I prefer dedicated game consoles. I've owned a PC, and even enjoyed the experience of tweaking the latest hardware to squeeze out every drop of performance, but I've decided a while ago it's just not for me. There are many non-technical reasons for this, specifically that I don't want to do a whole lot with my gaming system. I just want it to work. I can still play games as far back as 1978, and all I have to do is hook the system up to my TV and pop in the game. I can even buy cheap collections with dozens of older games for a modern console, and play that way. Maybe I can't do it all on my current system, but I've just never gotten rid of my older systems and their software because of that.
If you're annoyed by exclusives, you're probably not the only one, but sometimes that's the nature of the game. You've got the Kinect on the Xbox and Xbox One, the Wii has a unique controller, and the Wii U as well. The PSOne introduced a unique layout with dual analog sticks and dual shoulder buttons on each side that proved useful enough to make the basic setup of most gamepads today. The PlayStation 3 had motion sensing used in a few distinct ways in games like Flower and Heavy Rain, and the PlayStation 4 has a touchpad that simplifies certain actions such as scrolling or touch gestures. All of these can be used to deliver an experience only optimal on a particular platform.
The Theory
Yes, the hardware inside today's consoles is largely similar, and the game library could very well be unified with not much reason to keep them tied to one particular manufacturer's console. The idea of competing platforms without much difference from each other, barring exclusive games, may seem asinine on the surface but in reality, certain games may never have been made were it not for these deals.
Games that are subsidized by the console's manufacturer have the opportunity to bring something unique to the table with a high profile. Games like flOw, Flower, Journey, and The Unfinished Swan represent some indie games that would not have been possible without cooperation from a platform partner, and this would have required an exclusivity deal. Street Fighter V was not a focus for Capcom, and may not have been possible in its current form were it not for a partnership. A lot of marketing, development resources, and funding is provided, therefore risk is absorbed. Likewise, Mass Effect was heavily supported and promoted by Microsoft, and was a gamble considering the presumption from the outset that the story arc would span three games.
Bloodborne received a huge boost of support and cooperation from Sony, resulting in a faster turnaround time (developed in about two years), and fantastic presentation due to optimization for the platform. Regardless of the similarities between the Xbox One and PS4, they share a different underlying API structure, and porting a game written on one target platform is not as simple as copying over the code and clicking "Compile" on another development kit. Even the differences in hardware still have to be accounted for. Getting a game to perform well and look good is not a matter of fiddling with sliders until it runs at a reliable frame rate.
The Hardware
This is why within the PC itself, it's difficult to get a consistent experience across all operating systems and game engines. There are multiple tools available to developers, choosing which graphics API to use, particle and physics engine, or even what complete game framework to invest in. Whether you have an in-house or pre-packaged solution, you have to take into account the varied specifications the end user will have, meaning you need to do a lot of work to make your assets look good on very basic hardware all the way up to advanced. Everyone wants to feel like they are getting the most out of their hardware, from the power user to the person who can't afford the latest but still considers the PC to be their main gaming machine. With all of these variables, a lot of the time, games end up broken on day one on certain configurations and a smooth experience is not always in the cards.
Sure, 60fps and full native resolution with the highest visual fidelity is not a necessity for fun, but personally I want to at least have a guaranteed baseline on any game. A console will at least render every game playable and enjoyable for about five years, with a fraction of the worries or hassles. It may not look as incredible if you had a chance to update your hardware every year, but again it must be stressed that the highest visual fidelity is not a necessity. With that said, considering that you do have to stick with the same hardware for five years, trying to determine a performance leader is still somewhat of an issue.
The Software
Because of software exclusivity, hardware is not the ultimate determining factor when you make the choice of what system to purchase. It's in the parent company's interest to make their system as attractive as possible, and that means a unique library at some level. In today's risk averse market, making a new IP with a unique premise that may or may not take hold, could result in the loss of millions of dollars. Through cooperation by an experienced developer and platform holder, both of these issues can be resolved, resulting in a quality production for one specific system. These games now have a chance to exist, and some extra freedom and resources are given to the project, along with consumer visibility.
Due to the desire to have a constant stream of AAA hits, such people might be missing out on some gems by turning up their nose. Because not everyone is a core gamer, many will expect high quality and production values, and without these, a game may not catch the attention of enough people to thrive. A lot of people are simply turned off by the idea of another retro themed game, maybe something that looks like it was made in flash, or a minimalist abastract presentation. It's a shame, but this results in many great titles being overlooked until they have a huge budget behind them. The biggest example that comes to mind, is the huge hit Portal, whose predecessor was Narbacular Drop, which was considered a curiosity by those who knew it even existed.
There are some counter examples of high profile indie games on a smaller budget, such as Braid which was self funded by its creator, and Fez, a five year long work of love done in spare time and a government loan. Even then, it eventually had to rely on a funding partnership that involved a cut of the profits. More recently, projects have sought funding through Kickstarter. After being burned so often by ventures that went nowhere, solicited donations are not as easy to come by. Because of this, a large up front investment in something more than a few mock-up screenshots has to be presented by the developer.
The Fun
The platform wars aren't all bad. Because of them, there is more incentive to develop high quality experiences, building a library that is worthy of the cost of entry.
The truth is, today, no matter which platform you choose, you're going to have a good time. Maybe you'll even get in on all of them so you don't miss a thing, whether you spend a lot of money to do that initially or pick up the system and games at the tail end of a cycle for cheap. Fun games are always fun.
Don't worry too much about what platform you choose, or how many of them, just have a good time!
