Add on hardware versus native controllers? We've all seen how that works out, over and over again. Move and Natal may be great....but if developers can't count on it being there, they won't design for it. And these kind of interfaces really need the game to be built around them to be effective - reserving a control pad fallback means you can't use the things anywhere near their full extent
I would be inclined to agree, were it not for the success of such games as Guitar Hero and Rock Band. If Sony and Microsoft are smart, they'll include at least 5 free games with their devices, making it a "steal" in the average consumer's eyes.
As for a Wii HD to compete with them, I assume there will also be a PS4 and Xbox 720 or whatever they're going to call it. Also, the Move and Natal controllers are expected to be priced well below what any new Wii will probably cost.
I also see a difference in marketing strategies that could make a difference. Sony is advertising mainly (it seems) to "core" gamers, making the Move out to be just a new controller for games much like ones we already play. The problem there is that core gamers tend to play for longer periods than casual gamers and would probably prefer to stay on the couch if playing for over an hour.
Microsoft, on the other hand, is making Natal out to be an entirely new device, targeting the same audience that went for the Wii in the first place. The Xbox itself is so distant in the ads that there will probably be instances where customers buy Natal and then only realize when they get home that they need an X360 as well.
Nintendo, of course, is happily at the top of console sales, and so is not doing much advertising beyond for monster hunter and a couple other games. That actually seems to be a problem for Wii right now; they're selling consoles, but many people (including my in-laws) only use it for the Wii Sports game that comes with it, so Nintendo doesn't get as much profit from games.
-
m