I still say the Dual Analog system is more versatile. It can be used for FPS, TPS, Driving, Action, Platformers, RPG, you name it.

Certainly, the balance board is better for some things (like Wii Fit and Snowboarding) but if you were to compare the number of things Dual Analog can work for to the number of things that the balance board can work for, you'd notice the Dual Analog has a significant advantage.

All I am saying is that balance boards are not going to become the dominant format of controller. But then, I don't think pure motion sensing will be either. However, I think all of the next gen consoles will include motion sensing to some extent (two of three already do)

Defeated? You mean as in they havent won or they have lost? Yep. Any other questions?

Boring!

Games like that were playable on the PS1.  So... yeah... you would.

For most FPS it would actually  probably be an improvement in immersion. 

Though you'd have to ask why you were silly and walking around on the balance board yet aiming with a D-pad or single control stick, rather then pointing a gun.

If marvel was smart they'd make a Silver Surfer game.  That'd rule.  Just flying around zapping things.

360 will dominate PS3 sales until it gets a price drop.

Depends on what "defeated" means. They can get back to 2nd place (although it's a very long shot), but would that be a big deal if it happens after years, perhaps after the PS4 is even out?

In any case, Sony has much bigger problems to worry about than losing the console race.

That'd be a SNES-like win =)

Well, Sony has already assumed they won't end first. Their forecasts for the current year speak volumes on the subject, and heck it's the only sane assumption.

I think the Sony loyalists have found a messiah in price drops. Unfortunately due to financial constraints this particular messiah has been crucified. I think the unwavering faith has brought about a clearly myopic hindsight. Sony has been more then aggressive. They have been downright foolhardy. They started with a heavy loss leading formula, and in under a year slashed the suggested retail price of their product by a third. The couch analysts on these forums have decided that these measures are not only common, but entirely feasible. Yet they also think that Microsoft cannot do exactly the same thing. They quote Microsoft's losses as proof that Microsoft must make up that deficit, and then behave as if Sony does not.

This is the reality Sony is primarily an electronics company that focuses on high end hardware. The global economic woes do them no favors, and in fact almost guarantee that once profitable divisions at Sony will not be profitable. This was Stringers strategy to focus the company back towards its historical strengths. Unfortunately this also means that the company as a whole is more vulnerable when their core strengths become an economic liability.

To those posters with unwavering faith I ask you a simply question. Where is the money for these price cuts to come from? I mean if most every division at Sony is probably going to lose money who exactly is going to foot this bill. More to the point if the gaming division actually starts to bring in serious cash flow what exactly is to encourage Sony to turn down the flow. They need every dollar they can get. Where is the rational of walking away from the money you need.

There are two opposing trains of thought that result in the same outcome. Sony can either not afford to incur more losses so they cannot cut the price. Sony is actually being profitable on hardware which they need to make their bottom line. No matter how you parse it the PS3 is probably the most price entrenched product on the Sony catalog.

Your thinking about winning a console war at all costs. When Sony must be thinking how can we stay afloat. You are suggesting that Sony must be reckless, and self destructive to wage a war they cannot win, and that is the biggest truth. Sony cannot win, and in fact has no hope of doing so. All they can do is lick their wounds, and try to leave this generation with some future prospects.

The problem isn't just that Microsoft has more money. The problem is that Microsoft has had the fool proof strategy all along. Their online service is the key to their strength. This is quite literally a money generating engine, and the longer it runs the more money it churns out. Microsoft can literally loss lead an entire generation with this model, and still have positive profitability.

That is why it is futile for Sony. The longer a generation goes on the more powerful Microsoft becomes. Six months ago Microsoft may have had ten million gold members. Right now they may have thirteen million. Next holiday season they may have twenty million gold members each paying fifty dollars a year. Do the math they could be grossing a billion annually from Live alone. Before hardware profits, and licensing fees. Let alone the first party developer payout.

The faithful are talking about Sony just getting by. Meanwhile Microsoft will be churning out over a billion dollars in profit annually. Who has the margin to do the most harm. Once Microsoft meets that kind of critical mass the fight is all but hopeless for Sony. The 360 can literally be sold at a hundred dollars by the next holiday season. For Microsoft the money isn't in the hardware its in their gold service.

I read Sony will not let it happen, and I say how the hell can they stop this kind of perpetual motion machine. Eventually Microsoft will rest complete dominance over Sony. The price point is not enough for Sony to turn the tide. What Sony needs to do is begin charging for their online service. That is a stable secondary revenue stream. To have even a hope of winning Sony needs the money to wage this kind of war, and that isn't going to come from eating scraps.

You're one heavy poster. M$ gaming division is not as fool proof as you think but the fact is that windows would always make more than enough money for them. live is nothing compared to windows. Sony doesn't have that luxury and if you ask me, they're no longer fighting the console war, they're fighting for profit. the yens rise against the euro and dollar has been the bigesst hinderance to sony's profitability. In effect, they already cut the price lol.

The exchange rates might actually save the PS3. They might actually see Sony curtail production. Initially producing less will mean they lose less. However that might also prevent a price cut. The ideal situation if your a dirty rotten bastard is for Sony to have a repeat of the 2006 supply debacle. That was one of the fundamental reasons the console saw two drastic price reductions in the first year. Sony produced to many units that did not sell so they began to back up the channel, and began to lock up a large amount of liquid assets.

Sony had one of two choices. The first was to suspend production which would kill their strategy, or they could lower the price to get the channel moving. Even consoles sold at a drastic loss gives you access to the assets that were once locked up in inventory. The reason I say you have to be a dirty bastard is, because if Sony has to eat that kind of loss again early in the next year I have little doubt that the PS3 would be shut down.

Well it should be interesting to see how Sony addresses over production. Given the current economy I just cannot imagine them being able to produce as many machines as they were. They behave responsibly it makes a price cut far more unlikely. They behave idiotically, and churn out the same number of units, and I have little doubt they will pile up in the warehouses.