The PS3 would have needed to be designed completely differently in order to make a $300 price point ... Otherwise the assumption is about as realistic as assuming that Microsoft launched the PS3 in Japan with Final Fantasy XIII as a launch game.

If the PS3 launched at $400, James Brown and Anna Nicole Smith wouldn't have died. That price point had more reprecussions than we will ever know.

 Wow, that was an excellent post.

Just like how you blindly stumbled into this thread and blindly pressed buttons on your keyboard.

If the PS3 launched at $400, it either wouldn't have had the Cell or wouldn't have had a Blu-ray drive, or both.  And Sony wouldn't have gotten all the egg on their face with the entire Internet making fun of "599 US dollars."  And sure, they would have sold a lot more.  They might even have had more developer support (likely, given the amount of support the PS2 had).

In short, if things hadn't been the same, they would've been different. 

If they had the 40 gb out during launch it would be 3 maybe 4 million behind the 360 because of the lack of good games.

Wii would still be in first place, but PS3 would be doing better

Guys, what if the Playstation Three had launched for just one dollar? It would be so far ahead by now!

 Each game would by like 150 though

They had a 20 GB with full backward compatibility at launch until July.

I don't think it would have changed anything...

 No, we dont "all" know. I have 12 games for my PS3 (and i cant think of a bad one); and if i was in the US id have 14 by the end of next week with UT3 and the Orange Box.

 On topic however, I think Sony would have seen more short term success. But, without the Blu-Ray ability or Cell Processor as others have pointed out, it would have resulted in long term failure. 

 So, on a year basis it would be in a better position, but I see this last year of relative failure for Sony as a necessary for the overall success of the console.