I'd be interested in see the attach rates for the individual games. How many sales will PS3 games have if the same attach rates of these successful games are applied to the PS3 base? Would that even be close to making them profitable?

Why you all act like every PS2 game launched with over 100 millon PS2 ?

.. Jak and Daxter hit only USA where there were 8 million PS2 sold.

but aperantly every PS2 game launched with a +100 milion user base.

Yea, the titles are not all sony's but are there because of Sony. The idea is to have a killer library in addition to awesome first party. and out of those 13 2 are atrributed to the N64 (not including bundled games).

but just as redspear mentioned a few games do not win a war but there can be a correlation to the library. The PS1 and the PS2 had the most amount of million sellers out of all consoles period. Most likely this is god because more than a million sold means the gamecompanies profited instead of just breaking even.

In the last generation the Xbox had 4 titles published by MS to break 1 million. Nintendo had 17 and Sony had 12 or so. I am just trying to say that sony has alot more competition on the PS2 and there games most likely sold this well under merit. Where as Nintendo normally dominates their system in which they shine because they are the lifeline of the system. I am not saying that SOny is trying to become the lifeline of the PS3 I think they more or less want to set the bar and it seems as if they are going to do so full force.

Maybe I should rephrase ...

On any system which is selling a lot of units strong selling games will get a (potentially massive) boost in sales largely because they're on a popular system. Essentially, you could replace my question about the PS2 with the DS and it still stands ... Basically, as much as I think New Super Mario Bros is a fantastic game I think it is fair to say that (possibly) half of its sales are because it is on a popular system and has very little to do with the actual quality of the game.

 First off we dont know howhow much PS3 sales changed in march yet. Wait till the middle of the week.

Second. Someone said it in here... Sonic is a hardcore game. WTF dude. Seriously, if Sonic is 'hardcore' So is Mario, and if Mario is hardcore, super rub a dub is hardcore. Thus every game in existance is hardcore.

Sonic is NOT hardcore.

Ok, other than that I dont have anything to add. 

Hard-Core is a remarkably stupid phrase because it is so pooly defined and is (ultimately) up to interpretation ...

Now, I think Nintendo's "Core-Gamer" phrase is a little more accurate to what people tend to mean ...

Basically there are games (which Mario and Sonic are obviously a part of) that are conventional games which tend to sell well to the "Core-Gamer" market; at the same time there are other games (Nintendogs, Guitar Hero, The Sims) which sell to a more casual or non-gamer market.

Ps3 has no future. it failed.

With halo3 and the Nintendo Killer apps coming out swinging. PS3 has no hope to ever recap the number one spot.

Expect an early PS4. 

I agree that calling a game "Hard Core" is pretty lame.

Doom 3 - You go around collecting bullets, health, guns, etc. Solve puzzles (also jumping platforms) while killing monsters and giant bosses to reach and kill a giant final boss.

Super Mario 64 - You go around collecting coins, heath, weapons (mushrooms, flying caps), etc. Solve puzzles (jumping platforms) while killing creatures and giant bosses to reach and kill a giant final boss.

So how is Mario not "Hard Core"?