Sorry, that just isn't objectively true.
Even in a capitalistic context, companies can and should be judged by the net value they provide to the market, and by how responsibly they act.
I'd go one step ahead and add that, IMHO, the way many (most?) Americans buy into this BS about shareholder profitability being the only measure, is one of the major sources of problems in the modern world. Yes, many people buy into it outside America as well, but there it's less damaging, because in most countries with any economic/social influence, this is not the prevailing view. Maybe China could deserve to be included in this “part of the problem” too, I guess. But an European or Japanese companies gets in serious trouble when it's perceived as not serving its market well, or not being a responsible “corporate citizen”.
Or maybe I'm a dreamer...
But we don't live in a reasonable world. We live in a world ruled by marketing. Manufacturers will keep finding new gimmicks to sell consoles for many years, rest assured. There's more and more expensive motion tracking (camera-based now, which takes a lot of CPU to run). Then there's 3D. Then there's things like facial recognition, gesture tracking, etc. Then brainwave controls. And Live and PSN have proven to my satisfaction that consoles can do gaming on demand via internet as well.
A language can help a lot. And some languages are inherently less maintainable. If you don't agree, then you're in denial.
If we could sell our experiences for what they cost us, we would all be millionaires. -- Abigail Van Buren