aside from this being a very minor detail, this is just completely wrong. if sony finds it profitable to lower ps3 price, they will. undercutting competitor's blu-ray player prices has absolutely nothing to with it whatsoever. indeed, the low price of ps3 compared to other blu-ray players in the early days (when ps3 was $500-$600) was the primary reason blu-ray even managed to out-muscle HD-DVD's.
also, it has long been an implicit assumption that there's much more money to be made in blu-ray than games. i have not seen any evidence of this. let's use box office as a proxy for sales of disc-based media. typically, they bring in 1-2 times as much revenue as the box office. you can easily google up box-office revenues vs. video game revenues, here just 1 link:
http://www.sfnblog.com/index.php/2008/08/25/2163-us-video-game-revenues-keep-growing
so as you can see, at the very least, video game revenue matches box office sales. if you're conservative, you can say that disc-based media still bring in more revenue than video games, but if i were to make an estimate that i'm willing to bet 50-50 odds on, i'd say video games account for at least 30% more than disc-based media revenues by end of 2008. and this doesn't even include hardware and peripheral sales.
so not only there is not "much more money" to be made in blu-ray than video games, it's debatable whether there's more money, period.
now, we haven't even gotten into the royalities and what-nots of these businesses. a while back, i asked a manager at a DVD-making company how much royalties they pay to the DVD association or whatever it's called. i don't remember the exact number, but it's about 5 cents per DVD, and is big portion of the cost of the production of each DVD, ~25 cents each. i know blu-ray royalties are higher--let's say $1. but video game royalties are FAR higher--$7 minimum per full-priced game. and you don't even spread between members of the blu-ray association, of which there's like 20 or 30 of them. there are 3 companies that compete for the video game royalty market.
after accounting for all this, i just don't see how anybody can claim blu-ray is a bigger profit-maker than video games. i would highly suspect it's the other way around for any given company.
and this is when people start making financially intangible arguments like "sony can better capitalize on the success of blu-ray because of their horizontal integration of their businesses". which is an argument that, since any monetary estimate can be created out of hot air, cannot ever be refuted and the discussion goes on and on and on.
the Wii is an epidemic.
