No, I think they're going to slowly try and adapt to Nintendo's stratagy of not selling the console at a loss, so every new gen is a success profit wise for them, even if they come third it doesn't matter (look at gamecube), that way they'll keep going till they strike it lucky (like Nintendo did with Wii)

1st, 2nd and 3rd means nothing in the grand scale of things.

You are a SMURF. Wheres your Kimpossible avatar?!

@ 4. Can't we say the same about Sony considering they have more markets?~~

Ah yes, another reason to hate Nvidea...yes I am an ATI fanboy! lol

The sales are declining year on year, and i think the sales will continue to decline faster than they have if natal fails. i'm saying there will be great sales, but just not that great; honestly natal is very good, very innovative, but i dont see people like, girlfriends & older people getting into it. i dont see it proloning the life cycle by 5 years.

i think launching a new console is absolute sucicide especailly if natal fails. theres no advantage in that, the components and the performance would have to exceed the ps3 for it to compete with sony. which would make it more expensive to manufacture, and more expensive to consumers. evidently the sales of the wii show that the consumer wants the best bargan, and the PS3 which is the most expensive has sold the least of the 3 consoles. most importantly its very expensive and time consuming to develop HD games, GTA4 costing $100 million, and GTA5 i think is the longest game in development. i think theres no way any developer would think about supporting a new console in the next 4 years minimum.

As for the PS3, i think if microsoft did release their next console, sony would use the PS3 to compete with that. because PS3 already has a complete package, HD games, blu ray player, PS move, 3D etc. it would be sucicide to release new consoles, when the PS3 & 360 havent reached 50 million yet and wii has not hit 100 mil either. considering its taken 5 years to reach 40 million and sales are decllining year on year, then by the next 5 years, arguabally the 360 wouldnt have reached 85 mil.

thats says to me that there just isnt a market for a bigger, better, more expense consoles, especilly in economic recovery and espcaily when the current gen consoles seem to be capable of everthing you want these days. why would anyone pay more for something that can already be done on a cheaper console.

No. Even very slow adoption of their motion control gamble won't put EDD into the red. They can afford a reduction in profit. They threw $100m at Bing like we use spare change.

After paying $4B last gen to get into the business and $1B+ this gen to stay in, it seems unlikely they will quit while earning roughly $1B/yr in profit. Their near monopoly of OS is a thing of the past and the vg business has the potential to earn them $3B/yr next gen. That would be a tenth of net profit on last fy fiscal if I remember correctly. Hopefully they will learn from past mistakes. Xbl is a growing resource stream and an incentive to stay imo. Why chop that money tree?

Dude everyone makes mistakes and goes through failures but there's a thing called endurance and persistence. If Natal flops, then Microsoft will learn from that and will make sure to come up with something that won't flop.

It depends on if Microsoft wants to give up this brand they have built up or not.

After all the $ they have put into building up their gaming brand I just do not see it. They seemed to have pushed really hard this Gen at least for a certain type of gamer.

Natal is mostly being brought in for the 360 in order to give MS's 1st parties and 3rd parties some training in how to develop for it, such that when the 720 comes out in 2012 or so with Natal as the default control scheme, the launch games don't have the same flaws as many of the launch Wii games