Yes, that's what interested me in the XBox 360 at first, despite I was already far more excited by the PS3's technical specifications. I had a 360 in the past, but for me it left a bad taste for various reasons. I did have fun with games like Kameo though.

I completely skipped the previous gen consoles and I probably will never get a Wii (despite loving Nintendo's rich gaming history).

I am not a Sony investor, but from the grand perspective I think Sony's investment in the platform are very good for the company for the long run. We consumers just benefit when Sony sells the PS3 below actual costs. Investors can worry if they want, but the situation is pretty solid at this point, the division is generating profits and this will very likely improve further in course of time.

Nope his second sentece is correct.

PS3 & PS3 slim, are both domed.

If PS3 sells more in 10 years than PS1 in 10 years it means it outperformed PS1. Period.

No spinning crap like launch dates in Japan and US and price comprassion. Are you willing to make a bet?

Which is still irrelevent.

What he said was "It can't possibly be outperforming the PS3"  present tense.

It in fact is not currently outperforming the PS1 or even performing on an even level with it.

Also, I don't make bets.  I find them juvenile.

The PS3 isn't and hasn't outperformed the PS1.  Period.  Whether it does or not in the future is irrelevent.

Which you know... is what i posted in the post you replied too... which makes your reply that much stranger.

No, it means it outsold the PS1. It doesn't mean it outperformed it.

Even so in raw numbers the PS3 hasn't matched or surpassed the PS1...

"Inflation" is another altogether issue which in of itself not needed to confuse things since the PS3 hasn't even reached the PS1.

If "From Paris with Love" doesn't pass Titantic (well I guess Avatar now) there is no need to adjust for inlation... since inflation is only going to make the loser lose more.

I'm not sure if you can use inflation in terms of userbase either... I mean, the market is bigger now, but is the Wii less successful then other systems that it will sell more in yet have a lower userbase?

It's hard to think since the Wii itself expanded the market.  I suppose it could be argued that the PS3 isn't expanding the market like the Wii, yet one still has to wonder then if you could hold  the Wii's expansion against it because of that.

Then again with the markets just naturally expanded in other markets and population growth i suppose SOME form of inflation should be considered but it's hard to figure how much would be "positive" inflation and how much would be "Systematic inflation."

It would take some fairly complicated equations involving purchasing power vs historic systems sold in similar levels of purchase power etc for different areas.

Would be really hard to pull off... probably the kinda thing you could do a statistics paper on.

Yeah ... But we all know the following years will not mimic the ones of PS1.

The PS1 has more in common with the Wii than the PS3 has in common with the PS1 aside from sharing the same name. The PS3 has more in common with the Xbox 1 than it does with the PS1 aside from the different names.

PS1 vs Wii both:

• Came from nowhere
• Changed the market conditions
• Beat incumbant top dogs severely
• Simple, relatively easy to program
• Updated controls to new paradigms during lifespan (motion + vs analogue)
• Expected to fail before launch

PS3 vs Xbox 1 both:

• Cost the companies a lot of money
• Underperformed relative to expectations
• Expensive relative to performance
• Included compulsary HDD
• Fans cling onto pyrrhic victory
• Included a few extremely good exclusives but the rest of the games never took advantage of the system.

@ RolStoppable

There's nothing dubious about investing massively into a platform. It's probably financially interesting to Sony from the grand perspective as a consumer electronics company from a long term and wider perspective.

@ Squilliam