As said by a couple of people already, Sony's use of Bluray in the PS3 was definitely one of the reasons for the format's success. Without the system's 'large' user base, disc sales would not have been as high and we'd probably be still without a winner today.
But on the reverse side, the use of the drive was one of the reasons Sony has lost their dominance in the console cycle so far. It increased the PS3's cost and delayed the launch. Sony will not regain the dominance they had with the PS2 this generation. If the PS3 only had a DVD drive, would the same be true? Maybe, maybe not. There are a lot of other factors at play including the early launch for the 360, the Wii's surprising success, the higher than expected price for the 360, etc.
So in the end, was it worth it for Sony to include the Bluray drive (which was the point of this thread for those who have wandered off topic)? Short term, it looked like a completely foolish move. But long term, I think the decision will be viewed as a necessary evil to help secure the Bluray format and in the end maybe even sell the PS3 to some people who would not have otherwise paid $500/400/300 for a stand alone movie player and/or game console.
Numbers are like people. Torture them enough and you can get them to say anything you want.
VGChartz Resident Thread Killer
