Honestly Sony made a number of monumental mistakes. None of which are terribly original. Other console manufacturers have made these very same mistakes. Anyone on this forum can list off the dozen problems with the PS3 console and its launch. The console has a myriad of problems associated with it. Almost like Sony decided to repeat as many mistakes as possible.

Lets count them shall we.

Late launch, price, architecture, proprietary format, development tools, advertising, superfluous features, production, public relations, launch lineup, competition, exclusivity.

On all those fronts Sony screwed up with aces. The only thing that has saved this console is the name, and serious financial backing. Without those two critical features this console would be on the short list for the console that died the fastest. That said Sony has a plethora of issues to resolve, and some of them can never be resolved. For instance you never get a chance at a second launch, and you cannot rebuild your console innards once it has gone to market.

I think when you tear away the console to its earliest beginnings you will see the true flaw. They developed a console built around multifaceted domination rather then a linear KISS philosophy. Keep it simple stupid is a fine design philosophy. Focus on doing one or two things well, and if later design choices in any way hinder that those choices must be omitted from the final design.

This is where all the mistakes have their root. Had the scope of the machine been directed with one goal in mind then it would have done much better. I have mentioned this before but HBO put out a movie a few years back named The Pentagon Wars. I highly recommend that many on these forums take time to watch this movie, and you can see exactly how a lack of rigid design philosophy can hamper any projects development.

I definately agree.  I would have bought one at launch and put up with all the associated BS if that price was tagged to the product.  There have been some great games released for PS3 recently but I'm not playing them because I don't have one and price was the deciding factor.

 I definatley agree with what you have said. Didn't really look into all those other things, but they definately helped to add to the situation

dtewi: " High Price ---> Less Sales ---> Less Brand Recognition ---> Less Sales "

That's horrible logic. Neither Microsoft or Nintendo has anywhere near the amount of brand recognition as Sony. For example, Sony Bravia HDTV is neither the best HDTV nor is it the cheapest. Yet the TV sells are still great but only b/c of what? brand name.
Your chart would have been better off like this:
High Price ---> Less Sales ---> Worried Publishers ---> Less games ---> 3rd Place.

Anyways, the reason why the PS3 isn't selling as well as expected is not because the PS/Sony brand has gone cold (lawls @ anyone that really believes that), it's because it's still the most expensive console with the least value in the minds of gamers. Here's a obvious list contributing to the PS3's "slow" start.
-Bad marketing (this is living = wtf?)
-By far the most expensive at launch (2 times the amount of PS2 launch)
-Horrible PR (put a sock in it Ken, for your own good)
-Fierce competition (Wii60)
-Bad ports/ strange architecture (You guys know the games)
-Lack of features many users are already accustomed with. (in-game XMB and rumble?)
-Lack of good exclusive software. (compared to the other companies)
-Format War (It's not the same when DVD was the only format and consumers had one choice)
Most of the negatives are gradually getting better, and people seem to forget the PS3 has only been around for one year. But that in a nutshell is why the PS3 is not doing as good as people expected.

 lo I should have put electron iscs instead. hello infinite space.

Nice troll thread here.

The PS3 hasn't "Failed" to deliver by any means. It obviously hasn't had the sales of the Wii, but then again it's not a 1/4 step up from previous generation graphics and power with only a new fancy remote at $250. Someone who is strapped for money and cannot justify spending 5 or 600 on a console will settle or choose the lower priced alternative.

As the price of the PS3 goes down, sales will increase and we have seen that so far in the last half of this year with the price drops. Also with better games coming out, it will just continue to get better.

Sony seems to have wised up with their marketing and they are at pains to teach people what they are actually geting for their money.
Personally I think now for what you are getting, the ps3 is very good value for money.
For instance the 40 gig ps3 is cheaper than an xbox elite and yet you get a hidef drive and wifi which are both features lacking on the elite.

 The PS3 has failed to deliver by the most basic measures. Sales, profit, games. 

It has lost former playstation exclusives, lost money (although expected on Sony consoles to start) and has far far lower sales than were predicted.

Oh and nice going on to an entirely unrelated topic of Wii bashing =\ you can hardly complain about troll threads when you post things like that. 

My humble opinion is that Sony released a console that wasn't easy to program for on top of all the other things people have already said. The price is a HUGE factor and the fact that no big-name flagship title has been released to carry the PS3 out of the ditch is another.

It mainly comes down to value as has been mentioned. Most people simply cannot justify the cost of a PS3 for the return. If the PS3 had games out that LOTS of people wanted, then more people could justify a purchase of a more expensive item because they would value it more.

For an example of price vs. value look at Guitar Hero. The entry price point is near $100 and most games cost around half that. Yet it sells well and is wildly popular (among most gaming crowds).

So in the end I am just one guy saying that the price of a PS3 to most people is not justifiable to the value of it.

 Then the PS2 also failed to deliver by the most basic measures.

PS2 POV:

Sales = 2 times cheaper than PS3 with only 2 million more sold given same release + less competition.   

Profit = Hardware profit was never Sony's plan, they get most the profit from royalties which took awhile for the PS2 to turn

Games = PS2 early games: Fantavision, SSX, Summoner, Tekken Tag, Ridge racer. Anticipated MGS2 took a little more than a full year to get released but sleeper hits such as DMC and GTA3 sold PS2s.

PS3 POV:

Sales = 2 times more expensive than PS2 selling @ 2 million units lower given the fact that the competition is more fierce

Profit = Gaming division losing alot of money due to hardware manufacturing (same as previous gens)

Games = PS3 early games: Resistance, Motorstorm, Genji, Ridge Racer. Anticipated MGS4 is slated to be released a year + a quarter after launch. Sleeper hits, who won't know until we see one.

All in all, I don't see much difference. You can't really call something a failure untill it's all said and done, and we have long ways to go before we get to that point.