Among a small group of Sony fans, it's commonly assumed that the PS3 will outlast the 360 by at least two to three years in the marketplace and thus will overtake the 360 in hardware sales in the end. But is this really going to happen? Here are five excellent reasons why the 360 will probably have a longer lifespan than the PS3:

1. The first Xbox was dropped fast because of contracts with Nvidia - Microsoft didn't get any benefits from the cost reductions Nvidia made and therefore the Xbox lost a lot of money on hardware sales throughout its whole life which was a good enough reason for MS to drop the support for an already dying platform quickly and focus on their next console. That's not going to happen with the 360 because Microsoft was smarter this time around and does benefit from all cost reductions made on the hardware.

REPLY:  Yes MS do benefit from the reductions, but how far now can they reduce?  They have already dropped the price of the 360 considerably and how much further can they feasibly go?  They are now 4 years into their timeline and we can't expect any major reductions to the price over the coming 1-2 years, maybe a $50 here or there.  So realistically the 360 is getting the benefit at the moment from the low price and of course will get a bit more benefit when it comes down lower, but the PS3 has yet to reach that magical pricepoint yet and it's still selling not too badly considering the Wii and 360 are seriously considerably lower.

2. Customers decide how long a console's life is, not the companies - If people start to stop buying a system and its games, retailers reallocate shelf space to more viable platforms and third party publishers reallocate their resources resulting in the death spiral for the console. Once that starts to happen, there isn't much a company can do anymore.

REPLY:  Of course they do, if they don't buy then the consoles won't sell, but there is no reason for consumers to stop buying just now or at anytime unless they either have no money or a new console comes out and is better than the current models.

3. The 360 and the PS3 share the vast majority of third party games - With the high development costs of HD titles, multiplatform games became the norm. Unless Microsoft or Sony offer incentives, third party games will be available on both consoles. Should one system start to enter the death spiral, the other machine will be affected as well, because its number of upcoming games will also shrink. The fates of the HD consoles are closely tied together.

REPLY:  Yes they do share 3rd party games, one reason for this is because of the high cost of creating games and the relatively low user base on both sides.  Once both user bases get to higher levels, then it becomes financially viable to produce single platform games for either 360 or PS3 as they have a higher chance of making their money back.  There will always be the odd 3rd party game that goes console exclusive so they can test their develoment power etc.  I honestly believe that if the 360 stopped being developed for in 2 years time, there would be more than enough PS3's on the market to warrant single console development.

4. Microsoft's and Sony's first party games are about equal in terms of selling power - On one hand you have Halo, on the other hand you have Gran Turismo. Then there are plenty of games on both sides that sell around two to four million units, overall it's about equal. So with first parties not having the edge one over another and third party games being shared, there's no reason to think that one console can outlive the other by a couple of years, unless one company would go to the lengths to keep a dying platform alive at all costs (why should they though?).

REPLY:  First party sales are leading my MS, this primarily is down to Gears, Halo and the extra year on the market, other than that, there is a reasonably healthy market for both.  Re 3rd party see my reply above.  But with regards to PS3, the first party games out and coming out are more varied and more numerous and that is the case with Sony.  And look at the first party games that have come out in the last 6 or so months for both:

MS - Gears 2, Fable 2, Halo Wars, Too Human, Banjo Nuts & Bolts, Scene It, Lips, Viva Pinata 2.

Gears 2 and Fable 2 aside, everything else has sold under 1m and most are way under 1m.

PS3 - LittleBigPlanet, Resistance 2, Killzone 2, SOCOM, Motorstorm 2.

The only big hitter thats not performed is Motorstorm 2 and there are some big games coming out this year with Infamous, Uncharted 2, GT5 and GOW3 to name a few.

I feel that Sony has the better lineup and the better chance to have huge sales from their first party games.

5. The 360 had a one year headstart - The above things considered, it seems reasonable that both consoles will start to fade around the same time. The difference is that the 360 has been out a year earlier, giving it the longer lifespan of the two.

REPLY:  You assume this based on your findings, although looking at my replies it seems entirely realistic that the PS3 will seriously pick up with sales of SW and HW especially when the extra big hitters come this year and next and the price gets slashed.  The PS3 hasn't taken off yet and is only in it's 3rd year or a predicted 10 year cycle.  The major games and price cuts will come in the next 12-18 months and then we will see a huge shift for the PS3 and Sony.  I sincerely believe that MS will initiate bringin out a new console in the next 2-3 years once they have made a bit of money from the 360, by then the PS3 will be gathering speed for it's final 3rd push.

Among a small group of Sony fans, it's commonly assumed that the PS3 will outlast the 360 by at least two to three years in the marketplace and thus will overtake the 360 in hardware sales in the end. But is this really going to happen? Here are five excellent reasons why the 360 will probably have a longer lifespan than the PS3:

1. The first Xbox was dropped fast because of contracts with Nvidia - Microsoft didn't get any benefits from the cost reductions Nvidia made and therefore the Xbox lost a lot of money on hardware sales throughout its whole life which was a good enough reason for MS to drop the support for an already dying platform quickly and focus on their next console. That's not going to happen with the 360 because Microsoft was smarter this time around and does benefit from all cost reductions made on the hardware.

2. Customers decide how long a console's life is, not the companies - If people start to stop buying a system and its games, retailers reallocate shelf space to more viable platforms and third party publishers reallocate their resources resulting in the death spiral for the console. Once that starts to happen, there isn't much a company can do anymore.

3. The 360 and the PS3 share the vast majority of third party games - With the high development costs of HD titles, multiplatform games became the norm. Unless Microsoft or Sony offer incentives, third party games will be available on both consoles. Should one system start to enter the death spiral, the other machine will be affected as well, because its number of upcoming games will also shrink. The fates of the HD consoles are closely tied together.

4. Microsoft's and Sony's first party games are about equal in terms of selling power - On one hand you have Halo, on the other hand you have Gran Turismo. Then there are plenty of games on both sides that sell around two to four million units, overall it's about equal. So with first parties not having the edge one over another and third party games being shared, there's no reason to think that one console can outlive the other by a couple of years, unless one company would go to the lengths to keep a dying platform alive at all costs (why should they though?).

5. The 360 had a one year headstart - The above things considered, it seems reasonable that both consoles will start to fade around the same time. The difference is that the 360 has been out a year earlier, giving it the longer lifespan of the two.

Among a small group of Sony fans, it's commonly assumed that the PS3 will outlast the 360 by at least two to three years in the marketplace and thus will overtake the 360 in hardware sales in the end. But is this really going to happen? Here are five excellent reasons why the 360 will probably have a longer lifespan than the PS3:

1. The first Xbox was dropped fast because of contracts with Nvidia - Microsoft didn't get any benefits from the cost reductions Nvidia made and therefore the Xbox lost a lot of money on hardware sales throughout its whole life which was a good enough reason for MS to drop the support for an already dying platform quickly and focus on their next console. That's not going to happen with the 360 because Microsoft was smarter this time around and does benefit from all cost reductions made on the hardware.

2. Customers decide how long a console's life is, not the companies - If people start to stop buying a system and its games, retailers reallocate shelf space to more viable platforms and third party publishers reallocate their resources resulting in the death spiral for the console. Once that starts to happen, there isn't much a company can do anymore.

3. The 360 and the PS3 share the vast majority of third party games - With the high development costs of HD titles, multiplatform games became the norm. Unless Microsoft or Sony offer incentives, third party games will be available on both consoles. Should one system start to enter the death spiral, the other machine will be affected as well, because its number of upcoming games will also shrink. The fates of the HD consoles are closely tied together.

4. Microsoft's and Sony's first party games are about equal in terms of selling power - On one hand you have Halo, on the other hand you have Gran Turismo. Then there are plenty of games on both sides that sell around two to four million units, overall it's about equal. So with first parties not having the edge one over another and third party games being shared, there's no reason to think that one console can outlive the other by a couple of years, unless one company would go to the lengths to keep a dying platform alive at all costs (why should they though?).

5. The 360 had a one year headstart - The above things considered, it seems reasonable that both consoles will start to fade around the same time. The difference is that the 360 has been out a year earlier, giving it the longer lifespan of the two.

Maybe, but then it wouldn't have been a "Five reasons why" thread (this one is the sixth).