It might turn out to be a mismatch. Microsoft isn't exactly light on their feet.

Haha, but you know theres always a chance to shake things up.

i've read the whole discussion and apart from a few immature comments, it's been a very interesting discussion. though i'm siding with onimusha right now. i too believe that ms' success was mainly reliant on sony's failure.

I feel that Nintendo's mind was made up long before the announcements of the other two machines, which direction they we going to head in.

But yeah, Microsoft would've tried to undercut Sony no matter what. Wouldn't have mattered though, if Sony never screwed up, because Sony 3/4 years ago where in a position of power.

But they did screw up. They put B-R in their console. Prices were hiked, and because of that, promises were cut (BC etc etc...). They were late to the market, and because of it Microsoft stole support and mindshare.

So yeah, their position now is absolutely down to decisions made years ago, in my opinion. Odds are they still wouldn't have been in first, but they definately could've been in a strong second, instead of being in the sad state they are in now, not even being able to convince third parties from going completely multformat.

@Vdoesntforgive:

A weaker PS3 makes a stronger Wii, theres no such thing as a strong 2nd when the Wii is involved. It makes the PS2 look like a chump competitor in comparison. Think about how strong the Wii would have been if all 7th generation games were ported to it? The only reason why the HD consoles are surviving really is a lack of Wii production and massive losses that both Sony and Microsoft have been willing to take.

 Who are you and what did you do with our friend Squilliam?

Weaker in what sense? I can't think of a justifiable reason for calling the PS3 "weaker" by removing blu-ray, other then having to do more work on compression and what not.

Strong second, weak in the face of the Wii. I won't argue the semantics. The point is, they would've sold more, and they would've lost less. Whether they were still 10 million behind the wii wouln't have mattered, because the position would've been a lot more tolerable for all those involved.

Because you have to acknowledge every mistake they made not just Blu Ray. They made their console hot, power hungry and hard to develop for. The "Blu Ray mistake" is only a portion of the losses they faced when they made the console. Everything that the PS3 is now made it expensive, so to fix every mistake they made would be to make it into something entirely different. The closer the PS3 is positioned to the Wii, the more it will eat it alive. The closer the PS3 is positioned to the Xbox 360 the more Microsoft will be willing to burn through the the dollars to keep Sony down. There is no safe middle ground in this generation for anyone and especially Sony.

Edit: @ Grampy:

I am the demon Reality made manifest through this vessel.

Exactly, which basically boils down what I'm trying to put across (and many other members).

They are where they are because of mistakes they made in the past, B-R just happens to be a big part of that reason, but not the only one. Being late to the market, and as you say, hard to develope for AND having to pay a premium when there is a cheaper alternative pretty much renders developing for a purchasing the system a non priority.

You say positioning the console too close to it's competitors would eat it alive, like what happened with the Cube. I actually do think that is a big problem here. It's far too similar to the 360 right now. Still, launched the same year, $200 cheaper than it was, and things look a lot more rosey for Sony today.

The Cubes problem is that it was far too similar to a strong competitor, the PS3s (hypothetical) problem with the Wii would be it was far too inferior to a strong competitor. Theres the major difference. Furthermore the system has to be a compelling upgrade from current PS2 users, the performance of the current PS3 is one such compelling reason.