Geeks of the Round Table

Geekasaurus Mike is a proud affiliate of Geeks of the Round Table at


Nintendo vs. X-Box vs. Sony

There are a few terms attributed to video game culture that leave a bad taste in my mouth. First and foremost is just the word “gamer”. In a world where more and more people play video games, I find it hard to believe that we need a specialized term for that. Of course, “hardcore” gamers are a thing, but so are “casual” and “mid level” ones. Moreover, I feel like its just overused by media and especially marketing establishments. This leads me into today's topic: Console Wars.

Console Wars is another term I'm pretty sure was conceived in a board room with a long table surrounded by soulless marketing experts. Creating rivalry is a great way to promote a product, and cultivate followers so fanatically loyal that there would be cults telling them to tone it down. However, I don't think the term is that legitimate. After all people are probably going to systems not based on the specs or features, but on the games that will be available.

That said, I do have a preference for consoles and games. Starting with the worst of the bunch (in my opinion) we have the X-Box One. Yes, yes, insert your “beating a dead horse” joke here.

We all know the stellar reception that the console got on the day its features were announced, so I won't go into too much detail on what they were. If you don't already know, lets just say “ridiculous amounts of DRM BS” and leave it at that. I'm told that a lot of “really cool features” could have been introduced through this, and that X-Box just did a terrible job of marketing the plus sides, but here's the thing:
I neither want nor need to make video games and the playing thereof more complicated than it already is.
I know that change is inevitable, and evolution will always take hold sooner or later, but what X-Box seemed to have forgotten is that not all (in fact I'd go as far as to say “most”) people who play games aren't looking for the “definitive gaming experience” or an “all in one entertainment system”. Let me explain this in the simplest terms that I can:

We want to play games.

That's it. That is literally the starting and ending goal for most people who turn on a console. People got so offended by the concepts the X-Box One originally introduced because it seemed to further follow the path started by things like extreme DLC. The game itself seems to become secondary to the “gaming experience” and more importantly the revenue creative from it. 

So at this point it should come as a surprise to few when I say that if I bought a next-gen console it would almost certainly be the Wii-U. I used to sign up for the Nintendo hate in favor of the better graphics and more realistic, grittier games, but in recent years I've realized what's been keeping Nintendo afloat long after all its original competitors bit the dust: it understands why it exists.

Nintendo understands that games need to be fun. They seem to understand more than any of their competitors that the highest resolution graphics and most detail oriented sub-machines are meaningless if the player isn't enjoying what they're doing. They don't innovate new ways of keeping their consumers on a leash, or letting developers come out with half-finished products to be completed for an additional fee with DLC, they innovate new ways of having fun. That's what the Wii-mote was all about, and that's what the new touch-pad interface is for, unlike the Sony or X-Box motion sensing clones.

Now, Nintendo's weakness is that few developers seem to share this notion, and that for the most part just want to make the same kind of “successful” games that Sony and Microsoft produce. But its always worth it you find those few games that weren't about making a surefire investment, and make you lose track of time because you're enjoying yourself. So rock on Nintendo, and may I not doubt you again.

Oh, and PS4 will probably be okay. I guess.