Intriguing you could be right. It's interesting to think how this company views the gaming market.

Why is this a stupid move?? M$ have lost billions supporting the Xbox brand, they havent won the gen and Sony has been beating them week on week despite the 360 being cheaper and coming out  year eariler. you think a good strategy is to lose another few billion.... and risk another RROD fiasco by premature launch.

nintendo are in a good position to release a HD console, but why would they - they're current console hasnt sold 100 mil yet, a HD console would be competiting in the price range of M$ and sony which already have well established franchises.

personally i prefer consoles that have as long a lifespan as possible. i think that the more experience developers spend on a particular console can result in much better games, and especailly innovation.

Don't know why some would think that this is a bad idea. IMO the PS3 could easily exist besides the Wii2 and the next Xbox. They have the most powerful console right now and I don't expect a really big jump in performance for the next consoles of Ninty and MS, simply because they know that performance is not all. That said the PS3 could have an advantage because it will obviously be cheaper than future consoles.

And if anyone thinks that Sony will finish 3rd next gen because of that... well... I think Sony doesn't care at all how they finish in the console war as long as they sell many units of the PS4.

Last gen Sony sold near 600% more than the x-box and this gen they're 12-13% below so far. That would indicate that they haven't exactly made the best choices lately and launching a full year after your competitor is a bad, bad idea imo.

I'm not sure why you think it's a huge deal, what you would you prefer calling it?  When you say Xbox 720 people know what you mean, saying Xbox 3 could be confusing, and it's easier to type out than the next Xbox.  Until MS gives us an idea what the name of their next console might be, there's no harm in calling it the 720.

Also, 720 plus 360 isn't 1000, it's 1080.

They lost because their console was $600, not because it came out after Xbox 360.

But honestly, launching late isn't that bad of an idea, so long as you have the power and lineup to back it up. Look at the ps2 and Dreamcast.

The issue with the ps3 was that it came a year after the 360 and was categorically inferior to the 360 in almost every way at launch. Weak network, no in-game XMB, weak first party line up (thanks to Sony focusing on ps2/psp), multiplats that looked better on 360, all for a much higher price. All it had going for it was Blu-ray and far off games like MGS4.

If they can launch a year late with an obvious hardware advantage, a strong first party launch line up (Uncharted and Killzone within the first half a year, for example), and multiplats that are obviously superior on their platform, I think they could pull it off. The refinement of Cell and Blu-ray should allow them to create a powerful successor to the ps3 without the crazy overhead they suffered from last time, leading to a cheaper initial product.

The PS4 will probably launch after Wii 2 and XB3 but I don't think it would be wise to wait to long.

They are both major factors.

if MS and nintendo do launch first sony shouldnt wait to long.. MS launching the 360 a year before ps3 was a BIG! disadvantage for sony