Thinking about the different systems has made me realise some fundamental differences between Nintendo and both Sony and Microsoft.

One was the HD spiel about the PS3.  I personally believe that once gaming in HD the impact won't last long: not a novelty at all because on the whole i do believe it will help in the interactions with and enjoyment of certain games.  That said i dont hold HD in very high regard, and on a list of my priorities of pre-requisites or criteria for entertaining gaming it comes very low.  I feel that both PS3 and Microsoft have placed too much emphasis on graphics and visuals taking away from the fundamentals of entertaining games.

At this point i'll draw a comparison between These two and Nintendo.  At the press conference there was (to paraphrase) talk of visuals not being of central importance and the difference between the left and right hand side of the brain.  I feel this is comment-worthy because it helps me try to understand the different approaches and which ones i tend to favour.

Nintendo are claiming the right side of the brain: a more creative approach, focusing on the feel of the games and how we interact with them... perhaps a warmer approach.

The other two by comparison are much more left sided.  More scientific and logical with emphasis on technology and advancement... perhaps colder?

The thing that throws me is that the right side of the brain is said to be more attuned to aesthetics which is somewhat contrary to the Nintendo press conference.

Personally i feel that a 'whole-brained' approach is key to success for the three companys: having the artistic, creative, visual and imaginative approach of one side of the brain with the objective, scientific and technological approach of the right side.

Does this make sense to anyone?