I hope im not crazy but do you guys think the ps3 could sold even more than the wii right now if i would have launched at the price it is now.  I deffinetly would be at like 60 million if it would have launched at 300.  There are obviously a lot of factors that could have changed either way but with the power the brand had at launch time i think with a bunch a good games at the time like a gt5 or exclusive grand theft auto 60 million would not have been a streach at all.  I'm sure if i really would have like the ps3 now if it was made at the $300 level 3 years ago but it would be nice to still have all the exclusives this gen and probably the best online community with that big of an install base of sony fans like mabey 12 million cod players.

nope, i truly belive the wii doesnt affect ps3 sales and vice-versa...why?? because the wii tapped into a new source of gaming, the casual gamer...thus even if the ps3 had been brought up at 300$, the casual gamer would have still bought the wii with wii sports for 250$

different story with the 360 though, thats just too unpredictable

Ok so were do think the ps3 would be now if it would have launched the way i propossed .

One of the reasons, i think, that sales have exploded post-price drop, is that people understand that for the price tag of 300$, they are getting the value of a 600$ console.

It's not that the console was too expensive before, it's that people couldn't find the value in it. Now that the value is glaringly obvious, it sells more. That could also be a big factor. People have been thinking like, man that's too much technology, I can't see myself paying 400$-600$ for that. Then the price drops, but they still feel that it's a 600$ system.

Agreed--it's 100% about value.  When the PS3 launched at $600 I thought Sony had lost their minds.  I didn't think anyone would ever pay that for a console, and in the grand scheme of things, not many did.  When the PS3's price dropped the first time, I had just bought my 360, and I didn't pay any mind.  When the PS3 dropped to $299, I simply could not deny its presence anymore.  I pre-ordered a slim model on day 1--something I never thought I would do.  The thought literally never crossed my mind until the price drop and hardware redesign were real.  All the sudden, we had a $299 console on the market that also played blu rays.  I just happened to have some spare cash at that time, so I went for it hook line and sinker.   Haven't regretted it since.

I agree. Consumer demand seems to spark when the consumer realizes he's getting an expensive item, for a good deal. This then speads and the concept continues.

Its like Computers. There's the Mac, and there the PC. Macs, on average, are about 1000 dollars for Specs that barely match standard-end PC's. PC's are cheaper. When people compare prices and usability, they realize which is a better deal, which is PC, because it is much more powerful, at a cheaper price. Of course, there are other reasons that can get across that (In this case, Windows Vista severely hurt Microsoft's existing user base), but in its bulk, that's how it is.

Also, another reason why I don't believe an initial $300 pricing wouldn't have placed it above the Wii is because

A). Although pretty cheap for what your getting, the PS3 is still more expensive than the Wii

B). I must admit, there are somethings PS3 offers, that some people may not even use. Thus questioning whether the PS3 is worth it

C). Software also sells consoles. PS3 had a pretty weak line-up of games at launch.

D). It would have been hard to develop.

With all those being said, pricing was the PS3's weakness, and if it was cheaper, it certainly would have affected it's situation. The position of the Wii would still be where it is now, however, the position of the Xbox 360 is a bit debateable. PS3 is still a great piece of hardware that I intend to pick up soon, and should continue to sell for what its worth.

Two of the largest factors in the ps3 price was bluray and the cell.

To have a price of 300$, one of those things would have needed to go, and I prefer that they are both there, especially when ps3 is now poised to make such a huge comeback. Sony must be excited for the coming year; there are like 6 huge franchise games hitting the console and already a huge increase in sales as well (about 30-40%)

They should have just made it equal to the 360 for $300. They would have dominated.

Not true.

Eyetoy, Singstar and Buzz all say hello.

PS3 didn't do too well at the start (aside from what others have said already) because it failed to maintain what the PS2 started, the "casual" gaming market (I'm starting to dislike the casual and hardcore terminology now).

The reason the PS2 is still selling today is because it's established a crowd of people that couldn't see themselves spending 5 hours in front of a TV shooting people, but would rather spend 30 minutes or so to play something highly interactive in the real world (i.e Buzz quizz buzzers).

When all three consoles launched this generation, Sony didn't focus on keeping these people that enjoy family friendly games, instead focusing on trying to take back these 5+ hours of gaming per day people from Microsoft, who spent a year trying to get them. So instead of keeping ahead of the pack by focusing on keeping these 30 minute gamers from day 1 (therefore eliminating the Wii as competition at the start), Sony instead decided to play catch up with Microsoft. This eventually led to them losing both.

That paved the way for the Wii, who people saw as another extension of the games they enjoyed on the PS2, but with much more variety (console was built from the ground up to have more real-world interactions as opposed to being a genius after thought like it was on the PS2)

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and I can't honestly say that I would have done differently if I were in Sony shoes (they were trying to push a $1000 AUD console remember), but the design choices on the PS3 (expensive blu-ray and CELL) really really really hurt their potential for different marketing opportunities (issue PS2 never had because it created and maintained the 30 minute home gaming market when it was at a very cheap price).

I'm not saying that this alone was what caused Sony to play catch up, but it definitely contributed.

Anyway, now they are catching up and they've certainly set themselves up for a very awesome and very affordable PLaystation 4.

I dont think the Wii tapped into a differnet market. I think we never really noticed them last gen. I think that most of the casual gamers had ps2 and mainly used them for the DVD players and played very few games. The reason we never noticed the casuals on the Ps2 was the fact that the ps2 wasnt mainly for just casuals (like the wii), it was for everyone. It had tons of hardcore games, yet had was a DVD player and had less hardcore games for the average person.

I think the PS3 would be dominating if it started at $300, because most people would have switched from PS2 to PS3, because why change companies if you were happy before, there is no high price tag to stop them.