This article is an example of the misleading, unfounded anti-PS3 internet bandwagon, most notably due to its high level of uninformed statements. First of all, the notion that the PS3 has struggled in sales this generation is possibly the greatest fallacy of this games-industry news phenomenon. 1) The PS3 has sold better than the XBox 360 in a similar month-for-month-after-launch time series, the only way you could say it's performed bad is if "Wiping the Floor with Microsoft" is your only measuring standard. 2) The PS3 division has been profitable since the beginning of 2008 3) Even if it wasn't, Sony is a large, diverse corporation that could take last place in all upcoming console generations and still stay in the race. Microsoft lost $7 billion on XBox up until last year, that gives you an idea of the nature of diversified corporations in the console business.

Specific Issues:

Profitability - Again, not only is the ps3 sector profitable, but most recent reports of manufacturing analysts suggest that Sony is breaking even, give or take around $10. The writer of the article clearly did not do any research into this matter, and even if the facts supported his/her claim, profitability is not an issue for companies like Sony or Microsoft, as opposed to Nintendo or Sega. To begin with, it's meaningless speculation devoid of an entire host of economic principles, to suggest that profitability is a big factor for whether or not a large company like Sony stays in a highly concentrated industry like video game consoles.

Prospects as a Software Publisher - this argument is ignorant of the fact that 1) a large contributor to the quality of Sony's titles are that they are trying to sell a system and are willing to go 10 extra miles to do so. Combine that with the fact that 2) they are focusing all of their efforts on getting the most out of one specific hardware unit, a factor that largely differentiates first and third party exclusives. Finally, 3) Sony simply has the best machine out. These 3 factors, all dependent on Sony having a console, are the largest reasons to why they have such an impressive reputation as a publisher. All of their landmark PS3 exclusives take advantage of 1) Cell Processor for large calculations 2) Blu Ray for storage of game components that could not be practically cut into discs, and 3) Hard Drive Installs for quicker load times, and easier flow of large data. None of these three features are available on any other console, PC has a hard time replicating it albeit multiple large install discs and game discs. All imaginings of Sony being strictly software being "a good thing" go right out the window with a simple analysis of the situatio.?

Dropped Support from 3rd Parties - It hurts the authors credibility when the author himself/herself admits that this is something that would never materialize. The Activision Boss' claim is hardly anything that could happen; again, the 360 was doing worse than the PS3 this time last year but that doesn't impact a publisher's success on it. Even if it did, this would be great news for PS3 owners, as it would allow EA to replace Guitar Hero and Call of Duty with Rock Band and Battlefield, with no competition, and even roll out special editions that take advantage of Blu Ray like they've already been doing.

iPhone - this is another irrelevant point as sony is already making the same strides as apple with all digital psp, not to mention all they've accomplished with the playstation store and already having digital games on it this year. it has the same prospects for developers with smaller content likewise coming.

I think further information on this subject should see David Jaffe's video blog on why he still supports Sony after all of the years. He states that no matter how you slice it, Sony gave the green light to the guys at Team Ico and Media Molecule when no one else would to create the kind of games they wanted. They brought a system that could support the vision for Little Big Planet recently, as they did with Squaresoft and their vision for the future of Final Fantasy in 1997. Putting out the most expensive machine this generation came as a result of putting out the most advanced console this generation. The parts it took to make it cost maybe 25% more than they were selling it to you, yet people still complained.

Furthermore, it saddens me to see gamers complain about them making it harder to develop for. It has long been put to bed that the PS3 is not a difficult system to develop for - rather, they selected a new kind of architecture for developers to be acquainted with, and that has allowed them to create unprecedented experiences like Uncharted, Killzone 2, and Metal Gear Solid 4. MAG and Uncharted 2 look to continue that tradition at the end of this year just like God of War III and Gran Turismo 5 look to at the beginning of next year. It's the console with the greatest lifespan - you can't argue that only the PS3 is seeing its library continually improve in technical and design quality by leaps and bounds.

The greater problem that this article is indicative of how industry/sales/business discussion has infiltrated and entrenched itself in gaming journalism. We never glued ourselves about monthly NPD's or used which console had sold more units as a legitimate point in discussion during the Sega/SNES or Playstation/N64 era. This new gaming industry sensationalism is diluting and ruining gaming discussion - furthermore it ruins itself with just how ignorant gaming journalists are of basic economic and financial concepts outside of what they hear on CNN/MSNBC.