Alright so we all know that in gaming graphical power has never ever actually pushed hardware. Yes I know fanboys will be enraged but its a fact that great graphical capabilities have never actually pushed hardware sales, the most beautiful system is never the system on top of the market?

Proof

NES kills Master System

GameBoy kills GameGear

Super Nintendo Kills Genesis

PlayStation kills Nintendo64/SegaSaturn/ Atari Jaguar/3DO

PlayStation2 kills (GameCube/X-Box and litterily kills DreamCast)

Nintendo DS Kills PSP

Nintendo Wii kills PS3/360

It would appear that anybody wanting to really push the graphical envilope end up futal in their attempts covered in debt and largely unrecognized for their efforts. I mean even today games like Crysis don't sell as well as expected. because people just either don't have the hardware to play them or don't care to invest in hardware to play them. For years PC gamers have bragged that PC is the home of real gamers but honestly do those high powered pretty games actually sell? World Of WarCraft for example doesn't have the newest hardware pushing graphics.

So why am I talking about this, how does it relate to the current war? Link thats right the PlayStation3 has lost Sony over 3-Billion dollars in losses. Last generation the X-Box lost over 4-Billion dollars by selling its X-Box hardware cheaper then it cost to manufacture. With the PS3 still being sold cheaper then the hardware costs and only two years into the generation it would appear that PS3 will loose out to Nintendo Wii if not even to its more competitive (Graphics wise) X-Box 360.

So is it just me or do gamers care way more about graphic quality and cost of gaming then actual next generation stunning graphics. I mean if the PlayStation2 could litterily kill Sega and take on far superior hardware like GameCube and X-Box. If Nintendo Wii can trash the PS3 do graphics even push hardware.

Today in China the Vii is beating the Wii, in North America and Japan the Wii is beating the PS3. Around the globe the DS is royally kicking the PSP's butt (Long term). Is making an extremely powerful console even worth it anymore, does graphical power even push hardware these days or is it all about price and software?

Or maybe just maybe, the wii has a different style of gameplay and it attracts different consumers..

Or it could be that this gen people cant afford a ps3 or 360.

(Hint ps1 wasnt the weakest)

Crysis did not bomb. It sold 1.5 millions, still selling and making a profit and the deals wth Nvidia made it even more money.

Yes it was. The saturn was more powerful, but never utilised to it's full potential, and the n64 was more powerful than both of them.

The Super Nintendo was the most powerful console of its generation, at least in graphical power. The 3DO was in the fifth generation.

The system with the hype, accessibility and reasonable price gets the top spot. if most console gamers were really that much concerned about graphics they would instead turn to more powerful consoles or PC gaming.

Hype is the most important. That's how PS2 killed Dreamcast.

Genesis was more powerful than Super Nintendo. Snes supported more colors but Genesis had the juice to make the games run much smoother and with more stuff on-screen.

It's true, btw nice title ;)

Still, no game on Genesis looks as good as the Donkey Kong Country series and Super Mario RPG.

That could explain this generation but not explain every other past generation. Also PS was the weakest platform of its generation. Can you name a weaker platform? Saturn/Jaguar and Nintendo 64 all beat the PlayStations graphics hands down. Prices aren't too much of an excuse today I can go pick up a 360 for around 300$ and the Wii is within the hundred dollar price differance. The Wii is still selling millions more then the 360 and the 360 is still beating the PS3. Actually when looking back it actually appears the console that is the weakest tends to triumph with the exception of the CD-i!