It's really funny to read the flip-flop comments in this thread. In other threads, when someone says that the 360 is a success because it is selling much better than the original Xbox did (in all regions, no less), then PS3 fans claim that the "winner" will be Sony because the PS3 will eventually pass the 360 in sales.
Yet, now that someone points out that the PS3 isn't going to sell nearly as well as the PS2 did, the argument changes to "PS3 vs PS2 sales are irrelevant to the PS3's success".
That's pretty hilarious... if the 360 outsells the original Xbox and takes a larger market share percentage than the Xbox did, it's a failure. If the PS3 sells below PS2 levels and takes a smaller market share percentage, it's a success.
Personally, I believe all 3 consoles are successes based on their installed base, game libraries, and future potential, and I've said so in numerous threads. The reason the OP's post in so important is to point out the flip-flop thinking of a lot of posters... how the bar keeps getting moved based on which console is discussed. "Domination" is definitely a moving target around here.
