If there's an obvious difference between PC gamers and console gamers it's in their feelings towards Microsoft. Microsoft on the PC is tarnished with anti-trust sentiments, with people perceiving the company as a monolithic soulless corporation, releasing products filled with holes, and lacking the features of better but less entrenched companies. They write the company's name as Micro$oft, to decry the unacceptable concept that a company should, in some way, make a profit. Microsoft is about as popular as Alec Baldwin at a Positive Parenting conference.

The gaming Microsoft, though, is a different fish kettle. Hip, and trying its best to be happening, the gaming Microsoft are video game enablers. They make well received and popular consoles, which are very successful by any standard except... making any money. Better still! Can't have gaming tarnished with THAT particular sin.

It's interesting, really. One reason we support Microsoft in gaming is that... they're the underdog. T...

If there's an obvious difference between PC gamers and console gamers it's in their feelings towards Microsoft. Microsoft on the PC is tarnished with anti-trust sentiments, with people perceiving the company as a monolithic soulless corporation, releasing products filled with holes, and lacking the features of better but less entrenched companies. They write the company's name as Micro$oft, to decry the unacceptable concept that a company should, in some way, make a profit. Microsoft is about as popular as Alec Baldwin at a Positive Parenting conference.

The gaming Microsoft, though, is a different fish kettle. Hip, and trying its best to be happening, the gaming Microsoft are video game enablers. They make well received and popular consoles, which are very successful by any standard except... making any money. Better still! Can't have gaming tarnished with THAT particular sin.

It's interesting, really. One reason we support Microsoft in gaming is that... they're the underdog. They're the little battler who gave it a go against the incumbent, the predatory monopoly. They are David against Goliath, AMD against Intel, Firefox against... err... Microsoft. We love to see the little guy win. But lets be honest, those stories are so much fun because they just don't happen. For every granny who triumphs in legal action against the multinational corporation trying to take away her kitten there are thousands who go kittenless, unsung and fallen. In a fight the smart money is on Goliath. Size and physical strength are kind of an asset in any battle, and let's be honest, slings just are a pansy way to fight.

Slings are also not very good metaphors. There are no knockout blows in most commercial fights. No stone hits the head and ends the war for good. Commercial rivalries, console wars, browser wars, CPU wars, platform wars, Star Wars, these are wars not of thrilling victory, but of attrition.

They aren't cleaned up movie boxing matches where a perfect punch seals a comeback, they're the 10th round, when both fighters are tired and bleeding, and the winner is the one still standing when the loser runs out of steam.

Ultimately it comes down to money. If Sony are Goliath, and let's be honest, they kind of are, Microsoft sure isn't a David. They had an early perception as a newcomer, bravely taking the fight to Sony in the face of Nintendo's inability and Sega's desertion. But those days are long past, and the company was never David. Maybe Goliath in a David suit.

Both Microsoft and Sony have massive pockets. It's hard to even say the companies' names without saying "cha-CHING" afterwards. They can slog away at each other for a long time, draining money from their parent companies. Quite frankly you have to respect Nintendo for even coming to the party here. They really don't have the funds for a fight like this. They've had to play it their own way: releasing good and innovative products that are well liked and sell in large numbers for significant profits. It's just crazy enough to work.

Yet somehow Microsoft gaming has the industry's goodwill, and Sony do not. Sony has been long and rightly criticised for their tying together of proprietary devices and formats.

Microsoft now uses their entrenched operating system to link up to its well liked online system, and no one seems to mind. No one cries anti-competition, anti-trust. No one minds. "How convenient! All my contacts in one place and messaging from my 360!"

Microsoft's goal is nothing short of global domination. That's not a criticism, it's the same of all corporations. The company that says "Nah, that's it, we're big enough now." will have to answer to its shareholders and explain why the stock prices are plummeting.

Is that a bad thing? Is Microsoft to be trusted? Are we OK with gaming Microsoft doing things we wouldn't trust PC Microsoft to do? It seems the only answer is yes.