I think you have articulated the problem we are having here. I am not saying that in this fantasy world the concept is BS. I am saying in this world (aka reality) its BS. In effect rather than try and tell people "well its ok if you do it this way...but not that way..." I am skipping it and just saying "Don't...seriously just don't F'ing go there.." or the polite equivalent actually.

To give a real world example of how we as a society ostracize these people consider this situation....If we were talking about NFL football and I said "Yeah, the vikings sucked last year but if they had all the good players from the other teams and could pick and choose the best players from all time they would have done much better.".

I think anyone in that conversation would look at me like I was a complete moron, and rightly so because it has nothing to do with the conversation. As you can see from my points above I focus on illustrating why it has nothing to do with reality for that reason. Because there are people who do in fact hear this line of reasoning and repeat it as though it were true.

In fact the exact moment I thought up this thread topic was during a face to face conversation with a person in a gaming lab at school where they used this very reasoning when they made this comment...

- QUOTE - (Actual Comment Below)

"I bet if the PS3 was the same price as the DS it would sell like 10x better."

- END QUOTE - (Hopefully you didn't have an anyuerism)

They then proceeded to start talking about how they "could have removed certain features" but that it would "still be the same basic package" and how "in the end they would of made more profit" etc.... Just for the record I did walk away from the group when he said the quote above but I could still hear him trying to convince the 3 other people of his position. Only later I thought about "What if he does convince them?" The idea of one person believing it is scary...but two or three???. Luckily from what I overheard before heading out to my next class they weren't buying it but the fact that they were trying to have a serious debate about it is frightening to me. And just to reiterate..they were having a debate about this scenario in reality, this guy thought it was seriously something sony could have done...if that doesn't cause you concern for the future of the world then nothing will =P

Anyways, this idea that its only hypothetical is wrong. But I will say that the idea itself is not patently BS, only when applied to reality, which in effect is the only thing worth debating about due to the endless nature of hypothetical situations. If people want to discuss alternate reality sales numbers we can probably get ioi to create a "Twighlight Zone" forum for people to go to =P

So in other words my earlier response to ChichiriMuyo was exactly right: 

"OK, so it's perfectly fine to make up some fantasyland numbers and say "A fifty dollar PS3 would be sweet!"  I think that as consumers we can all get on board with that statement.  If you want to post about that, the only complaints you'll get are along the lines of 'WTF is the point of your post?  It means nothing.'

"But nobody wants to leave it there.  People want to take their fantasyland numbers and try to make them into some kind of statement about the real world.  And that is pure delusion.  That is what I see Sqrl fighting against."

While topic doesn't fail, it's not right either.

You can't really call it stupid. The idea is you say "IF XXX was YYY$". If is subjunctive, meaning your talking hypothetically, or, outside the limits of the real world. "If I had 1million dollars, I'd buy a lot of crack". Sure, I don't, or many never will, have 1million dollars, but that's the point. I'm talking in "What if" statements. Which is why your argument is wrong. You are trying to add truth where there is none.

While, yes, some consoles would lose a lot with price changes, but the idea is to argue what if. Truth is, PS3 would be winning if it was 400$ rather then 600$.

 Did you bother to read the thread?

 So if I say:

"What if" Smashchu had read the thread... then Smashchu would understand that Smashchu made a joke post.

Then it is not wrong for me to say this because it wasn't true to begin with? Wow. Have you been brushing up on your Tractatus?

That doesn't even come close to making a bit of sence. You missed the point me thinks.

Idea is people are saying "If the PS3 was 400$, it would sell better". Is that true? Yes. Is it probable? No. There you go.

Seriously, Smashchu, if you look at the post right above your own, you will see posts from Words of Wisdom, Sqrl, and myself explaining in detail what this thread is all about. 

Words of Wisdom argues, like you only more articulately, that these utterly hypothetical statements are perfectly okay, but also explains why they add nothing to any real-world argument.

Sqrl argues, with a rather spectacular example, that the utterly hypothetical statements (hereafter UHSes) not only add nothing to the debate but foment a kind of "magical thinking" whereby the UHS somehow validates whatever point they are trying to make; and he therefore believes that we should stamp out these UHSes on the forums.  

I, Final-Fan, remind the thread of my earlier argument that the UHSes are amusing and harmless, except when idiots try to use them (as in Sqrl's example) in the mistaken belief that they somehow pertain to reality in any way.  

Again, this is all in the post right above the one in which you state that we do not understand that the Utterly Hypothetical Statement is, in fact, Utterly Hypothetical, and proceed to give a UHS about the PS3. 

I can only hope that you realize it means nothing to the real world prospects of the PS3.  (I presume you meant "What if ... $400 launch price"; if you mean another price drop, then you are not making a UHS, but rather what is essentially a prediction -- and that prediction is wrong.) 

As it turns out, you did NOT in fact read the thread -- or perhaps you simply didn't comprehend what Sqrl was saying.

Your "If the PS3 was $400, it would sell better" (different from the earlier "sell best"), combined with your comment about it being "probable", leads me to the conclusion that you are really asking "What if the PS3's price DROPPED to $400", which is not the kind of thing that Sqrl was denouncing AT ALL.

He gave 2 examples: one in which the PS3 was $300 and the Wii $500 -- clearly a fantasyland argument with no real-world value or predictive qualities at all; and another in which the PS3 was stripped down until it cost 'the same as a DS', which doesn't even make sense because there wouldn't be enough left to compare to the existing PS3 -- it'd be less powerful, by a large margin, than the Wii!

Are you really comparing your own hypothetical scenario to the ones Sqrl is crusading against?

 Well... there seems to be a contradiction, but to be fair you've said that:

"What if" statements aren't logical top begin with.

I guess there's no contradiction, right? Hrm. You also say:

"it's not wrong for someone to say this ("if") becuase it weasn't true to begin with."

So these things are not a function of truth. Okay. You go on to say:

  "If the PS3 was 400$, it would sell better". Is that true? Yes.

You've said that these types of statements are not true and then you make one of these statements and state that it is true. Huh? I agree that it's true you have said these things. Yes, that is true. Is it probable it means anything? No. There you go.