Well with all the 3rd party support and SONY's own support I doubt the PS3 is on its "last stand". I mean even though the gamecube and xbox didn't really stand a chance against the PS2 they still had games untill their next gen systems came out. Even if the PS3 doesn't reach the Wii or 360 I don't think the PS3 owners would be disappointed as games are being made and will continue to be made.

elnino334 said: Though the Wii is priced at $249 it actually cost more than that as you start adding accessories and games. My cousin ended up spending close to $500 when he got his Wii and based on the average of accessories and games my friends bought for their Wii’s they average almost $400. Basically though it seems cheap the Wii at the end of the day will run most gamers a nice chunk of change.

 Why do people keep making this completely false claim?

 The 'average' Wii buyer probably buys one extra controller at $60, which is the same as the average 360 or Ps3 buyer.

The 'average' Wii buyer may or may not get any additional games, as they probably got Wii Sports and Wii Play at this point. Whereas the average 360/ps3 buyer must spend $60 to get one game. Unless they got one of the available pack ins. Then its the same.

That's it. Nothing extra that you need for the Wii as compared to the others.

 There are unique non-average things.

 360 buyers would most definitely pay another $50 to get Live.

A minority of Wii buyers may pay a total of $40 for two classic controllers.

Ummm...

Beyond that I can't see how people keep trying to claim Wii is actually more expensive. Kwaad used to always try to make this claim, but yet every time you draw a direct comparision, it is by far more expensive to get anywhere near the comparable system out of 360/ps3.

As for the rest of your post, I didn't read it. I stopped here when I realized your logic is flawed already.

PS3 domination won't happen, but a turnaround will start around March.

@Elduderino
Thanks for the explanation!

superchunk said: elnino334 said: Though the Wii is priced at $249 it actually cost more than that as you start adding accessories and games. My cousin ended up spending close to $500 when he got his Wii and based on the average of accessories and games my friends bought for their Wii’s they average almost $400. Basically though it seems cheap the Wii at the end of the day will run most gamers a nice chunk of change.   Why do people keep making this completely false claim?  The 'average' Wii buyer probably buys one extra controller at $60, which is the same as the average 360 or Ps3 buyer. The 'average' Wii buyer may or may not get any additional games, as they probably got Wii Sports and Wii Play at this point. Whereas the average 360/ps3 buyer must spend $60 to get one game. Unless they got one of the available pack ins. Then its the same. That's it. Nothing extra that you need for the Wii as compared to the others.  There are unique non-average things.  360 buyers would most definitely pay another $50 to get Live. A minority of Wii buyers may pay a total of $40 for two classic controllers. Ummm... Beyond that I can't see how people keep trying to claim Wii is actually more expensive. Kwaad used to always try to make this claim, but yet every time you draw a direct comparision, it is by far more expensive to get anywhere near the comparable system out of 360/ps3. As for the rest of your post, I didn't read it. I stopped here when I realized your logic is flawed already.

I am sorry if you misunderstood what I was trying to say.  I wasn’t saying the Wii cost as much as the 360 or PS3 but rather buying a Wii may leave some gamers with less money to buy a 360 or PS3.  What I am basically saying is that if many people buy the Wii as their first console for this gen they may not be able to afford a second system like the 360 or PS3 at their current price.  By saying it cost more I wasn’t comparing to the 360 or PS3 but just saying that you end up spending quite a bit once you get all the things you want to enjoy your Wii.  Basically my claim is that the Wii will run you up $400 for the average gamer once they gotten everything they need which is more then the $249 that is typically used to show how cheap it is.  This goes hand in hand with if it keeps selling so well then less gamers will be able to afford another system.  That is one of the reasons why the PS3 will continue to struggle.  Again just to be clear I am not saying the Wii is more expensive then the 360 or PS3 but overall depending on what you want with it you can spend a quite a bit.

El Duderino said: ^^ But you already have a PS2 kn, why would you care about backwards compatibility ??? People like me with no PS2 should be much more concerned about that, anyway I´d don´t think Sony would be so foolish, different systems are ok but not THAT different.

Not kn, but i care beccause i have a Atari, Balley Astrocade, NES, SNES, N64, PS2, and a Wii.

Am moving in with someone with a Sega, 360, and Dreamcast (and others but those are the non dupes.)

We're only going to have so many TVs dang it!  When i get a PS3 I wanna be able to replace my PS2, like i did with my PS1 and Gamecube so i can have them all hooked up.  Not to mention they want to get a Wii as well. 

Also, what will ALWAYS hold back the PS3 is price. The PS3 is the most expensive console on the market and that really hurts it in market viability.

There are many people that don't care that much if they get a Wii, 360 or Ps3 and price is the biggest sticking point, when it falls to a level they want they'll get whichever one it is.

There are even more who feel that way about just the 360 and PS3. Many of these people will only buy one console. As long as they are behind 360 on the price they're going to be missing out on this portion of the market which is a pretty large portion. That's why the most expensive system never wins.

Kasz216 said: Also, what will ALWAYS hold back the PS3 is price. The PS3 is the most expensive console on the market and that really hurts it in market viability. There are many people that don't care that much if they get a Wii, 360 or Ps3 and price is the biggest sticking point, when it falls to a level they want they'll get whichever one it is. There are even more who feel that way about just the 360 and PS3. Many of these people will only buy one console. As long as they are behind 360 on the price they're going to be missing out on this portion of the market which is a pretty large portion. That's why the most expensive system never wins.

Price is pretty important but I think games can trump prices.  I think the gamecube was the cheapest last gen and it didn't mean it took off.  Also the Xbox dropped in price pretty quick yet it was still not enough to get any where near the PS2.  Didn't the PS1 cost more than the n64?  Sorry I can't recall but in the end games>price.  It just so happens the PS3 hasn't had any games to light gamers ass on fire like gears of war, bioshock or guitar hero II etc.  If MGS,final fantasy, GT would have been available at launch or soon after I think the PS3 would have been in alot better position.  Hopefully once those games come out they can gain some ground but I think it would be too late.  Those games wouldn't really offer anything that new that you wouldn't find on the 360.  Some of the PS3's best games are new IP's but in the end unlike gears or bioshock they just didn't do much to get people to buy it.  We will soon see how ratchet does since that is an established franchise but in the end again I am not sure if SONY just dug themselves in too big of a hole.  Can't wait to see how things turn out.

the pricedrops always mean good news (boost sales) or bad news (desperation) ,maybe sony need soon a new redesign model like the psp.

@elnino334

ok, I understand your position now.

elnino334 said: Kasz216 said: Also, what will ALWAYS hold back the PS3 is price. The PS3 is the most expensive console on the market and that really hurts it in market viability. There are many people that don't care that much if they get a Wii, 360 or Ps3 and price is the biggest sticking point, when it falls to a level they want they'll get whichever one it is. There are even more who feel that way about just the 360 and PS3. Many of these people will only buy one console. As long as they are behind 360 on the price they're going to be missing out on this portion of the market which is a pretty large portion. That's why the most expensive system never wins. Price is pretty important but I think games can trump prices.  I think the gamecube was the cheapest last gen and it didn't mean it took off.  Also the Xbox dropped in price pretty quick yet it was still not enough to get any where near the PS2.  Didn't the PS1 cost more than the n64?  Sorry I can't recall but in the end games>price.  It just so happens the PS3 hasn't had any games to light gamers ass on fire like gears of war, bioshock or guitar hero II etc.  If MGS,final fantasy, GT would have been available at launch or soon after I think the would have been in alot better position.  Hopefully once those come out they can gain some grown but I think it would be too late.  Those games wouldn't really offer anything that new that you wouldn't on the 360.  Some of the PS3's best games are new IP's but in the end unlike gears or bioshock they just didn't do much to get people to buy it.  We will soon see how ratchet does since that is an established franchise but in the end again I am not sure if SONY just dug themselves in too big of a hole.  Can't wait to see how things turn out.

Gamecube was cheaper, but by the time it came out the PS2 had already locked things up as the dominant console and had all the 3rd party support. PS1 had overwhelming support because of the cartridge based N64. I think game are only > then price when the more expensive system has a huge advantage in games. Even when the PS3 gets it's killer games it won't have the overwheleming advantage in multi-platform games that it had with the PS1 and PS2. Without those sustainable advantages the PS3 is in trouble. It will take a while for the PS3 to rival the 360's library, and considering how much more a PS3 costs, they don't need to rival the 360's library they need to trump it handily.