I believe it worthed the risk for Sony, about the price tag. Atleast its a state of the art console

When Sony doesn't need 3 years to milk the "true" power of its system, it'll be in business.

Still there's not much they can do when videogames today look pretty damn similar. I don't think Joe SpaceMarineLover cares that KZ2 pushes more polys than Gears or CoD4.

 state of the art? how? cause Sony tells you?

90%+ of the PS3 library is available on the 360......and dozens of those multiplats perform better on 360.

Its a state allright !

Sony defeated Sony sure. But they also defeated Toshiba who is also a huge company. Remember HD-DVD? It's dead and Bluray sales are up 500% over last year.

Nintendo has defeated Sony but c'mon the 360 killed Playstation? Ok let's take a look

The 360 has an 8 million console lead over the PS3 but the PS3 is twice as expensive.

Every person who goes into the store and chooses PS3 does so knowing that they could get 2 360's for the same price. But does 360 have twice as many consoles sold then 360? Lol of course not. And don't forget that the 360 came out a full year before the PS3 with almost a 6 million console lead before the Plastation 3 had even come out. And look this week the PS3 outsold the 360 at TWICE THE PRICE. That's not defeating anything except the original X-Box.

PSN is growing, Bluray is growing, PS3 userbase is growing and there's nothing Microsoft can do to stop it. No matter how many developers they pay for exclusives, No matter how many money bombs they drop on Marketing no matter how much FUD the lace the net with. The PS3 will still outsell the 360 by generations end. PS3 pricedrop day will be like a troll holocaust for all the Fanboi's who love to spam that "teh PS3 is dooomed" .

It was worth the risk for Sony to undermine consumer demand? You know that means they don't give a shit what you think as a consumer right? They only fell inline because they knew it would cost them.

I love these threads, it makes me think about all the historical revisionism in the past. If only, if only, if only.

Sony lost this generation without firing a shot people. The Wii was always going to win, it was always a question about 2nd place.

Now, what incentive is there for people with a PS2 to upgrade to a PS3 if the PS3 isn't significantly more powerful? Its not like they delivered any other major changes apart from network play and performance. Furthermore the closer they position themselves to the Wii the weaker their position becomes and the stronger the Wiis position becomes.

I fixed it for you.  But your kind of thinking happens every day, by a LOT of people.  I could have compared it by those numbers, but everyone knows what they look like.  Everyone sees those numbers all of the time. Most people don't see the real numbers.

release year vs. release year. You can tell me it doesn't matter.  But why?  Do you have an answer?  The fact remains that after 2 years on the market the PS3 outsold the 360 after 2 years on the market.  But you can't stand that can you? (not directed towards any one person   =P   )

Sony has had a higher price tag.  Most of you think that killed the PS3.  Well the numbers say otherwise.  I don't like to talk about sales and numbers but it's the only thing I can do right now to back up the fact that the PS3 has not been defeated by anyone (including itself). 

+1. I hate how fanboys talk about how Sony would've been in the lead this gen if the price was right. It was always a battle for second place. Theres no way around that.

By modeling the PS3 to more closely resemble the Xbox than the PS2 and the constant focus on competing directly with the 360 that bordered on obsession Sony clearly defeated themselves. Why focus on the online experience and multimedia capabilities when you underdeveloped both? How did launching a year late with the most expensive and developer unfriendly system make sense? Sony was sabotaged internally... or monkeys run the company.