In the end those are all superficial aspects of gameplay Starcraft, and all things that can be explored later generations when it is economic and feasable. Right now pushing such aspects is problematic and justifying the dead end direction of the market for the sake of these minor improvements in gaming is just foolish.
Your argument is to the same affect as saying, "Who cares if Heroine is bad for you, it feels so good!"
To translate, yes these graphics, AI, and environments are wonderful and wanted by all gamers, but are they worth the cost they're forcing the market to pay? If we wanted to, we could have had 6th gen graphics back in the 5th gen, but it would of been at a terrible cost to the consumer and market. Just because you can have something and push boundaries doesn't mean you should.
And yes, both Sony and MS have reached profitablity, but not by much and considering Microsoft has 7 years of lossess and Sony (the financial equivalent of) over 10 years of losses to make up for, that's not really saying much. The real question here is are the third party developers and the market as a whole reaching profitability on their consoles? That's been my argument all along.
