Sony’s jewel in the crown, the PlayStation 2, is a marvel of modern retailing and electronics manufacturing. Since its birth in 2000 it has sold 140 million units, with an average of around 4 million units being sold in Europe over the last few years. The PlayStation 3 has been just as successful as has the handheld PSP. There have been rumours that Sony were going to drop the retail price of the PS2 this year in light of the new demand for the new consoles. It’s good news for those living in the US and mainland Europe but not for those in the UK.

In North America the PS2 will see a drop from $129.99 to only $99.99. This price will also be the same throughout Europe too, so the price tag will be 99.99 Euros. However, official word from Sony is that there will be no price drop for customers in the UK this year. The current price for a Slimline PlayStation 2, as found on Amazon.co.uk, is £92.99, which is quite considerably less than that charged over the last few years, especially following the launch of the PlayStation 3 in 2006.

When consoles are in higher demand and more people want new models, it’s obvious the old models are going to drop in price. Some people might see it as a strange decision not to allow the UK customers the benefit of the price tag drop. It’s not been said officially, but it’s clear that the decision has been taken at least in part because of the value of the pound. Computer gaming has suffered in the economic crisis as much as any other industry and Nintendo have had to bump up the UK price of the Wii this year. But with the PlayStation 4 already being talked about for some time after 2010, it probably won’t be too long before the PlayStation 2 is found in the charity shops with its older brother the original PlayStation.

The phenomenon that is the Nintendo Wii continues to set new records and break new ground. It has just been revealed that the immensely popular games console has now sold more than 50 million units across the world, a phenomenal figure that just shows what an impact it has had on the games industry.

This latest statistic makes the Wii officially the fastest selling console in history, taking the crown from the PlayStation 2. At the same time as the announcement was made, it was also revealed that the Nintendo DS is not doing too badly either, having sold 100 million units globally, albeit over a longer time period than the Wii.

Satoru Iwata, the head of Nintendo, said that the success of the Wii was “beyond what we possibly hoped for”, and stated that its success was down to the expansion of the games market and the Wii’s ability to attract fans who were previously unfamiliar with gaming.

Commentators have agreed with this argument, claiming that it is the difference between the Wii and the other consoles on the market that has made it more popular across the globe. To put the figure into perspective, Wii sales are about the same as both PlayStation and Xbox sales together.

At the same time as the announcement was made, Iwata also revealed that the Wii is to get a new storage system, as well as a number of new games to add to the list. He also said that the Wii Fit, the board that gamers stand on to control some Wii games, has now sold 14 million units.

He also made some interesting points, saying that 47% of Wii sales were down to women, and that 20% of Wii owners had never owned a console before. This goes to show the wide appeal that the Wii has and its ability to attract different types of fans.

The Games Developer Conference took place recently and out of it came an idea that has the potential to dramatically change the current games industry model - its name, OnLive. What OnLive is designed to do is eradicate the need for expensive and high-end technology in the home, allowing its users to play their favourite games on entry-level hardware.

The concept is made possible because all of the processing and graphical work is not done by the machine that sits in front of you, but instead by a much faster piece of equipment in a server house. The console in this future is nothing more than a hub, transmitting your controller inputs across the internet and receiving in return the game’s image to display. For many gamers this may seem like one giant and complex waste of time. It’s hard to see why changes need to be made to the 5 year life cycle most have become accustomed to with today’s consoles. So why is it then that although many analysts have questioned whether OnLive itself will succeed, everyone seems to agree that the model at least will inevitably triumph over the current one?

The answers lie less in the benefits it will provide the gamer and depend more on what it will provide to the developers and publishers. For example, as the game is digitally stored at the server end of the connection and not within your home, the system will theoretically remove the possibility of software being pirated, sold second-hand or tampered with. This will allow much more money generated by game sales to go directly to the creators. There are some who belief though that not every pirated game is a lost sale, and that the second hand market brings in new gamers, whilst encouraging present ones try out the untested waters. Tampering with games is not always a bad thing too; many PC games in fact thrive on their unofficial modding communities, but with no files to edit it is unclear as to how this could continue with a game streaming service.

The question of ownership also comes into play with a service like OnLive. Although digital markets are becoming more commonplace they are still very much in their infancy. Many websites selling MP3s, for example, first began selling DRM coded files but quickly moved towards simple, access anytime music to match consumer demands. With OnLive however this would not be possible; when you purchase a game through the system you are technically buying access to it rather than anything physical, and if the creators of OnLive were to ever close down your game collection may just disappear overnight.

For the majority of us though, who still struggle to stream low quality videos from the internet without them stopping to buffer every 30 seconds, these concerns are perhaps a little premature. Although OnLive intends to begin its service this year it is likely to be at least another generation before this writer can realistically begin considering whether or not to join in. Perhaps by then some of the fears of a streaming, digital future will have been alleviated but until that happens then I for one will be taking a long hard look at my old game discs, files, cases and manuals with a new-found appreciation.

Nintendo were enjoying an unexpected publicity boost the other day with the announcement that the Wii could provide one answer to combating the growing obesity epidemic in children.

The announcement was made by Sir Liam Donaldson, the Chief Medical Officer, who said that interactive computer games could play a major role in reducing obesity in the future, as kids are simply not doing enough normal exercise.

The announcement was made after a pilot scheme went underway in the East Midlands, which wanted to find out just how useful interactive consoles could be in the fight against obesity. The East Midlands has seen a huge rise in child obesity levels over recent years, and was considered a prime spot to target.

The results were so encouraging that Sir Liam Donaldson claimed that although video games have been one of the major causes of child obesity, they could now be used to combat it. After all, if you can’t stop kids playing them, then why not use them to get kids healthier.

According to the findings of the report, energetic games can increase heart rates and can lead to an increase of 42% in the amount of calories burnt by children playing them compared to the calories burnt if they were sitting down. This means that one hour of play per day would lead to a 7 1/2lb loss in body fat over the course of a year. On top of that, they can also be played safely at home, especially important for obese children who could hurt themselves through traditional exercise.

Sir Liam Donaldson has said that the results would now be used to “develop a strategy” which would “promote involvement in physical activity.”

With Amazon.com and Toys R Us recently announcing they are to enter the used game market, the debate about trade-ins has one again arisen, this time with many industry professionals joining the argument.

The problem is this: when a game is sold brand new, some of the money you spend is given to the people who made it. When a title is sold used, all of the money you spend goes to the shop. Games have always been sold second-hand but recently problems have arisen because retailers began offering incentives to make people trade-back games within the first week of release. These copies are then given a higher priority over brand new ones, as the shop will make more profits from them.

Both sides have a valid point as to why they feel they are in the right. Developers and publishers pay for the majority of a game's advertising, which in turn attracts people into the game stores, so they believe they deserve a cut of the money. Retailers argue, however, that they simply offer the customer a choice for better value. It may be interesting to debate the rights and wrongs if you work in either one of these industries, but should the average gamer really care? Well actually yes, as the way games are produced, designed and sold is about to change because of how seriously the issue is being taken.

Many have predicted the death of brick and mortar game stores with the next generation of consoles, where full game downloads may become a reality. Until then it seems that download codes could be the industry's answer. One thing you may have noticed recently is the rise in pre-order bonuses. Gears of War 2 for example gave free levels to people who bought the game on release day; these came in the form of a one-time redeemable code. What this means is that the used version of the game will effectively have less content, reducing its appeal. Codes that give in-game advantages may be the next step in this strategy. Imagine if your second-hand copy of Call of Duty came without the ability to use certain weapons online, or your engine size in Gran Turismo was capped unless you pre-ordered the game. These things could then be unlocked after several months for everyone, allowing the used market still to exist, but not inside a games launch window.

Other industries, such as films and automobiles, also have a used market but neither seems to have quite the same issue with it affecting the sales of newly launched products. This is down to pricing and could be something the games industry may need to address. DVDs cost approximately £12 and often do not seem worth trading in for their low cash return. Cars on the other hand are the opposite; their cost is so high that selling back a car within the first week of release would lose you a large amount of cash. Games sit at an inconvenient price level as they are neither too cheap nor too expensive. One way to change this is to release games at a lower RRP. This can be budgeted for by producing shorter games and then charging for extra DLC. With extra content being released over time there is also more reason to keep hold of a title instead of trading it in. Burnout is one title that has relied heavily on its free and paid DLC to cover the cost of its cheaper launch price, and more than a year on it still has a very active audience who have held on to the title and reaped the rewards.

The problem is that without the broadband speeds in place to provide full game downloads, publishers must walk a fine line between curbing used game sales and upsetting their retail partners. More importantly though, they must be sure any changes they do make respect the customer and their positive relationship with second-hand titles. After all, without the support of their customers (and their money) it won’t matter what they do.