With Move integrated in every console. Without the Cell or any other advanced component back then.

It probably would:

-Outsold the PS2

-Marketshare of +70% like last gen

-Possibly Microsoft out of the gaming business? Understand this, MS had a lot of difficulties with the RROD in the first few years. A dominating PS3 and a good Wii performance would probably force Microsoft to get out of the gaming business if it sold 3 times as less units as they do now. Coupled with the fact that multiplatform games would all be optimized for Move/Wiimote control, leaving MS in a situation like Nintendo is now.

I'm glad it didn't turn out that way tho, I love the PS3 as it is and its my favourite console, I wouldn't like a weaker PS3 with Move as the standard controller, even if it meant PS3 dominating this gen.

I'm gonna say yes

Well... Let's be happy it didn't.

Competition is good. Do you think we would have gotten so much greatness if the PS3 didn't have anything to out-show?

Ofcourse they would have, imagine you're back in 2006, everyone's crazy about da ps3. A 200 dollar less costing PS3 with Move would steal the thunder both from 360 and Wii launch.

With the same Sony advertising? Wii would dominate and 360 would be the core machine.. PS3 would be distant third... their marketing somehow got really disconnected to... everything..

Sub 399, Move integrated... You mean if Sony made the Wii?

But all kidding aside, they would probably be in a better position than now. Microsoft would still have the advantage of launching first, and because of the lower-tech PS3 they would have the strongest console for what that's worth. Outsold the PS2, most likely not, because that console had everything going for it. This Gen, MS would've still received the multi-plats and survived at least.

If they'd integrated Move from the beginning and had a Wii Sports type game for it, there's no telling what it would have done to Nintendo though. This Gen for them would probably have been a lot slower.

What's (basically) certain is that Sony wouldn't be in the same financial crisis as they are now. In hindsight, it was a stupid decision to make the PS3 as is.

It would be 2nd place now thats forsure.

But one tinsy tiny thing......Sony was at the time selling the $599 PS3 at a massive loss. A $399 PS3 would have been a ungodly amount of red ink on top of the money it would have cost them.

A nice what-if alternate universe, but I like this dimension just fine :)

Its E3 2005, Sony sees the Revolution and realize its a potential gold mine. They abandon Cell, RSX, make a more powerful PS2 with HD support, call it the PS3, come up with the Move or a more advanced version of the Eyetoy integrated packed with every PS3 system.

he got banned for a few days..

Impossible to say. The PS2 was in a prime situation and the landscape was different then. Also, it's been demonstrated that many people who fell victim to the RRoD were content to stay with the 360, perhaps because they liked it until it died, or because they already had a personal library assembled.

I doubt the PS3 would have "won" North America regardless, give what hits Halo and Gears were with the shooter crowd.

People keep comparing the PS3 to the PS2 despite circumstances being a lot different. The same thing is likely to happen with the Wii U, even though the way the Wii went viral with the casual crowd was a lightening-in-a-bottle situation that can't be expected to happen in consecutive generations. I'm already rolling my eyes at all the soon-to-be "the Wii U is a failure because the Wii sold better" posts.

Besides, Microsoft spent large sums of money at the start of this generation buying times exclusives. They weren't going to be denied a share of the market.