Who won the last console war?

[85 78 73 81 85 69]

Firstly it's idiotic for grown ups to think there is some sort of "console war", these things only exist in the minds of children.

Secondly I think the study misses out some important information and oversimplifies things horribly.

It completely ignores the fact that all three manufacturers may well have their own very different reasons for releasing their consoles.

For example, one of the primary motivators for Sony was surely launching the blu-ray format to the world which accounts for them allowing the console to have such a high launch price. If launching blu-ray wasn't a primary factor for them they just wouldn't have allowed for that price to happen.

I can't think of anything that suggests that the PS3 was anything but 100% successful in getting that format out there and I don't think the format would exist without the PS3. I would imagine for Sony, irrelevant of some of the "facts" listed in the study that they would certainly see the PS3 as being a winner is they were 12 and considered that there was such a thing as a console war.

What were Microsoft's and Nintendo's primary motivating factors for them releasing their consoles? Is it really as simple as them wanting to have boxes out there and then making more money from games than the other two? I doubt it, particularly not for Microsoft.

I'd imagine that all three finish this generation feeling that they've "won" in some way, they'd all like to have won by more but they'll all have taken significant steps forwards in their long term plans throughout this generation and those strategies won't end when they move in the new generation.

[CMcK]

Microsoft wants to stop Sony from dominating the living room. Nintendo wants to make money and Sony is wondering how many folk will buy ugly consoles.

[QualityChimp]

It's funny how Microsoft have shifted their goals from making a games console to being the "One" device in your living room.

I have a games room where I played all my consoles, but moved the PS3 to the lounge to watch The Raid with some mates as I'd bought the Blu-Ray.

Then I started watching LoveFilm on it because I didn't have to pay another ?40 for Live to use it.

Then my wife watched some stuff on the ITV Player as Virgin doesn't have it.

Then I spent a night messing around with the YouTube app, which is free on PS+.

Then Playstation Plus was ?20 for the year and I've started using that and been impressed with the service because it adds to the experience, not restricts access.

Oh and the free games are brilliant. I've been playing Demon's Souls (k)nightly since it was made free and loving leftfield choices like Thomas Was Alone that I'd probably have missed.

I don't mind that I've only got it whilst I'm on Plus when the games are free and such great choices.

So Microsoft's restrictions on the various media services and their crippling Silver Live service have pushed my choice of "One" console under the telly to be the PS3!

That's with this gen's restrictions, so how they think these, and the additional Orwellian restrictions the next generation entails, are going to make me buy an XBone is baffling!

I have a year's Live sub sat in my drawer, but it's only getting used when EDF comes out, but then I may be playing the Japanese PS3 version as that is region-free unlike the 360 one...

[wakka]

MS are bigging up the multimedia features, but I don't see much to separate it from a box costing <?100 - or a PS3. Just the live TV stuff, and who watches live TV anyway? Old people mostly. And even a lot of them have Sky+.

[prinnysquad]

Matthew Broderick.