Why does everyone always say that PS3 is doing good for this point in its life? It's not. It is 5.8 M down the Wii and selling significantly worse than the Wii. And it's 6.4 M down from the 360 and its barely selling better than 360 which is dead in the water in Japan.
If you look at life in a vaccuum, then yes PS3 isn't selling horrible. It costs $500, it's only been out 8.5 months, the big games haven't hit yet. But life isn't in a vaccuum.
It's competing against the Wii, which has the low price advantage, and a unique selling point with the motion controls. No way the PS3 will ever catch it.
It's competing against the 360 with the exact same business plan. More power equals better games. But they are a year late to the party, cost too much, and don't have the quantity/quality of games that the 360 does at this point in time.
The 360 started the nex-gen war by starting a year early and not becoming a failure like the DreamCast. As such, it gives them a huge advantage with games and price point. As such, it's an easy business decision. You can argue that the Wii has different gamers and some games would sell better on the PS3. But I'd like someone to put a cohesive argument why a high profile game would sell better on the PS3 instead of the Xbox 360.
I have one requirement, it has to be high profile. This eliminates Japan only games and the occasional bone game, i.e. Playstation owners have fewer games so they may pick up an average game at a higher rate than 360 owners which have 10 equivalent games to pick from.
