics on the Wii clearly aren't hurting sales and really wouldn't do much to extend their appeal. When Nintendo had the gamecube which had graphics on par with the PS2 their system sold worse then teh Wii is now so clearly trying to compete with Sony on graphics has no point for Nintendo.
They would be fine just making the Wii until at least 2011 or 2012 when they could cheaply make something resembling the PS3 with, again, a digital distribution model due to cheap hard drive space. They would probably position themselves in the same place relative to the PS4 as the Wii is relative to the PS3 on both price and power since it seems to be a good fit for Nintendo (I can't see Nintendo investing 1 billion dollars to design a custom made processor like the cell any time soon, hence why they're better off with cheap off the shelf parts. Switching to a Wii 2 would just dilute the installed base, reduce profit per unit sold and would not really do much to help them in any way. The only thing that would make any sense is maybe a new version of the existing Wii that has an HDMI port or hard drive in line with they way the redesigned the NES after the SNES release. Same price, slightly better features, plays the same games as the older Wiis.
For Microsoft it makes the least sense to release a console in 2010 of all the big three. There is no chance they could make something that is much better then the PS3 by 2010. The best they could hope for is a situation like the PS2 vs the original Xbox where the Xbox was better in a lot of ways, but none of them were REALLY that perceptable. It was like the LE vs teh SE version of a sedan, sure the SE has 10 more horse power and better cup holders but do you REALLY notice that much of a difference? Probably not 99% of the time. The Xbox didn't sell because it was only a marginal gain on what everyone already had (a PS2). The 360 sold because it was significantly better then the PS2 with higher resolution graphics, more expansive game worlds and other changes. It does work getting to the party first with a new console, but only if your console is WAY better then whats already there.
I bet most of you either have a 3000 dollar quality PC or know someone who does. Start up a game like Crysis and look at the graphics, pretty sweet yes. Now find a PS3 and look at one of the better looking PS3 games like Metal Gear Solid 4. There IS a difference but its in the little things like better dynamic shadows or slightly better specular lighting. A slight difference in shadow shading isn't going to make people think "man f this PS3 or 360 I already have, I need a slight gain in anti aliasing!" and just like the PS2 vs the Xbox the new 2010 Xbox would flop and flop hard. I'm saying look at a 3000 dollar PC because I'm assuming, given the relentless march of technology, that in 2010 the components for a 700-800 dollar production price console will probably be pretty similar to top of the line PC parts today.
They could include things like blu ray and better GPUs and all the rest, but that would just make it similar to the PS3 and not vastly better which it would need to be to really start a new generation. The 360 would trade in its only advantage, which is a higher north American install base. Very quickly the games would dry up and the xbox system would go back to being the complete afterthought it was in its first generation. Maybe with another infusion of 6 billion dollars Microsoft could keep things affloat, but a fast start to the next generation with tech very similar to this generation would not shift the balance of power at all in Microsofts favor.
I really hope that I'm right and things don't move to the next generation until 2012, I really see no reason to buy a new system and hope that we aren't forced to by an accelerating console release schedule. Maybe someone will invent real VR (as opposed to that crappy gameboy VR from the 90s) and change the game necesitating a new console generation start early, but I doubt it.
PSN ID: ChosenOne feel free to add me
