If a product has features they want at a price they are willing to pay, then it has value regardless of how much profit the manufacturer makes.

While a product that has all the technology in the world given away for free provides little value if it has features that people aren't interested in.

The Wii provides certain features that the PS3 and 360 do not, including but not limited to ease of use, interactivity and available software. To many consumers, these features are more important than graphics and internet connectivity.

Okay. This statement is wrong and interesting. We have a company here that is basically changing it's strategy and doing to much trash talking. It is true that if you include all the features the PS3 could be considered a better value but here's the thing. Nintendo's Wii actually gives you the ability to play games of all types in new Unique and innovative ways, it also has internet access and is $250.00. The PS3 is playing catchup for the most part. Also what I find comical is the fact that $250.00 is considered overpriced when this company expected you to pay $299.99 for a PS one or maybe I should start referring to it as a really expensive CD player.

Ouch, ok I read most of the important parts >.>

First this was just Sony patting themselves on the back - next Pachter was mentioned so ignoring that part.

"``For the first time since the console launched, I really think there's more reason to buy a PS3 than the 360,'' said Todd Greenwald, an analyst at Signal Hill Capital Group in Baltimore."

Who is this Todd Greenwald?

Clearly he's not video game industry analyst - so what kind of analyst is he? Business? No because then he would understand the industry of the business he is analyzing and this part of Sony from what I can tell should be in the gaming industry. This man has confused me with just that statement and so has Bloomberg's writer as neither seem to understand the industry they report on.

Gaming is no different from the movie industry - in how it's sold, Actors don't put money in the pockets of investors and all the other guys a long the way, consumers do, producers and directors don't make box office hits; consumers do that.

If any investors are still listening to these guys then they must be the most loony daffs I could ever imagine, and I want them to invest in me. I could use a n extra billion. ;)

Did I come in at the wrong time?
In the middle of a 'LOLZ GRAPHIKZ < GAEMPLAI LOLZOMGWTF' fight?

On topic, this is a horrible interview, I thought it was a joke at first. D:

So, is Nintendo bashed for being in this business for making money?

Because... who isn't? You think any company thinks about the customer or about the money they're investing?

Woo the Ps3! Best blu-ray player ever! Shame about some of the games though

Don't shoot me, i had to.

Very well said!

And needless to mention that with just a Wii you can enjoy games from Commodore64 to NES - SNES - N64 to Gamecube while with the expensive PS3 people are still confused that cannot play the previous Sony console games... go figure!!!

Wow. Just wow. I don't even believe he said that.

I mean.  There is nothing wrong with spin... but usually you want it to be somewhat factual rather then calling the 250 dollar machine expensive compared to yours which is almost twice as.

   You do know you've been able to play all the games on virtual console and more for free for at least 10 years right?  I have been able to find ROMs not only of all the old hits, but translated versions of games that never saw the light of day in the US (Secret of Mana 2 for instance).  If anything the whole virtual console thing is heavily overpriced.  I mean 10 dollars for a 22 year old game?  Come on.  For about 30 seconds I thought about buying sonic the hedgehog and a few other VC games, then I remembered the ROM thing and thought better of it.

   And its about value at the time.  At the time of its release the PS1 was pretty close to cutting edge (remember how amazed a lot of people were by the cutscenes in FFVII?) just like the SNES was when it came out.  The difference between charging 299 for a SNES or a PS1/2 and 250for a Wii is the Wii is not at the cutting edge or even close to it.  With the old hardware in it the Wii should be closer to the 99 dollars the gamecube ended up at then the 250 it is at.  Yes people will pay more, but as it stands the value is NOT the same for the Wii and for other consoles like the SNES, PS1, or even gamecube at their release.