I actually think your estimations for 360 and PS3 are too high. I would say the 360 does between 300-400k a month, and the PS3 does between 200-300k.

Well just because I don't want to look to far back last week the Xbox360 sold about 88k in a week the PS3 sold about 43k and the Wii sold about 235k so that would come out to roughly 352k for the Xbox360 a month 172k for the PS3 and 940k for the Wii that's just a rough estimate though. As to the topic basically all it seemed like to me was that for the time being the Xbox360 and the PS3 are closer to the PC couterparts than they needed to be I believe John Romero had an interview where he talked about this idea as well.

I think the guy is right. Historically, consoles have sold at launch for about $200 to $300. Now there are 2 console makers that sell well over that price. Instead of making incremental increases, Sony and MS made huge jumps in technology. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but they have to realize that most people are not willing to make a huge jump in price.

Only Sony fans could pretend the words of Square-Enix's CEO have no weight.

And tell me, how many of these 360/Ps3 games will be anything more than the mediocre tripe we've already seen released on their consoles? Certainly the Wii's lineup is nothing to brag about either at this point but time and time again we see the 360/PS3 fans elevate yet another upcomming title to god-like expectations only to watch it barely make a plop in the market's ocean. How many of these awesome lineup games for the 360/PS3 aren't just Halo clones, Motorstorms or Virtua Fighter 5s? How many of them offer anything more than graphics to justify our excitement us at this point? What if anything do you know about the gameplay of these projected titles when all we have for the majority of them are just polished screen shots?

Getting excited about an upcomming game on the 360/PS3 just because its graphics look awesome is about as sensical as getting excited about an upcomming game on the Wii because it uses the Wii-mote.

No one is arguing the Wii has a loaded deck yet in terms of games, but only being its first year it has the potential to grow and expand while the 360 and Ps3 only seem to be narrowing their markets shoveling out games that are sold on graphics and the bad boy factor, not gameplay. And while this is also the PS3's first year we basically already know everything that's comming out for it in the next two years at least so don't act there any room for the same optimism that can be afforded the Wii. Call the Wii's library mini-games if you want but after seeing the typical play time (start to finish) of a game on the 360/PS3 shrink to a standard of 6-10 hours of single player gameplay, I'm not sure how you can really call your own titles anything other than mini-games anymore. Online play is not a substitute for content, its a supplementary feature.

In my opinion,this 7th generation,so far,is terrible.

So... more Dragon Quest and Final Fantasy games on the Wii and DS? Right on.

From an objective stand point, the games are pretty terrible thus far as a whole.

 I think it's better...lots more attention, lots more innovation, technology, and more reaching out to the mainstream...

The Wii truly is a gaming console only, it's not a "entertainment center", and its not so much that the PS3 and the 360 are overengineered. It's the cost which is directly related to how the system is built (ex Blu ray drive in the PS3). Microsoft and Sony are trying to make a jack of all trades, but really what most people want is a gaming console.