I would suspect the reason why being in last place sucks for Sony is that once people start using a specific online service, it will take a lot to shift them from using that service. Say Xbox Live gains a significant lead in online gaming, then these high value consumers are essentially locked away from them as they will probably just buy the next generation Xbox to stay with their friends.

Nintendo came last-ish in the previous gen and they came out with the Wii. Perhaps coming last helps to drive innovation that doesn't cost people an arm and a leg.

Microsoft came second-ish, and their system this gen is the least innovative of the 3. Whereas Microsoft came from nowhere last gen and had the most innovative system (XBL).

BMaker11 said: RolStoppable said: The PS3 is losing games completely to the Wii. It's not that significant at the moment, because the few big games are mostly important only for Japan and smaller and niche games haven't been really good so far, but signs point to an improvement for the Wii in the future. uhhh....Momster Hunter 3? That's all I can think of

 

That popular game in which you hunt the correctly spelled abbreviation of people's mothers.

 

Anyway, in addition to MH, DQ and ToG, there are many games for the PS3 that have been cancelled, and the teams then started work on a completely different Wii game

I think them finishing last this gen will make them have a reality check and release a good console that is a little more competitive and maybe cheaper than this gen.

both the n64 and the gamecube and the first xbox had it worse
actually it have a chance of outselling snes. getting close nes.

what i dont want though its microsoft getting second, they would charge for online and don't make a high quality hardware.

PS3 in last place will make PS4 a better competitor next generation. Sony will realize that they made a huge mistake with PS3 this generation and should focus the core value of playstation, and that's to offer a gaming experience first and foremost and then, the extras after. This gen, they focused blu-ray BEFORE gaming, which is why they lost the connection with gamers. A trojan is a trojan, gamers were smart enough to see it and not buy the console at the original price. They tried to hit two targets with one arrow.

Jo21 said: both the n64 and the gamecube and the first xbox had it worse actually it have a chance of outselling snes. getting close nes. what i dont want though its microsoft getting second, they would charge for online and don't make a high quality hardware.

I don't love the idea of paying for online play, but its not that big of a deal.
Lifelock cost me $10 a month.
My phone is $50 a month.
Sirius Radio is $15 a month.
Now my Xbox Live account was $40 for the year and that comes out to $3.33 a month. It's one of my cheapest expenses and it also gives a me a ton of entertainment. Free is great but if I can pay a few bucks for a better service I will gladly do that.

As far as quality hardware goes. The original 360 used the Xenon motherboard which had the RRoD issue. The Falcon motherboard had the E74 problem. Now they use the Jasper board. I haven't heard any problems with that board yet and hopefully it will stay that way.

Could not care less about where the PS3 ends up as long as Sony make profit, I want the Playstation brand to continue as well as those first party games.

scottie said: BMaker11 said: RolStoppable said: The PS3 is losing games completely to the Wii. It's not that significant at the moment, because the few big games are mostly important only for Japan and smaller and niche games haven't been really good so far, but signs point to an improvement for the Wii in the future. uhhh....Momster Hunter 3? That's all I can think of     That popular game in which you hunt the correctly spelled abbreviation of people's mothers.   Anyway, in addition to MH, DQ and ToG, there are many games for the PS3 that have been cancelled, and the teams then started work on a completely different Wii game

lol woops

 

Nint has always been a gaming powerhouse, their ranking affects only 3rd party support, and even then being 1st doesn't help much. Also and most importantly, Nint manages to stay profitable whatever the situation of their console.... So for them ranking is unimportant.

MS is a money machine, profits are not important, thus sales are unimportant from this point of view. The only reason sales matter is because they are said to be in this to counter sony, thus making it important for MS to outdo Sony. So for them ranking above sony is important.

Sony thived on 3rd party support, they developped their 1st party but those quality games have only a moderate appeal to the masses (they are not the best selling on their own console, 3rd parties are). Also, Sony is inneficient when costs are concerned, they need high sales from software (and thus from hardware) to have their businness profitable. So for them ranking is important as it brings them the much needed revenues, being last is very bad.

Basically your reasoning fails when you say that loosing exclusive is unimportant for sony. The reason this matters is financial, they are the only company that needs a good ranking to stay affloat, and exclusives are what brings sales to a console. The quality of the Sony made exclusive is not enough to bring PS3 to the top (the 3 top sales are not sony made) and thus losing exclusive hurt them a lot.