You do know that Sony sends out Playstation consoles to sell their other products, without ps3 there would be no blu ray, and Sony would have lost a ton of money there. Weither the Playstation brand is profitable or not is not a big issue for Sony.

You are right.

this is the dumbest thread ive seen. hes too dumb to realize that the lower the profit (or higher the debt) from each sale shows that that console is actually better. it shows that the ps3 is much more valuable, and that the hardware is much better than 360 and especially the wii. when a company is making $100 profit off each sale, then u know that ur getting completely ripped off by that company if u buy one. and for sales, ps3 beat 360 in sales for the total weekly sales for the last 20 weeks in a row, and sold more on average per day than the 360. the wii isnt even in the mix cuz honestly its a cheap piece of junk. only 6 year old casual gamers buy that failure-in-a-box.

Sony wouldn't taken this route mainly because they want to put Blu-ray in everyone hand's.

You are right..

Playstation 2 was outselling the 360 by a mile the year the PS3 came out..

Your way off, they should of just stuck with the PSOne, never even bothered making a PS2, PS3 and PSP, make it a 20 year plan. Every 10 years they should introduce a new add on to the console and bring up the price so they make even more money. By now PSOne sales would be around 300 million.

I hate to say it but I agree.

I bet if Sony had known how well the Wii was going to do they would have stuck with the PS2, or at the very least not put blu-ray in the PS3 or made it such a graphics whore of a console!

it didn't happen...oh well.

Good point Rol, the 360 would be the "odd man out" for sure. Could you make a funny thread too? I like your funny threads.

This actually makes perfect sense. I am shocked and appalled.

And let's not try and fall into the same trap that former joystiq editor Vladimir Cole did, eh? The manufacturer's subsidizing their hardware is not some benevolent act on their part.