The funny thing is the forums looked much the same way they do now. Nintendo fanboys were all up on the Dolphins nuts and the M$ camp was all about how much more powerfull and easy to develop for it was. The price was also an issue talked about on a regular basis. If we take 9 years of inflation into account in addition to all the "extra" features the PS3 comes standard with compared to the PS2 and 360/Wii....I think the price fits. Its still too expensive for strictly gamers, but for the people that see its true worth and can use it to its full potential it is well worth the 600 price tag. That said when Sony drops the price this July/August they should see a jump in sales.....that is if they drop it by at least a 100$. As history has shown though, we cant count out Sony. 10 million is a decent number but not even close to 120m +. Thats a lot of potential price/game watchers just waiting for there games to launch or for the price to drop. Hell I know a number of people that are waiting for the die shrink.

Agree...

yeah the PS2 was constanly sold out when it launched in October of 2000 until April of 2001. The PS3 was constanly sold out in November of 2006 until the first week of January of 2007. I still see the PS3 being very successful with price cuts, exlcusive games, and very good marketing.

Another thing to consider is that when you're trying to make predictions about the future based on very limited information it is quite difficult to be correct. Early on the Dreamcast sold quite well and there was reason to think that it could have built a healthy following, by the time the PS2 launched it was clear the Dreamcast wouldn't save Sega. At the same time you could have expected Nintendo to be more agressive with the Gamecube's line-up than they were which would have dramatically improved their userbase; had Nintendo released Mario, Zelda, Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart and Metroid Prime in the first 12 months of the Gamecube's life it would have sold far better.

You can't say "Sony's consoles last around 8 years" based off the PS1 and PS2...

And yeah, this has at least one other thread talking about this article, but whatever.

What's with the slew of multiple threads in the past few days? It's hurting my head.

Oh my, there's some serious wishful thinking going on in this thread. First of all those arguments for why the PS2 would fail are completely bogus.

The Dreamcast was already dead when it launched. It was a nice console, but wasn't in any position to compete with anyone. Sega had lost a huge chunk of its fanbase, financial resources, and most importantly developer support with the Saturn. Heck, even Segata Sanshiro was dead. You can't make a console without Segata Sanshiro.

The price factor was also completely different back then. The difference between $300 and $200 is only a hundred bucks, and we can safely say that kind of an amount doesn't make a huge difference. Not to early adopters anyway, as a vast majority of PS2s only got sold after the machine dropped to $200 and below.

The Gamecube turned out to be much later than this guy though, and it didn't exactly have a stunning launch line up. Luigi's Mansion was ok, but no system seller, while the next Mario was Sunshine (probably the weakest game in the main Mario series) and the next Zelda was the impressive Wind Waker in late 2002/early 2003. I love my Cube, but there's no denying it was in a very weak position to compete against the PS2. The same with the Xbox really.

And no, people in general were not saying the PS2 was going to fail. Most people knew it was going to do very well, and the people spelling doom were about as attached to reality as the people who think the PS3 is doing well now. Anybody else remember this gem? That's what the news was like back then.

The PS3 on the other hand has a price twice as high as any succesful console has ever had and has practically no chance of ever lowering it to mass-market levels. The launch games were average with one great title, the first year contains only a few gems, the big titles have been pushed into very late 2007/early 2008, and most importantly the next destination of virtually all big third party games is extremely uncertain.

Then there's also, how instead of launching a year before the competition, the PS3 came out last/second last, instead of having a 15M lead has a handicap of 7M that's growing daily, and how instead of weak competiton is facing one console that is doing substantially better than the 24M seller last round, and another that is having the best first year of any console in history. It's doomed and there's no way around it.

Oh, and please stop saying Sony consoles last 8+ years. Succesful consoles last that long, the company had nothing to do with it.

You're wrong. The vast majority of the people love the box.

First off... Playstation3 is not going to die off or anything. It's currently the most powerful system on the market and it will have some exclusives along with a price cut that will help it out. However, I don't think it will dominate the way PS2 or the original did. It will be a second or third place system most likely.

Secondly Wii isn't going anywhere either. While it may be the weakest graphics wise it's priced right and Hardware wise may very well end up winning this generation of consoles. Software wise Nintendo systems sell Nintendo games. Let's be honest the Gamecube and N64 didn't sell for the strong 3rd party support.

And last but not least XBOX360 might have a minor problem in my area at least nobody touched 360 last holiday season and to be honest with you while I think Halo 3 is going to sell systems the other problems it might have is 1. Alot of people who wanted Halo 3 already bought it and 2. Let's face it everybody who had an XBOX and wanted the upgrade(since it was more or less required) might have a 360 already. Still these are minor problems at best and the 360 will most likely sell very well this holiday season.

 its called code names.. the code names become the name of the CPU or GPU in their system just like the 360's codename was Xenon, the xenon is the GPU. The only console that doesnt go by code names is the PlayStation brand.

 It was bad mouthed by one guy on a forum and apperantly almost no one agreed with this guy, tons of people posted counter arguments in behalf of Sony, and the guy was called a Sony basher. Apperantly no one remembers that either.

Here are other quotes from other posters:

• "P.S. playstation2 shall reign supreme, so let it be written, so let it be done."
• "I forsee PS2 being successful"
• "PSX2 WILL DO VERY GOOD.
  I CAN TELL. I KNOW WHEN A SYSTEM IS GOING TO SELL ALOT AND
  THE PSX2 WILL BE ONE OF THEM.! YOU WILL SEE!"
•  "that shows how viable and strong the market and capabilites of the playstation were. just imagine what they can do with the playstation 2."
• "I predict it will sell 1 and a half million pre orders alone in the U.S. and also 1 and a half million systems in the first week alone which will embarrass the dreamcraper."

Now there were some against it but hardly the anti-ps2 campaign many paint it as. Plus all the rips about it's price were because no one knew it yet, they were going off in some cases about a $500 price tag. Where the ps3 actually had a high price tag, so some of that was a misconception.