I dunno, it is nowhere near as epic as "2001 vs 2008" thread.

RolStoppable,
1) No, because:
a) this thread IS comparing SALES.
b) you can`t give me REAL NUMBERS comparing HOW MUCH profit/loss PS3/GC made.

2) So, you write without FACTS? Nice...

3) I know MANY GC games, but i have never heard, those, which you named + being better, than PS3 games.

4) You mean, what IF GC had been selling, while bundled to a game for 49$??? LoL, how more desperate could Nintendo go during GC time? Wasn`t 99$ price at that point  low enough?)))

5) Give me REAL PS3/GC only profit/loss numbers, or begone. =)

That Guy - http://www.vgchartz.com/swlaunch.php?reg1=Japan&game1=Super+Mario+Galaxy+-+Wii&reg2=Japan&game2=Super+Mario+Sunshine+-+GC&reg3=All&game3=&weeks=100 may Japan be with you.)

So, atleast on Japan i was right. =)

what about ALL MARIOBOYS BOUGHT SMG AND WII? AN ANALYSIS OF SOFTWARE SALES

awesome the game industry is growing as a whole! that rocks

It does suck thought that nintendo turned a profit at 99 bucks and the ps3 can not at 399

so sony has that to work on

but all in all good news for gaming

@rol
I think crazzy is trying to address the point that consumers are willing to part with 400$+, whereas you are focusing on the companies profits.

One talks about popularity and one talks about income. Of course it's always necessary to talk about all the factors in the situation but we aren't talking about all the facts are we? We are talking about only 2 aspects. I think any expansion on the original idea should have it's own thread.

The thread talks about selling power of the ps3. If anything in this thread should challenge it, it should be evidence against that popularity, which is the topic at hand.

In fact, because it is such a narrowly focused point, the thread should have been over a while ago. It's like arguing about which controller is better ps3 or 360 and then someone saying that 360 is a better system.

RolStoppable,
1), 2) and 5) I compared ONE console SALES with ANOTHER console SALES, with one 399$ price VS another 99$ prices.

While PROFIT/LOSS of gaming division is made NOT only from Hardware sales.
So, HOW can you compare PROFIT/LOSS from hardware, if you don`t have numbers???
Thank you. :)

3) That does NOT make them better, than PS3 games that i named, just maybe for you. And you can`t deny, that those PS3 games, that i named, are GREAT and AMAZING, and definitely not worse, than GC games in first 2,5 years since it release.

4) I compared 399$ costing console SALES with 99$ costing console SALES.
What GC price for sale do you have in mind, that it would  be able/allowed to lose 5 bln. $? =)

99$ price tag did not suddenly improve GC fate, it could be similar for 299$ PS3, especially since it still will be the most expensive device on the market.

RolStoppable,
LoL, What???
Sony is selling PS3 at 399$, you say it should still selling today at 499-599$ in sake of PROFIT? And how do you know, that GG at 99$ wasn`t selling at LOSS?

Lolcislaw,
Maybe because 399$ console is selling BETTER, than 99$, And 299$ PS3 VERY likely to sell even better? =)

@rol there definitely is some truth to that. But hasn't sony always sold consoles at a loss? That kind of argument would very well make all about Sony sales invalid. Hmm, rather, I think it is only part of the argument, but, in saying that.... I think it's important to note that you both have good points.

Your argument kind of implies that people are buying ps3 for the value. Since there is no way to tell how many people that is, it's kind of hard for this debate to be one-sided.
How much was the profit from GC sales when it hit 99$? If they had profit at that price, wouldn't it imply that Wii would be a similar cost? I really don't know.

I'm just going to trust you because you make a good point, some consumers might actually be buying ps3 simply because Sony is "undercutting" the market. Crazzyman you should listen to rol, but that doesn't make either of you right, so stop fighting :P

RolStoppable,
1) THAT`S why we speak ONLY about console SALES in this thread, because it`s the ONLY numbers, that are available, and pretty much close to reality.

3) So, your point about GC having better games is irrelevant. =)

4) So, how do you know, that Sony haven`t SPENT most of those money on developing engines for their games, for Home, for PSN and etc.?
You don`t know, so your point is irrevelant, unless you provide REAL numbers.