A One Console Future

With all of Denis Dyack's talk of a one console future, it got me wondering if I would actually want that to happen. So let's look at the positives, which are numerous and obvious. It would be less money spent on one machine that was the equivalent of the three we have now, it would mean there would be no fear of missing out on an eagerly anticipated game that was exclusive to a system you didn't own, it would mean that every company would work together on making every aspect great, and it would mean one gamerscore system (the clincher. ;) I jest.)

But then there are some significant negatives. I personally like the idea of different consoles targeted at different audiences, with the Wii not to my tastes at all, and the 360 and PS3 perfectly catering for my gaming needs. It might also mean the death of the PC, which might not be able to withstand the combined might of Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft. But most importantly, it would mean no more original ideas or IPs.

It's true that competition fosters creativity, and in a one console future, you wouldn't need any awesome exclusive games to sell your system, as it's the only one on the market. Would we have seen Mario 64, Metal Gear Solid, even Halo if there was only one console? No, and that would probably get rid of what is good about gaming; you can have new experiences with every game you play. If there was only one console, then every genre could just have one franchise that got yearly updates, and we would have no choice but to buy them if we wanted to play anything. Which we would. So if you're thinking that this would be a great idea, then you're only partially right.

It would be fantastic for developers and publishers, as they'd never need to innovate again. But for us, as gamers, it could be the worst thing that could possibly happen to our beloved industry.