Sony's losing over $200 in the PS3, they're the last company to be able to drop the price $100 a pop.
If all major third party games go to both 360 and PS3, why spend $200 more for the PS3?
Wii games coming out now haven't had much time spent on them 'cause no one started working on it 'till last summer/fall after E3, and more still didn't bother with it 'till after its launch. This holiday and next year we *should* see some more polished games. Calling it the "prevailing wisdom among third parties" is just short-sighted.
Nintendo will up production as needed as often as needed, and they'll probably still be supply-constrained come Xmas. Selling 9M worldwide for Oct Nov and Dec combined (4th quarter) is not completely out of the question though--I'd expect more like 7M tops.
Do you not know what "Sony is publishing the games" means? They're basically putting the up-front money out there to pay the devs to make it, then they get that back from the sales. Second-party games = Sony is paying the devs to make the games for them.
Sony's goal was to "sell" (ship) 6M consoles by March 31st 2007. Estimates are they actually shipped 4.5M, and of that have only sold 3M.
Sony hasn't released its big hitters yet either, and are supposedly focusing more on first-party, and the third-party games can't compete with Resistance or Motorstorm as it is. At least Nintendo has a true top tier title in Zelda out on the Wii that everyone is buying.
That's just those of your points that made actual sense, grammatical and otherwise. ;>
