Here, Sib and Zemalac shall duel each other not with pistols but with biting words and cutting retorts. The debate shall start with Sib on the affirmative, then Zemalac on the negative and so on for 3 posts each. Other forum browsers are asked to not post until after the debate is over; but please go wild once it is. Any complaints or thoughts on the format acan be taken to: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.60122?page=2
Over to Sib.

The console wars have had a great effect on the gaming industry, if we look at the early years of gaming, where our favoured pastime was just a small niche market of geeks and nerds. Companies like Sega, Atari and Nintendo were the juggernauts, we can all say they made some
mighty good games, but the competition was much less fierce, this lax atmosphere encouraged them to make sequels upon sequels (I'm looking at Nintendo the most for this). While sequels aren't a specifically bad thing it does wear thin when we have Kirby 10, Mario Kart 8 etcetera, and I won't mention the Sonic or Mario series because everyone knows how many instalments we have for them.

I bet you're wondering where I'm going with this, right? Skip forward to the past couple of years:

The console wars have been raging with a previously unknown fervour; this competition for the gamer market inspires new and interesting game directions for the companies involved, in hopes of striking big. New game IPs are springing up every month or 2, with such examples as Spore, Assassin's Creed, Mass Effect and our beloved Portal. While Spore and Portal are the 2 main new trendsetters the older genres are being revitalised with new ideas, once again spawned by the console wars. The previously PC exclusive RTS has now found its way to consoles, with Command and Conquer 3, Universe at War and even its own exclusive title : Halo Wars.

Admittedly a large percentage of the games coming out recently have been FPS, I hold my hands up that there has been little variation to such a successful formula, but I do have a counter argument for that which I think I shall save up for my next post, hopefully it will be better than this one, because I am veeery tired right now.

Over to you Zemalac.

While the console wars may--and I'm afraid I must stress the may, for reasons that I will explain further in the post--have had a positive effect upon the originality seen in games these days, that does not make up for the amount that the console wars have damaged the industry. I have two reasons for this:

First and foremost, the bizarre dedication to one console that characterizes the foot soldiers of the console wars (i.e. the fanboys) prevents them from buying any of the other consoles. In some cases this is because they cannot afford a second, but in most cases they can indeed buy another console if they saved up a little money. This rather irrational rejection of two excellent machines and all their games hits the game industry where it hurts most--in the number of sales. Fanboys for one console will not buy any games on the other consoles, and thus the number of sales made is noticeably below the number it would be if it were not for the console wars.

Second, the console wars also add to what has been the bane of video games since there have been games: controversy and negative public relations. The consoles inspire such fervor that fans will (just to name an unfortunate example) have knife-fights in lines to buy what is essentially a piece of plastic with complicated wiring inside. Out reaction as rational people and gamers is to think, "These people are morons," and go on with our normal lives; while meanwhile the news media is jumping on the story like starving wolverines on a piece of meat. To someone who is not a gamer and not familiar with the console wars, the actions of these people fighting in line is another example of the horrors that video games are inflicting upon today's youth, or something like that. The unfortunate thing is that they are partly right--these people would not be fighting if the consoles weren't so highly prized.

So those are the points that I originally had. Now to address the points that Sib made:
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the three players in this war are still churning out sequels. From Metroid Prime; Corruption to Metal Gear Solid 4 to Halo 3, the manufacturing companies are still using the sequel as a surefire way of making quick money. What we are seeing now is a revolution in the work of third-party developers such as BioWare, UbiSoft, and Valve. And I must point out that the most revolutionary game in Sib's examples, Spore--by which I mean the full version of the game and not the cut-down versions being offered for the Wii and Nintendo DS--is only coming out on PC. Spore isn't really part of the console wars, because the only version coming out for a console is different than the one we have all been waiting for. And again, the game is being developed by a third party, in this case EA. And even with the originality showing in some developers work, the majority of recent games are (as Sib said) basically the same FPS (Halo, for those who were wondering) with slight variations painted on. The various consoles are certainly paying the third-party developers to make these games, but the ones that they make themselves contain the same amount of sequels that they ever did.

That's all for now. Your turn again, Sib.

Sorry that this is a bit late and not finished, I've been really quite busy, I'll edit my post and finish this up soon as poss, loves you :)

Now for the retort, my good Zemalac.

The various console manufacturers have been calling to the wider populace, (beware highschool stereotypes incoming) the jocks, the band members, the normal guys, whatever sub division you can think of has now been called to the pastime of gaming. These new members to gaming aren't interested in the platformers and adventure games of times passed, if they were into these they may catch "the gay". This, in my humble opinion, is why we have seen such a recent influx in FPS style games. The so called 'casual' gamers are less interested in little pink cute Kirby and more interested in the overly-macho Gears of War style men, pity on Kirby but thats how it goes.

Now, to respond to your points:
1. The foot soldiers as you deem them aren't usually the hardcore gamers, at least in my experience, the 'hardcore' gamers will generally accept the consoles for what they are, and know that there really is very little difference in the consoles. Mind you, the Nintendo fanboys are particularly rabid little bastards if you insult the Wii, but that's beside the point. Anyways, the main 'footsoldiers' in the console wars are the casual gamers, who see their consoles in a similar light to how they see their favourite football team *cough* Liverpool *cough*, they will defend their console to the death, simply by loyalty and a fondness for the console which brought them into gaming. Maybe that's why the Nintendo fanboys are so crusader-y, but that's a topic for another thread.
The sales that are lost by the above fanboyism are far outweighed by the masses of casual gamers that are coming in each day, have you seen the sales for Halo3 and GTA4 on launch day? Baffling numbers, they really are.

It's all right that you were late, Sib. If you weren't late then I'd be even later than I am now. Seems that both of us have been really busy.

Now, for my response, friend Sib

Hmmm. You are probably right that the number of new casual gamers coming in daily more than makes up for the sales lost to fanboyism. However, their loyalty to their first system (which seems to go on indefinitely) still affects the industry after the initial rush of casual gamers is finally over. There are only so many new gamers you can catch by putting out FPS after FPS, and eventually the flow will diminish and my point will be proven. Unfortunately it seems that this portion of my argument is now hinging upon events that have not, technically, happened yet, so I will move on to hammering home my other point.

Do you recall when the PS3 was coming out, and people in lines to get it were being robbed at gunpoint and knifing each other for suspected cutting in line? Such behavior might be expected in a rather anarchic high school, but not from adults waiting to get a gaming machine. I stand by my argument that the console war has added to the steaming mound of controversy that the media likes to dump on gaming from time to time. I don't think you can prove that point wrong.

I can't think of anything else at the moment. Over to you, Sib.

"The console wars" as we termed them have had a massive positive effect on gaming as a whole. Not talking about the above adding to the creativity of games argument, the wars also have positive effects for the consoles themselves. The competition forces companies to lower prices, use new technologies, and try to keep games at a somewhat steady price point. Imagine if say the Atari 2600 had no competition at all at any point in time. Atari would just continue to churn out games for the 2600 but because competition arose that claimed to be bigger, badder, and more beautiful they had to adapt themselves. Competition in the industry is good not just for the games but for the gamer as an audience. While we may wish that there was one super-console that played everything it would mean the complete and utter halt to the industry because there was no competition. So don't be a rabid fanboy or a dreamer waiting for the gaming messiah just go out buy what you want and let the sales do the talking for you. That will keep the consoles and games coming out.

(Psst...blaze, if you have a comment you have to do it in the link up top...this is for sib and zem. only)

EDIT: My favorite feature of the console war is how I can click on a link in firefox and have nothing happen.

Ironically Sib, so many of the shooters especially Gears of War feature art designs and/or body language of characters that is simply homoerottic. Then there are the practices of some people who play these kinds of games and do things like "Tea bagging" etc.