Personaly, I would have made two SKU's. The lower one, would be the 20GB with wi-fi including all the extra components (i.e. no HDMI) for $450/£325 Then I would have made a premium edition, with a 250GB hard drive, HDMI cable and 2GB RAM. I know this part is impossible, but I would have included Vista/Mac OS X. This would have been sold for $800/£550 As well as making rumbling SIXAXIS's, having no Emotion Engine at all, most importantly, I would have made a worldwide November release, even with less than 1 million units.

Sony Then: One Model, 20 GB version. Add Wi-Fi, take out the EE and a few other odds and ends that weren't necessary. Let people know emulation won't be perfect at first, but is being worked on. Allow save files to be transfered via home. No one would realize anything is missing, except the people who would have bought it for the purpose of playing Blu-Ray. Really, the 60gb model was never made for gamers. Sony Now: Remodel the system, release a new one at $350-$400 in time for christmas that mirrors the 20 GB. Continuously remind people that model is easily as powerful (really, more so) and well equipped as the premium 360 and that it's what you want to buy if you just want to play games. The 60BG model was never meant for gamers. MS Then: No Core system. It hasn't improved business dramatically but it has limited the capabilities of the system. Developers can't take advantage of a HDD that isn't in a significant portion of the user's systems. In addition, they needed to face the fact that they can't do squat in Japan. Save the launch for whenever they can actually produce enough systems and instead put machines into places where they'd, you know, sell. MS Now: Prepare for a price cut. Buy Take Two to gain real exclusiveness over GTA and sell the rest of the company off at a discount. Having 2 of the 5 biggest IPs in video gaming would be huge. Nintendo Then: I wouldn't change a thing. Nintendo Now: Prepare an online system that western gamers can appreciate and work with third parties to make it as easy as possible to make games for the system that can use the system to its fullest. That's it.

"What would you of [sic] changed if you where [sic] kutaragi?[sic]" My job...

Complaining about BR in the PS3 is akin to complaining about the hard drive in the PS3 as well. "Damn sony.... forcing their consumers to support seagate.... arghh I hate seagate..." Tough its there to make life easier for the devs and so is the blu ray. It isn't always about what the consumer "thinks" they need or do not need.

Hmm... If I were Sony... I would have sat back and watched a little while longer before even thinking about the PS3... I would have pre-empted Wii Sports with a game for PS2 with a wireless motion-sensitive peripheral controller... I'd also dust off Eye-Toy, develop more fun new peripherals, and push things like educational software... With PS3 not right around the corner, PS2's continued outselling of 360 would matter more to publishers, and a more diverse software lineup would push sales even higher and let the much cheaper PS2 even combat Wii. And I'd try to start this reinvention of PS2 way back in 2002-03. Sometime between Xmas 2008 and Xmas 2009, right in the middle of 360's and Wii's run, I'd launch PS3... Make it maybe even less powerful than the PS3 is now, so that a $300 launch price would be reasonable with modest initial hardware losses... Have a controller that trumps Wiimote in user-experience and versitility, go HD and possibly Blu-Ray if prices are reasonable (they should be), and build the online system specifically for MMOs, user-created content sharing, and social networking aspects as well as standard multiplayer... While making the online store focused on amassing content right from launch.

People who wish the PS3 well seem to take Blu-ray's victory for granted but can anyone show me an article with actual sales figures and not just Sony claims of victory? All I can find is that in a 2 week period Blu-ray movies outsold HD-DVD by 2:1 but that was because only 2 HD-DVD movies came out (they came out first so more movies are out overall) compared with some unspecified much greater number of Blu-Ray movies. I did find a story that noted "Universal Studios Home Entertainment announced at a press conference at CeBIT that it has signed up to the European HD-DVD Promotional Group along with Toshiba, Microsoft and Studio Canal." and that "The adoption of either high definition format has been rather lacklustre to date, however, the major hurdle being the high price of players. Blu-ray's gains in the battle have mostly been attributed to Sony's inclusion of a Blu-ray drive in its PlayStation 3 gaming console. However, as the price of players decreases and adoption becomes more widespread the backing of major studios such as Universal may swing the tide in the favour of HD-DVD." http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2186241/universal-signs-hd-dvd Without hard stats (if you have them please let me know) at this point it doesn't seem to me that a winner or potential winner can be called. That being said including Blu-ray in the PS3 definitely helps Sony in the long run, if it can survive the lower console sales and losses involved with that decision. This isn't like with DVD's where everyone and their mother could instantly realize a benefit with DVD's over VHS, and the PS3 doesn't cost $300 like the PS2. It took many years for stand alone DVD players to drop below the PS2 in price, Blu-ray players will probably do it to the PS3 by Christmas or next spring. At any rate I agree with those who would argue that Blu-ray isn't the greatest problem the PS3 has. What would I do as head of Sony? Firstly, shut up the "people should work extra to buy our system", "Aussies have to understand Australia is small", "Britons wouldn't believe the truth if you told it to them" managers. I've long thought that Sony's main problem this round was that they seemed to get MHz envy. The 94 MHz N64 could run rings around the 34 MHz Playstation graphically. The 485 MHz Gamecube and 733 MHz Xbox could do likewise to the 294 MHz PS2. The fact that Sony far outsold them despite being weaker didn't seem to matter, this time the PS3 would conquer all in every category. An ok ambition until the problems, and therefore the expenses, with Cell and RSX began to crop up. At that point Sony should have realized that it was its brand and games that counted not its hardware and started a crash course of grabbing off the shelf components like Microsoft did with the Xbox. Take something like a 2 GHz Core Duo processor, an X1650 video card, 256 MB system/128 MB video RAM, and a PS3 logo (I just made that up so the prices may not work). It could still handle 720P with ease and could have been sold at $400 or maybe $300 if Sony really wanted to play for keeps. Would Sony fanboys be shouting from the forums that graphics are the end all be all of video games right now? Nope, but they wouldn't need to since that PS3 would have actually sold well.