The whole argument Sony has made is a last-ditch effort to try to keep up with the Wii and 360. Also on that note, the individuals (no names) that I have seen defending and even promoting the PS3 here confuse me. The PS3 is a fine machine, good graphics, and the most horse power out there - in theory. Try using it, and developers have been quoted saying that it's hard to do. They find the 360 easier to work with, partially that Microsoft will throw cash at them to fund the projects, i.e. buying out of Bungie and Halo bad when.
The Wii is stable and perfect in every way FOR WHAT IT AIMS TO BE. Family oriented and fun for children, spot on!
The 360 is a well-rounded console. Add-ons provide a scalable pricing model, while getting them all may be more expensive than competition, the base price is cheaper and is a good idea IMO. If you can't afford the PS3, the 360 is there because it cuts corners. All in all, it's interfacing to windows live, my Zune, social networking, and everything else they've added has made it my favorite choice.
PS3 has nothing wrong with it. To the contrary, it has Blue-Ray and the potential for more content and better graphics. The problem lies in that they had no release titles anyone thought justified the price tags besides Sony fan boys, hence shooting themselves in BOTH feet and expecting to be able to crawl fast enough to keep up with the competition. The bit off more than they could chew early on, and now pay for it as the other two were able to burn more money on prospects to destroy the PS3. If Sony had more exclusive titles I care about, I'd have one. Little Big Planet, MGS4, and maybe Resistance 1+2 don't justify the purchase for me.
That's my opinion, but the debate rages on of course.
