First, this graph is based on NPD.  It doesn't include European figures, where both Uncharted and Gran Turismo 5 Prologue enjoyed the bulk of their sales.

Second, this is only because Sony has yet to release a title the caliber of Halo or Mario Kart.  Their big game was MGS4, a third party title.

Killzone 2 and God of War III should help somewhat, but the major release is Gran Turismo 5, which will probably sell more than even Halo, thus increasing the attach rate dramatically.

So long as games sell enough to become profitable, we shouldn't be worried about this. The only thing is that some older titles like Lair might have never broken even, but the vast majority, like Uncharted, Ratchet & Clank, Resistance, and soon Resistance 2 and LittleBigPlanet, have been profitable, and the sales of Gran Turismo 5 Prologue have probably already covered all of GT5's development costs thus far.

The thing that's really hurting them are the games that have been in development for years that have yet to come out, like Killzone 2. During the first two years of the ps3's life, dozens of titles were being developed by Sony, with only a handful coming out each year to make back money spent. Starting soon, many of those titles that have been in development for a long time are finally being released (Killzone 2, InFamous, White Knight Chronicles), thus finally bringing Sony a return on their investment.

Unless you think all of these games will flop, i wouldn't be too worried about it.

The data in of itself I have no problems with.  The problem I have is the blatant misinterpretation and misinformation which is so typical of just taking a small piece of the picture and projecting it as the whole.  Attachment rates/ratios take a back seat to profits because if you aren't making a worthy profit, it's not worth investing in regardless of attachment rates/ratios.  You can have a high attachment rate/ratio and still not make a profit depending on the actual dollar amount you are investing.  And we don't know how much SONY is making as a whole in regards to their software.  In fact, another way you can look at this whole thing is that it's an incentive for third party developers to continuing supporting the PS3 because of their high attachment/ratio.  And with that, the royalties from third parties makes it all worth it for SONY.  See, just as it's easy to negatively spin this from the OP's point of view, anyone can do the exact opposite with the limited data given.  And since this thread is foucsed on SONY, what about priced PSN downloads?

In the end, the limited relative data serves next to nothing substancial without real absolute numbers.  This thread = misinterpreted and misinformative negative hype.

You realize that Ratchet & Clank:ToD, Heavenly Sword, Folklore, Lair, Gran Turismo 5P, SOCOM: Confrontation, WKC, and a host of other titles (SingStar? BUZZ?) are 2nd party titles, not 1st, right? I think even Motorstorm may have qualified as 2nd party when it was released... I think Sony bought that studio afterwards.

Sony hasn't released very many 1st party games for the PS3 yet... Uncharted, WipEout HD, Motorstorm: Pacific Rift, ...heck I can't even think of any others. This chart is very misleading in that regard.  Since it doesn't draw any lines between 1st and 2nd parties, you can only "assume" where the chart author is throwing the titles I mentioned above.  

Be careful you're not tripping over some finely woven "spin".  The chart also neglects to mention that, if you extrapolate attach rates/tie ratio given current sales figures (i.e. as you move the beginning of the graph toward the present), the situation is much, much different...  Assuming from this static set of data, that "up goes more up" and "down goes more down" would lead you in the opposite direction from the truth.

Ignore the Wii in this, just use the Xbox 360 numbers. Sony has a much larger 1st party that Microsoft, so to feed and profit from them they have to see a lot more 1st party games relative to the Xbox 360. "Selling" less than 1 1st party game per console and having many of them bundled for free anyway is not good for Sonys overall profitability.

Now I know the big hitters don't come until next year, games like KZ2 and GOW III etc. They have been very expensive games to develop, probably costing more than your standard multi-platform game considering the time its taken to get them to market. So even with full profitability they probably need to average 1 Million sales on every game just to break even on them (Advertising + Development and publishing costs)

The goal here, I guess is to see Sony come into profit on the Playstation 3. Without profit, they cannot drop the price and without dropping the price they can't boost console sales significantly enough to increase software sales in the long term to break even on the Playstation 3. Its like a catch-22 and the crutch of this matter is those first party games have to profit Sony for their lengthy development.

Im not saying that they won't, im just saying that they really do have to sell well. Motorstorm 2 this week wasn't really a good start for their first parties in the holiday season and LBP may not have cost a lot to develop, but im pretty sure they spent a lot to advertise the game.

What comes first the chicken or the egg? In this case, the egg has to hatch (Killzone 2) and that chick has to lay golden eggs of its' own for them to consider dropping the price in Q1 2009. They promised golden eggs to their investors and without being able to show them off, they haven't got a leg to stand on in relation to dropping the price of the PS3.