Lets start with the "Its:"

1. "It drove away many devs because it was too hard and costly to develope games for."

Who did it drive away? As a 360 and PC gamer, the PS3 has more and better exclusives than the 360. Can you provide examples of game developers they drove away or lead to Microsoft?

2. "It drove away consumers because the only way Sony could afford to launch the console was at a muc h higher price point than the competition."

Yes, the price from 2006-2009 was drastically higher than the competition. This has been discussed to death. I don't see this happening with the PS4. I will be surprised if the PS4 is above $300 for the entry model.

3. "It drove away gamers because multiplats looked the same (or even worse in some cases) as the Xbox 360's games, this was due to the fact that it just wasn't worth the time or money to make multiplat games utilize the PS3 better."

I could also argue that the $50/year Xbox Live Gold subscription has drove players from the 360 to the PS3's PlayStation Network. If we are debating who has the larger online community, then yes the PS3 is less attractive because less people means less noobs to compete with and get better with.

4. "It cost Sony millions which they are still trying to recoup."

There have been posts about Sony losing $4-5 billion on the PS3 from 2006 until the price drops. This is a much, much heated topic of debate. Hot like the core of the sun.

I disagree no further.

As for Sony, the best they can do is hope that Nintendo does not end this generation before 2014. Once Nintendo starts the next generation all talk of 360 sales vs. PS3 sales vs. Wii sales becomes completely irrelevant as the expectation is now on who has the newest, shiniest console and who will sell the most.

Talking about the PS3 sales once the Wii 2 is out is equivalent to someone crowing about the PS2's sales in 2008. Most will think this branded loser had been hiding under a rock with his PS2 the whole time.

Looking at 2011, I would call it the "year of the PS3." Excellent game lineup.

Then again, it may be the "year that Nintendo 3DS revolutionized the way we look at 3D entertainment and disrupted Sony's 3D television ambitions in the process." Like how Elvis popularized Rock N' Roll but did not create it (Chuck Berry did), it does not matter who created the 3DS technology, but Nintendo will popularize it and forever be associated with it. Same goes for Apple, the iPod and mp3. Apple did not create the mp3, some German techies did, but Apple took it and popularized it with the iPod.

Time will tell. but Sony for the short-term year or so will be just fine and will make more than enough profits to successfully launch the PS4.

My thoughts on PS4...

It wont be a drastic change in "graphics" as we saw from PS2 to PS3. They wont NEED to improve that much. Games like Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2 are graphically stunning. We don't really need games to look much better... And yet we have Killzone 3 and Gran Turismo 5 looking to push that boundary even further. The games look so good now that... They don't need to be looking all that much better.

Blu-ray, I think... Will be used again. There will be a better Blu-ray drive. Bigger Blu-ray discs... And we are yet to see a Blu-ray disc maxed out for a single game. Blu-ray itself is now becoming much more mainstream, but a lot less quicker than DVD did. It would be stupid of Sony IMO to try bring out another new expensive disc tech when Blu-ray is still growing, and can easily be used in the future.

Next gen, Microsoft wont be using DVD's. 360 games are already pushing DVD's. Look no further than the 360's own Forza 3 for one recent example. Forza 4, 5 and maybe even 6 will have much more content and will look much better. Microsoft wont want to use 3 discs for a single game everytime they release a big game. Same for devs. They will need to upgrade... And Blu-ray seems the best bet as of right now IMO.

The Cell. It's fantastic... And now a LOT cheaper than it was before. Again, they don't need to drastically upgrade next time around. A small upgrade on the tech inside the PS3 will keep it looking state of the art and will keep it cheap. Something Sony REALLY need next gen. They don't want to launch another console at $600, losing $200 on each. They don't have to have the best looking games. The PS2 didn't, and it sold 140 Million. The Wii hasn't, and it's breaking more records than I can count.

Games - Speaking of games. Sony have created a LOT of new franchises this generation. The 1st party is bigger than ever before, and they are experiencing GREAT sales from these new franchises. EA have a great partnership with Sony. They have multiple different control options going into the next generation. DualShock, Move, PS Eye. The PlayStation name is still a huge name in gaming. We can see this from continued PS2 sales and even PSP sales that go hand in hand with great PS3 sales.

Speaking of PS2 sales, these will also help. Sony are releasing the PS2 in new markets. These markets will expand and become future strongholds for PS3/PS4 or whatever.

Remember. The sales don't come from the graphics. They come from the games that USE those graphics. If Sony can get out the major titles quickly next gen... Killzone. Resistance. Uncharted. Ratchet. Gran Turismo... They have a great chance of encouraging 3rd parties to work on the console due to the fanbases of said games well... Being there, due to Sony.

If PS4 can release for less than $400, and can get on the market 1st or 2nd... I think it has a great chance of winning the generation.

ZenfolderVGI, did VGChartz pay you to be the joke poster of this site?  Because if they did, they sure aren't getting their money's worth...

Sony has screwed themselves.

Last generation they were a supermajority of the gaming market, with many, many 3rd party games as "Sony exclusives."

Then they launched late, refused to pay 3rd parties for exclusivity, make their console in such a way that it was unaffordable to the vast majority of consumers, and a few other dumbass business moves.

The key thing that screwed them from supermajority to dead last this generation was launching late. Ironically, that also caused them to "profit late" in that they are just now starting to recoup some of the losses from the PS3. They are not in a good position to launch a new console right now, but MS and Nintendo are.

Sony themselves said they are probably going to be launching late again this generation. Somebody help me out with a link. I predict they will launch even later than last gen.

So, let's recap. From supermajority market dominance last gen, to last place in every console race in which they are competing this gen. From tons of great 3rd party exclusives, to almost no 3rd party exclusives. From a dominant brand position to an average brand position, and from launching late to launching later.

The next thing I want to analize is the power of "the cell." The cell really doesn't matter. It's a processor, it's not a GPU. Who gives a shit if it's tapped. The best looking games on the Xbox, with its standard and much easier to program for cpu, don't look that much worse than any PS3 game. Especially when Crysis 2 comes out. The PS3 is not some supermachine. It is not much more practically powerful than the Xbox 360, and if the next gen consoles don't blow it away I'll be fucking astonished, and I won't buy them because they will be shit. I'll just buy a PC, which is already vastly more powerful than the Playstation 3 ever could be in every aspect. The CPU is important, but it is only one part, and it certainly can't open up other bottlenecks. Especially when its more trouble than its worth to develop for, and a half of a gen's worth of multiplats ended up looking like shit because of it. Had Sony launched with a standard cpu, there would be a shit-ton of multiplats out there with better graphics on the PS3, including some big hitters, like Fallout 3, The Orange Box, and Red Dead Revolver. Games that are arguably better than most exclusives on any console.

A much bigger boon and the only good think for the Playstation brand this generation is the extra storage capacity Blu-Ray provides. It has the potential to make future games much better. However, if games are tending towards installation, and/or direct download next gen, then the BR becomes less of a necessity. This is compouned if you compare the read/write speeds of a standard laptop Hard-Disc or even a SDD to a high speed blu-ray drive. However, Blu-Ray has marketability, and thus it is a good thing for Sony. I'm much rather launch early or have some sort of brand handicap though, were I in competition, because I highly doubt the next Xbox launches with just a DVD drive on it.

They're not in a great position, compared to say, the Xbox or the Wii, both coming off their most successful generations ever, red hot, and ready to launch new hardware ahead of the Playstation. This is compounded by the fact that the US, which is dominated by Wii and 360, is quickly becoming the most influential, profitable, and dominant videogame market worldwide, thanks in great part to the decline of the core obscure gaming culture in Japan this generation(Playstation's lifeblood).

Let's talk graphics and games.

We often talk about the Xbox 360 as a console with few relevant exclusives. However, the Xbox is competing with the PS3, much more than the PC in this regard, so it doesn't really need them. All that matters is the console has tentpole multiplats the the PS3 doesn't have. This will stay the same next generation. For fanboy arguments, we can make "exclusive" lists, but that doesn't give a real idea of library quality. As long as the Playstation can't play games like Fable III, Gears III, and Halo, it doesn't matter if PC gamers can. Those games increase the quality of the Xbox 360 library comparitively to the PS3. So, talking about exclusives really isn't giving a clear picture, and in fact, it is giving a purposefully cloudy picture full of bias. The Xbox 360's library is strong because of multiplats. Not only does it get all of the PS360 multiplats, it's also gets all of the PC360 multiplats, as the PC and PS3 rarely share games the Xbox 360 lacks. The vast majority of games, AAA or otherwise this generation are multiplats available on the 360.

My point is, game quality is subjective, and there is an argument that it is also moot from a  marketing perspective. In other words, it doesn't matter than you like Playstation 3 exclusives. They won't drive sales for Sony next gen anymore than they did this gen. Last gen, Sony had tons of 3rd party exclusives, which are now multiplat, and that advantage is now lost forever.

Graphics. They're great this gen. Honest, there isn't a huge difference between top end graphics on the games available on the consoles. It comes more down to artstyle. Given the graphics we've seen in games like Uncharted 2, Gears 3, and Farcry 2, while the PS3 does have a graphical advantage, it is vastly overstated. Imagine this is a highway. The Wii is running about 50 MPH. The Xbox 360 is running about 300 MPH. The PS3 is running about 320 MPH. That difference isn't significant as a marketing tool. It's just not. Now maybe the PS3 will increase in speed, BUT, last generation, the Xbox was arguably much more powerful compared to the PS2, than the PS3 is to the 360. I'd guess it was at about 40 percent more powerful than the PS2, and it had an internal Hard-Drive. Were those things important to Playstation fanboys at that time? Who is to say Sony will continue to have the most powerful console next gen? They probably will since the only way they will have the more powerful console is if they launch later than the competition. It's a double-edged sword.

Just some food for thought. Is Sony really in a better position than Nintendo or Xbox next gen? Think about it. If worst position is defined as screwed, then they are.

actually from math point of view  ps3 would be 420MPH or more.

maybe it's me, but what's with all these threads concerning Sony and their next gen console? I think most would say Sony screwed up this gen,(myself included) not trying to sound fanboyish or trollish, but I hope we're not looking over the success Sony had with the PS1 and PS2. 

though Sony did have a a bad start with the PS3 I think  the PS3 was Sony's test to its future consoles, I don't think we'll see much of a tech-jump when it comes to the PS4, it seems developers haven't even used 100% of the PS3's power so I don't see a reason to why Sony will jump on making/adding something that will make the PS4 just as or even more costly than what the PS3 was at launch. I actually think it's a good idea if sony is the last to unveil their next console, they can't wait and see how MS and Nintendo's consoles are perceived by the public, gamers, and from a technological standpoint and planned what their next gen will cost, how developers will approach it, ect

I believe that sony's next gen console will be somewhere around $375-$450

Someone likes to overanalyze what we can not really know. Just a fantasy in your mind bro.