Of course, no harm in competition.
As long as people don't take it too seriously and start crying because they've found someone better than themselves.

I strive for competition in school, with my brother, on the wizard competition and it is what helps me improve at whatever I do.
Beating other people and knowing I'm better than them is what gives me satisfaction, but if someone beats me I can't say I really care that much, it just means I can improve even more.

Would more competition be a good thing?

I have a mixed opinion on more competition in the video game world be a good thing.
One of the good things being that there will be a wider variety of consoles to choose from and people could enjoy different games which would be suited to the certain consoles.
The big negative side to more competition being added would be the arguments, everyone already argues over which console is "better" than the other, but at the end of the day, it's all down to personal preference, but if more consoles are made there could be a very big commotion about the "better" console.
Another reason is a new console is made it could be be very successful, due to the fact of the Xbox and PS3 having so many features, the new console could not live up to the expectations of which people are wanting, so they could either be very successful with a new console or it could just go down hill with a big argument.

Competition as in online competition? Or company competition?

Online competition obviously makes the games a ton better. The advanced playlist(team tac, snd, that gb type thing in black ops) makes the game harder and a lot more rewarding when you manage to pull of a victory. I don't see any concs at all here, as long as it would be a seperate thing from the normal online. i.e. black ops, all normal playlist, more advanced/gb settings for more hardcore players(Gears of War did this also). It does take way more effort to do this than just casual gaming, but you wouldn't be forced to play it. No cons.

Game competition would mean more companies making games. That's a perfect idea. Not only do we have more games to play, but companies will try a lot harder on their game so that it would be the top of the list. This would produce way better titles, and some companies would only succeed if they put a ton of work into their games. I could say the only con here would be not having enough money to purchase all the games you would want.

Console competition in the sense of making new consoles, not a console war. I don't support this in some ways. I'd hate for a new console to be out every 2 years. Hell, even 5 years. I'd like a new console every 7 years maybe. And then only if it's a real hardcore upgrade. Now, competition like the playstation move, kinect. That's good, I'd like to see that stuff happen more often(not that I bought either). I like seeing new things come out, and the more competition they more gaming stuff we would have available.

I don't really see how more competition could be a negative thing honestly.
Of course, people just thumb down without actually reading the post. Same with J20.
I guess people can't read all this text.

I am going to strongly argue no, there are already far too many game & consoles in the market for there to be near enough room for more & more people to start entering the market. The video game industries is one of the most profitable around, with big titles bringing in revenues exceeding a few billion, attracting more & more developers.

However, I think I speak for the masses when I say games are far too expensive to keep bringing out new & new games. Modern Warfare 3 cost me £32 and for some of you reading this which got your mummy to buy the game for you, you may never know how hard it is to make this in real life. That £32 took me basically a whole weekend of wages(two 4 hour shifts) to purchase. At the time, battlefield 3 & gears were all being released, I wanted all three but simply couldn't afford it. Imagine if there were even more games being released, how would we be able to purchase every single one?

Simply even 3/4 consoles is far too many in my opinion. I personally have an xbox, and a laptop which isn't capable of any decent PC games. My friends which play on the ps3 or are a PC gamer I just can't play with due to the price tag on these consoles. New consoles being released due to the Research & Development costs would be set very high, and it is doubtful they'll make a break into today's market.

The creativity of games nowadays is just getting worse & worse. Modern Warfare 3 is arguably just a graphics update of it's previous two titles. Some games(e.g. battlefield 3) manage to keep their games differentiated from previous titles, but with more games entering the market it's just going to be hundreds upon hundreds of the same basic FPS games.

However, with more & more games being shoved into the market it is likely that even though there'll be some absolutely horrible ones, there will be some absolute revolutionary games. This'll give the non-mainstream underrated developers a chance to shine, get themselves noticed more, as well as making the whole gaming community a lot happier there's a decent title around.


Overall, I think that unless there's going to be a fall in price, piling more things into the gaming industry will only make them sitting ducks with very few purchases.

I think competition in the video gaming world is ok...because more the competition the more the companies will thrive to beat all the other companies, also the games with get better and better after each release the big(well known) gaming companies will try to beat the last game in the genre of their newly released game.

Also it could end up being bad because the better and better the games get the better the graphics and gameplay gets. Like some games have graphics that are so good their bad and some games try really hard to make the campaign or main story line so good that its all they take their time on, so the multiplayer is really bad or not thought out all the way.

I think yes it would be better,
Why?
If it werent for a large amount of competition we wouldnt have most luxuries that we do today