Remember last year around this time?  Everyone was clamoring that the success of the DSLite meant that Nintendo was sure to release a WiiLite or a WiiHD or some kind of revised Wii a year or two into its cycle, so there was no reason to buy the console at launch.  Never mind that they'd always released updated handhelds every year or two and never released an updated console in a widespread major-upgrade way.

Fast forward a year later and what do we see?  It isn't Nintendo who's been releasing new upgraded models of their console, it's the other two.  MS released the Elite about a year and a half after launch, so anyone who had the Premium and wanted the best model now had to upgrade to get the HDMI ports (the major point) or shell out $180 for the 120GB hard drive if they wanted to take advantage of all the video downloads.  Now even Sony has canned *both* of its launch SKUs and is releasing a third model with an upgraded hard drive -- at least the 60GB owners can upgrade their hard drive themselves with any other compatible one.  But they're also reportedly releasing a Sixaxis controller with rumble, so anyone who already bought several controllers is going to have to replace them all in order to take advantage of that feature.

So now what are your thoughts?  A year ago Nintendo was the devil 'cause they were gonna release a different Wii version every year to try and get all those suckers to keep upgrading and re-buying the system.  Yet its MS and Sony who've shown that they're more willing to do that so far -- is it still that bad a thing, or are you suddenly reversing your stance on the issue?

Interesting point. I think you are right,

I don't see how you could spin that.

Personally, I have never had a problem with a console manufacturer releasing updated versions of their product if the upgrades fix a real or imagined problem with the system; the size of the DS (for example) was a huge issue for people that wanted their portable system to be portable and the DS Lite solved (or at least reduced) this problem.

The XBox 360 Elite and 80GB PS3 do not seem to do anything which corrects any major flaw in the systems, and these systems seem to prevent the console companies from addressing the issue that prevents their systems from selling well (the price).

Yeah, good point. I remember Kwaad stating that he hates Nintendo because he has to "buy a new handheld every several months" (when talking about the GBA and the NDS Lite) and that he would hate this thing happening to home consoles too.

I would love to hear his opinion now.

I didn't like DS nor PSP when they released. Both were still big and I didn't see the "portable" part then. DSL changed that.

 I agree that all the "upgrades" from PS360 is a bit crazy. So many new models in such a short time.

What exactly is the problem here? The thing here is that if you have a DS you can still play DS games after the DS Lite appeared. What I'm trying to say is that when any compnay releases and "upgraded" console/portable, your old machine still works with new games. So... who cares if we get a Lite, Elite, Premium, 80 gig or whatever "upgraded" console.

If you don't like it that a "better" console may or may not appear in the future-- well, then you better never buy a console. Its like with computers. Your computer is only "top-of-the-line" for like 5 minutes. Besides, what would you prefer, for there never to be "upgrades". I think thats a much worse alternative.

Sony and MS can relase upgraded versions of their consoles. Whether they sell or not is not my problem.

There isn't a problem with releasing a 'Lite' version of a console or handheld, after all, it is still capable of the same functions, which is what we want from it. The problem is with releasing different versions of the same console, each with different capabilities.

I think the Core 360 was a mistake, it makes sense for a product range to be able to take advantage of all the features available, which the Core system is not. Not to mention the fact that this is confusing and off-putting to consumers, who don't know which features they will need or if they are needlessly buying the more expensive verion.

I also don't understand the need for the upgraded versions of consoles, the Elite and the 3 versions PS3. Upgrading for manufacturing costs is one thing but releasing so many versions of a console smacks of not knowing what your customers want. The companies should decide what is needed in the console and stick to their plan. As long as the system is capable of everything it needs to be then that is all that it needs to be, and you can do that in one package.

Given the Wii's upstart success, and the concurrent matter of it being the lowest end next-gen console available, I would think that the nintendo people would see the usefulness of updating the wii eventually, to keep it going longer.

I never bought into Nintendo upgrading the Wii like many people have. They have never made any major changes to their consoles except redesigns much later in their life span.

I also am not a big handheld gamer, but I've certainly seen the woes of the "handheld of the month club" when it comes to Nintendo constantly reinventing their portable systems.

For me, while I'm not keen on the idea, I don't mind companies redesigning their consoles for aesthetic reasons, production costs, or even improvements for functionality.

The whole trend of creating mini-PC's with the consoles now bothers me some.
It almost seems like Sony and MS are more interested in their other potential markets more than they are keeping focused on games. At least this is what all the hoopla over new versions of the consoles seems to be to me as a gaming vet.

But I do suppose that as long as the primary integrity of the systems are kept intact, that is all versions can play the games released for the system, then frankly I don't care in the end. It sorta becomes like how I felt about the handheld market: To each his own.

If you don't want to buy the new chartreuse color system, then don't. I suppose the added options for new colors and minor additions don't bother me much. Options aren't bad to have, as long as the systems work equally in regards to gaming. Let the companies take risks and get the headaches of having to keep up with the plethora of options.

But if a trend occurs that when major components are left out only to be integrated years later ( HDMI for example ), I can see how that would sour some customers, including myself, which would most likely lead me to only buy systems later on.

Thing is this would be a terrible sales tactic for game companies if they keep up the multi-media trend, as they depend on the "hardcore" gamers to help break high introductory rates for their products.