The Nintendo Wii is the best video game console.

PRICE: The producers of the 360 did not, in fact, over-invest in their product. They have profited a great deal, making this notion completely out of the blue and completely without any substance. Moreover, "Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft will try every trick in the book in order to maximize sales. One of the best weapons Microsoft has is its price point; after the September price drop, the least expensive 360 model is selling for $200, which is $50 less than even the Wii. While the Arcade unit doesn't come with a hard drive, Microsoft is seeking to fix that: the company has launched a promotion giving Arcade users the choice of a free 512MB memory card or a $20 refurbished 20GB hard drive" [1] In other words, Pro's entire argument is officially NEGATED. He has said, "Thus, the cheaper console is better for pretty much everybody." In addition to having proven this faulty logic untrue SEVERAL times throughout this debate (again, note the Honda and Bentley analogy), I have still managed to debunk this argument of my opponent's by using his own logic and reasoning against him: He says that the cheaper system is the better system, and I have proven that the 360 is actually LESS expensive than the Wii. [Point: Con] CONTROLLER: I said that gamers (those who play video games regularly) have come to the consensus that the Wiimote tends to lag behind. My opponent says that as a gamer, he disagreed, therefore making my statement null and void. Unfortunately for him, that is not the way debate works and the proper or effective way to negate an argument (using statistics and other facts rather than a biased opinion). Additionally, my opponent continued to site the various uses for the Wiimote, which is not enough to disprove any of my counters since I have already addressed the issue of variety and proven that the 360 has just as many functional controllers as the Wii. [Point: Con] PERFORMANCE/GRAPHICS: "I'd still say that swinging your arm is more realistic of an indicator of tennis skill than pressing "A." It's naturally not a perfect indicator, but it's obviously better than using a normal controller." -- Pro Again, this is based on my opponent's opinion with very little basis to back it up. Why? I have already explained in previous rounds that one can just as easily move around with a wireless 360 controller as they can with the Wiimote. Additionally, a system's "realism" generally refers to its graphics. My opponent concedes that the 360 is known to have far superior graphics than the Wii. [Point: Con] THE MARKET: Once again, Pro has completely ignored the fact that PRICE DOES NOT DETERMINE WHICH SYSTEM IS BETTER. Even using his own arguments, Pro says that, "It makes it a better product for consumers, and seeing as consumers are the ones who review the games, price does indeed matter." The problem here is that consumers are not the only ones who review games. There are professionals whose jobs literally revolve around judging and rating games; not consumers. Moreover, my opponent still ignored my argument regarding the market determining the value of a particular item. See, I had thought that this was basic knowledge and therefore automatically understood by Pro. It wasn't until later on that I realized he did not grasp basic concepts of Economics. I apologize. However even after detailing my logic in R3, my opponent chose not to address it in R4, therefore conceding the point to me. This is especially valid as my opponent chose to bring up an entire new argument during this last and final round (see: next contention) -- [Point: Con] PLAYABILITY: Pro chooses to introduce an entire new argument during this fourth and final round by providing lists of the Greatest Video Games of All Time. Now, just because Nintendo dominates the list doesn't mean that the Wii itself does, and it is the WII - not Nintendo - that is up for discussion in this debate. In fact, the majority of those games mentioned all pre-date the Wii, and many of them are specifically designed for arcade systems anyway. [Point: Neutral] SO-CALLED DROPPED ARGUMENTS: 1. Most players enjoy using the Wiimote. --> This is an opinion with no evidence to support it. 2/3. The Wii has Wii Fit, which contributes very much to user interaction and realism, as well as general fitness. Oh, and the Wii also has health benefits. People use the Wii for rehabilitation from injury and disease. --> I've explained how the term realism generally applies to graphics, which Pro acknowledges are better on the 360. Additionally, the Xbox has other games (i.e. ones that require use of Dance Pads) which also encourage interaction and body movement, and generally promotes overall fitness and well-being. Finally, what Pro failed to mention are the various INJURIES that can be sustained from using the Wii (hence the warnings). This can off-set the positive effects. So, in conclusion, both systems offer games with health benefits and yet only the Wii has been known to cause damage or injury. It would seem to me, then, that the 360 wins this category as well (in terms of safety and well-being). 4. Additionally, swinging your arm is more likely to encourage you to stand up than pressing A+B. You really can't swing your arms around with two arms gripping the controller. --> Just because you swing your arms while playing a game or two doesn't make the entire system better or more valuable. Thus, I ignored this point probably because it offered absolutely little to no value in regard's to my opponent's position in the debate. 5. The Wiimote is a novelty, but it doesn't just 'wear off quickly. --> This is an opinion, and I have addressed it. 6. Additionally, your only point here is about large groups. --> Huh? I said that the Wii is preferable while playing in large groups, yes. What's Pro's point? Listing the fact that there are many 1 on 1 games you can play on the Wii is entirely irrelevant, since there are just as many 1 on 1 games that you can play on the 360. RE-CAP: -- The 360 is cheaper and is therefore more widely accessible, which Pro deems highly important as he has repeated this concept consistently throughout the entire debate. -- The 360 consistently achieves higher performance ratings than the Wii from gamers and esteemed critics alike. -- The 360 has been voted the "best controller" and I have linked the source proving so in previous rounds. Plus, while the Wiimote is versatile, I have proven that the Xbox comes with just as many functional controllers. -- The 360 has better graphics, and my opponent concedes to this widely known fact. -- The 360 has just as many "Best Games" on the Best Game's top 10 list than the Wii, as I have also indicated in earlier rounds. CONCLUSION: Given the fact that I have proven the 360 reigns superior using a plethora of statistics (market sales, etc.) and facts (testimonials from an impartial group of multitude gamers, instead of my opponent's sole biased opinion) along with the fact that I have argued against all of my opponent's claims, and he hasn't successfully negated mine, I encourage a vote for the Con. Thank you.