Recently, ATI Corp. has announced a partnership with Nintendo, a technology development agreement, and as part of the agreement the two companies are working together on new and innovative technology for future Nintendo systems (handheld or console remains the specific mystery as of press time). This brings about a rather interesting little battle.

The two largest Video technology companies are ATI and nVidia. Nintendo, with an agreement with ATI, and Microsoft with an agreement with nVidia leaves Sony sitting out in the cold without any real name brand company to make their graphics chip.

As we’ve learned and witnessed from this console war, ATI and nVidia have done more than well enough for their respective consoles. The GameCube’s and Xbox’s graphical prowess dwarfs that of the PS2. Sadly, as we have all seen, the PS2 contained a Sony built product, the 150 MHz graphics Synthesizer, and it just wasn’t enough to compete with the GameCube and Xbox. It was enough, however, to topple the Dreamcast (Alas, poor Dreamcast, we hardly knew ye). In this current, and almost finished, console war, the PS2 is ahead of the competition by leaps and bounds, which really proves that graphics don’t always sell the games. If that were the case, the Xbox would be well ahead in first place with the GameCube traveling shortly behind it. But all is not what it seems in this topsy-turvy world of gaming.

What’s done is done, and it’s pretty safe to say that Sony has won this battle in the gaming realm. But, who’s to say that their place is safe in the next wave of system battles in the next 2-3 years? With all three of the companies well into development of their follow-up console, we can’t help but wonder what will be “under the hood” of each system.

Nintendo will have another ATI graphics chip. Microsoft will have another nVidia chip (most likely a GeForce4 or higher), and Sony will most likely have their own chip again. Now, unless Sony is really able to pull something amazing out of their butts, they may lose the graphics battle all over again. Do the graphics sell the game, though?

Being someone who has all thee current consoles, I would say it definitely helps in the decision. When Max Payne was released, I did not own an Xbox at the time, or a good enough PC to run the game, so, I was faced with the PS2 version. Needless to say, I just waited until I had the Xbox because the PS2 version played like a big ol’ Cleveland Steamer. When faced with the choice between Xbox and PS2 versions of Max Payne, controls and quality aside, simply on graphics I went with the Xbox version. This is not always the case, for most people. Many people have one, maybe two of the current systems, but not all three. So, where am I going with this?

As the title suggests, perhaps I was right all along. Before the current systems launched I posed the theory that perhaps Nintendo and Microsoft had a silent agreement with one another to try and take Sony out of the competition, or at least hurt them. As it would seem, that’s what they are doing again. With nVidia and ATI already in contractual obligation to their respective partners, that leaves Sony at the traffic light asking for a dollar as they clean the windshields on Nintendo’s and Microsoft’s cars.

The Xbox and the GameCube, strange as this sounds, are very much alike one another. The PS2, however, stands apart from them in many respects. Where does the graphics chip play into the next generation gaming, though?

Well, as we’ve all read and learned about, the current generation of gaming we are in was a drastic jump from the previous (PSX to PS2, N64 to GameCube). Alas, this next generation won’t really be much of a technological jump, but more of an update. Processors will be faster, graphics will be even more realistic, load times (God willing) will be a thing of the past, and all other minor issues with the modern systems will be ironed out. It’s not like the next systems will be a jump to in-home Virtual Reality. They will just be an upgrade of what’s currently available, much like the jump from 8 to 16-bit gaming. It did change the way we looked at games, but wasn’t necessarily the biggest advancement in the world. By the end of the 16-bit era, you never would have guessed that only a few years prior we were all clamoring over blocky looking, 5 pixel characters. It’s just so different when you look at a game like Mario RPG, and then look at Super Mario Bros 3. One generation’s new wave becomes the next generation’s basis for mockery.

In this next generation, I plan on buying all three of the new consoles. Of course, the order in which I purchase them is subject to time of release. Hypothetically stating, if all three were to release on the same day, I would buy them in the order of Nintendo, Microsoft, and then Sony.

Now, why is it important that Nintendo and Microsoft have tried and true graphics companies making their chips? Because, as I had said, this next generation is just going to be an upgrade of the current market we are in. Remember when all the talks of Microsoft buying Nintendo came about? Well, I don’t think it was necessarily a “buy-out,” but more the two of them coming together with a game plan to hurt Sony and help one-another. When you look closer, deeper than the façade of gaming companies at large, Nintendo, Microsoft, and Sony all have one common goal; to make mad phat cash, yo. Nintendo is already well on their way to having an extremely successful system (in terms of profit). Microsoft is too proud to admit they lost some money, and they have deep enough pockets to not worry about it. Sony, however, I just can’t tell. They aren’t going to worry about selling systems, and they are sure-as-Hell not going anywhere anytime soon. Perhaps, just maybe, with this next generation, Nintendo can pull themselves out from under the N64/GCN rock they climbed under, and get some of the fans back. The GameCube 2, Xbox 2, and PS3 are all going to sell relatively well, but I can’t help but wonder…do Nintendo and Microsoft have that “silent agreement” to kick the bejesus out of Sony? Or are they just that similar, while being completely different? Only time will tell.

The big N and MS are on board to have known, high-quality parts, but yet Sony remains unaffiliated with any company other than themselves. Whether this is a good move or not, I am not one to say. They say that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, and it would seem as though Sony has not learned. Sure, they did release the system a year ahead of their competition, but it really shows because their hardware was slightly outdated by the time the new systems came out. Nintendo vs. Microsoft? Just a little. ATI vs. nVidia? Very much so. Maybe this isn’t even a console war, but a graphics war. Maybe, just maybe, in some distant future, there will be harmony among the gaming companies. Either way, I still see this next generation as being, essentially, a big penis fight between the companies over who can push more polygons (or as it would seem, fewer polygons but an overall better appearance). I don’t foresee this next generation of systems being as successful or as important as the current generation, but I have been wrong once or twice before in my whole life.

Kevin McGinnis