Well your personal experience is irrelevant or maybe your memory is fuzzy. I just gave you a list of core titles they pushed over the years. I forgot to mention they had some exclusive advertising on Homefront. If you're only seeing Kinect commercials its probably because of the programs you're watching.

Obviously Kinect is going to be a major focus, strike while the iron is hot. MS hasn't published games yet for 2011 but they generally save their big releases closer to the holiday. For the record, the biggest titles they'll be publishing are core titles.

If you don't have a source then drop it. It has no weight. More importantly, whatever money spent it was to rebrand the 360 and they plan on pushing it for years to come. That's a lot cheaper and less risky than launching a new console.

You act like pushing Kinect is somehow a bad move. In retrospect, it seems they did everything right to make it a massive success. When MS actually stops marketing and publishing core games, then maybe your argument might have some validity.

Sony will have to do someting but i don't see the past repeating its self. i think Sony will come out swingging next gen. they have eruope which is proving to be most valuable to them.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-10-18-kinect-gets-USD500m-marketing-spend

Kinect Advertising budget, as reported by the New York Post, is over $500 million dollars.  5 seconds in google.

Also, Kinect has sold well, but then it was expected to be a total flop.  And I hardly think 10 million units sold is going to overtake a $500 million dollar advertising budget.

http://www.joystiq.com/2011/03/09/microsoft-10-million-kinect-units-kinect-games-sold/

lol yeah they know taking on Sony directly is suicide

OT: seems more like what would the hopes dreams of Nintendo and Mircosoft fanboys (not calling op a fanboy) in seeing Sony lose another gen because they won't sell a lot at that price.

but reality regarding the next gen playstation is this, the ps3 was expensive at lunch because it's eternal components where extremely expensive given how new they were to the market and that next gen that wont be the case, that Sony can do a console that's 1080p, 60 fps 3d console for half the price it cost to make, cell processors are 4 times as powerful as the current ps3 cell would cost half what the ps3 cell cost, better, larger blu ray disc with faster blu ray drives and leave no need to search for a new disc medium unlike MS and Nintendo and a more efficient specifically designed GPU, would yeild much better results for 3rd party developers.

the ps4 at launch (that would be 400 dollars to make) selling said console for a 100 dollar loss 299 entry price, but being able to produce way more than they could the ps3, and losing a lot less than they did, that coupled with an easier console to develop for would mean MUCH better launch titles that release a lot sooner than it took for the heavy hitters for ps3 to come out, which would mean a much higher market penetration and higher software sales.

Long term is something Sony longs for, and we can't forget the ps3 which will be selling gang busters in all the developing nations like the ps2 was, future looks bright for Sony

Not a very helpful answer, I'm afraid.

What happened this generation is that, despite the initial assumption that the PS3 would dominate over it's competitors, it's initial sales were low, and the console as a whole was unprofitable. However, due to the very high sales of the PS2, and the high profit margin, the PS division as a whole managed to keep on keepin on until the PS3 had some price cuts and got some good games.

So you are predicting that the PS4 will initially be assumed to dominated over the Wii2 and 720, its initial sales will be low and be unprofitable, but the PS3 will somehow start selling close to PS2 levels, and start earning lots of profit, which will allow the PS4 some breathing space.

Sounds pretty dubious to me.

and a casual one

how many people said that AFTER the 599.99 bombshell, people who should not have been taken seriously I hope

Well you proved me wrong... no wait. That was a claim, the article says MS never confirmed.

This article claims the Kinect only cost $56 to produce... http://www.geek.com/articles/games/kinect-components-only-cost-56-20101112/

If that's the case, surely they made that alleged $500 million back. Also, they had big profits in the last quarter reports so I'd guess Kinect is already in the black. Don't forget all that advertising wasn't just for Kinect. It also helped sell consoles, software, accessories, etc.

You're downplaying Kinect's success and you're under the illusion MS is all casual now. I'm starting to think you aren't a fan.

would be dead

If that were to happen, Microsoft and Nintendo might just stand a fighting chance.