Where's backwards compatibility listed for the PS3 80GB model? That's right... they dropped that to reduce the cost, while the Wii has the whole Gamecube library and the Xbox... well, it has somewhat of a old game library. Yet they'll love to add $100 to XBox's Wifi, when you can easily play games without that admittedly overpriced feature. And honestly, no one buys the Wii expecting Blu-ray or HDMI support.

Honestly, it doesn't matter what numbers are floating around, just comes down to the options you want and which exclusives you want (which are becoming a rarity, for that matter), and really, what horse you want to back. At this point, it looks a player would have fun with most any pick.

Also, if we are talking about Sony's competitors, can we include the PC? I mean, I know it isn't a home console, and a gaming rig would be slightly more expensive; though, you can easily get a decent gaming computer for $500 - $700. That's a high price, but compare the VALUE! You get the latest games, an impressive back catalog of games, digital distribution via Steam or Greenhouse, a large indie scene, game mods, surfing the internet... the list goes on and on, not to even mention the other things a computer can do (e-mail, word processor, etc.)! And with output now a days, you can even use your TV, gamepad and couch, if you are concerned about losing that "console feel". Talk about value there.

Oh good god. Not this again.

Let's get down to brass tacks. The truism that you get what you pay for goes both ways. You can pay less and get less... or you can pay too much and get too much. At $200, Xbox is STILL a logically complete gaming console. $200 is STILL half way to owning a PS3. And, in my opinion, PS3 has STILL not conclusively proven to be the "best" in games, technology, or services.

In short, it's damned easy to massage the numbers and get it to come out your way. Here I ran the numbers and found it came out completely different:

http://www.loadingreality.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1284:
on-the-edge-360-a-ps3-real-real-price-comparison&catid=15:editorials&Itemid=143

Here's the difference: For what I need, the costs come down to this:

Xbox Arcade: $200
20gb HD+3MONTH Live offer: $30

Final cost: $230

That's still $169 cheaper than Sony's base model. I probably won't even keep Live, but if I did, $50 a year is not that much. Microsoft won me over with their price cut, plain and simple. In fact, if they hadn't lowered their price, I'd probably have caved into the peer pressure and gotten a Wii. :)

"As PS3 continues to evolve without the need for additional parts or expenses, expect the competition to continue peddling add-ons in an effort to keep up with the Jones’,"

Careful, Sony. I wouldn't be so eager to spout off such words when its comments like these and your failure to meet them which has dug this ditch you're in now.

Considering you place this generation, I don't think you are in any position to speak arrogantly.By the way isn't sony cutting prices and countless features to "to keep up" with the competition??

This is something I've always mentioned when discussing the benefits of the different consoles. If you just want to play games, the 360 is a better deal. But if you want to do everything it ends up just as expensive.

Because, let's face it, a lot of (if not most) people have entirely wireless networks. In many cases they simply can't get a wire to their TV (without running it across the living room floor). That $100 ends up not being optional.

And isn't that 20GB drive for $30 a refurbished one anyway?

Either way, this looks kind of desperate. It's kind of like them admitting that there are more exclusive 360 games, but that the PS3 is a better deal if you want to play the cross-platform games online.

All three systems have their pros and cons, and it's really come down to personal preference. I wrote to Sony back when I received one of the only PS3s that support backwards compatibility, warning them not to drop that feature on future models. They did, unfortunately, and I think that's one of the big reasons they're trying to save face. I hope all three consoles stick around for the long run, because the overall competition is a good thing to have.

Wait...didn't they peddle the SIXAXIS DUALSHOCK when I bought Metal Gear 4? Add another $50. What about the EyeToy? The Singstar Microphones?

They speak as if they've never sold add-ons.

PS- Didn't XBOX and WII have rumble out-of-the-box?

Sony still hasn't learned its lesson about that arrogance problem... I think it's intervention time.

If this complete package was such a great deal, you'd think they'd be selling like hotcakes, but as we all know the PS3 is doing anything but. If Wi-Fi costs $100 to add to the 360, then how much could we reduce the cost of the PS3 to remove it from the basic model?

Personally, if I could pay more just for some damn backwards compatability, I would (though how that'd function as an add-on, I'm not sure, sigh).

PS3 is better quality from my experience. I own both and so far have had to buy about 4 controllers for the xbox 360 because they all break, about 4 microphones because they all break, and I had to send it in because of the red rings. PS3 on the other hand, I've had a single controller and a single mic that work perfectly and the console itself has only "crashed" or froze twice since I've had it. Then include Live membership as well and PS3 has cost me a lot less than the Xbox360 not because of the added add-ons of the competition, but because of the lack of quality of the add-ons.

SO let's add another row to the chart:

Backwards Compatability:
Wii - 100% with GameCube. Also emulates hundreds of games for older consoles.
360 - Some with XBox. Must have a BC patch for the games you want to play.
PS3 - Only PS1 on all current models. No PS2 on current models.

So down one for the PS3.

Next, Bluray and HDMI are only plusses if you have an HDTV. I believe the market share of HDTVs is still in the 10-20% range at the moment.

@ David
The 360 wi-fi solution is only $100 because it is proprietary. A standard wi-fi card for the pc only runs about $20-40 for the pc at retail. The same goes for the hard drive. Because they are proprietary that is why they are so expensive.

I do not agree with how Sony has illustrated it, but they do have a point.

But the fact is, a consumer's main concern is the point of entry. The Wii gets to be quite the investment when all is said and done. To get the most out of this party-friendly console, you'll want 4 controllers along with nunchucks, which takes you higher than the asking price of a PS3.

But people don't look at it that way. The entry price is the biggest concern, as short sighted as that may seem.

Another issue is the fact that many gamers don't yet care about online play or require a hard drive. With Nielsen rating showing that the PS2 is the most played console, and the fact that many Wii owners are in a similar position (despite built in Wifi), the 360 Arcade SKU has an audience.

My friend love NHL 09 when he played it at my place and wanted a next gen console for it. He picked up a $199 Arcade unit and is having a blast. No online, no HDD...just like how he used to play on his PS2.

@ Amir

Sure, but when you add the cost of three more controllers for the PS3, it kind of evens off.

On another site, they were also talking about the lack of HDMI cables and a headset for the PS3 out of the box. Add those in and you are back up there with the 360.

So what are they getting at?

Oh I don't deny it Ephraim, but my point is simply that instead of complaining about the competition's game of selling their console for less and making bank on add-ons, Sony would probably be better served by doing the exact same thing. This attempt at touting value will obviously do nothing for consumers who walk into a store, compare price, and say "why on earth would I pay twice as much for this thing?" The PS3 is just unattractively expensive, and maybe by cutting out "value" in its core system, it can reduce the price and sell these "fabulous features" as add-ons like their competitors.

Sony is full of it. I have a PS3, Wii, and Xbox360 Elite. I have used my Xbox360 Elite as is out of the box. All I have purchased is a battery pack with recharger for the controller and the annual Xbox Live Gold membership. The Wii I have purchased rechargeable batteries. For the PS3 I had to buy an HDMI cable and a remote. I was able to use my Wii and Xbox360 right out of the box but I had to buy an HDMI cable before I could use my PS3. The PS3 40 gig cost me the same as the 120 gig Xbox360 Elite but all i do is watch Blu Ray on it. I actually watch more movies for free through Xbox/Netflix than on PS3 Blu Ray. 70% of my gaming is on the Xbox, 25% on the Wii, and 5% for the PS3. I get waaaay more value out of my Wii and Xbox than my Ps3. It's not a competition for me as I like all the systems, they each have something unique and different to offer.

Wifi is not necessary for the 360. You are better off using the ethernet cable provided as it is more secure, easier to set up and is much faster resulting in much faster downloads and no lag during online gameplay. Wifi is only necessary if you are too far from your access point or you are borrowing or leaching off someone else's bandwidth. I can download an HD movie in less than two hours with ethernet cable but it takes 3 hours plus using Wifi.

Well, I don't really expect Sony to bring up things like backward compatibility if they no longer offer it. Microsoft doesn't scream "Wi-Fi is not built in" either. :)

But I do miss the backcompat on PS3. I wasn't an early adopter and therefore I missed out entirely.

Statistics never lie and liars always use statistics. Anyone can try and spin a desired product as the "best." What it really boils down to is what makes the gamer happy? Is it the PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, or some mutant combination of the three.

They forgot 360 shipping costs for RROD ;)

"Is it the PS3, Xbox 360, Wii, or some mutant combination of the three(?)"

The Wii-S-360?! NOW WE'RE TALKING!!!

I just dont agree with most of you, yes sony is being arrogant but there right the PS3 is better. Even if the cost is a bit more out the box it has basically everything you will ever need. Not only that there arent problems with the PS3 like the RROD. If were talking about exclusives the reason PS3 dosen't have many exclusives is because the 360 managed to get most of them.(It really pissed me of that the 360 got DMC4 and FFXIII) Everyone I know that owns a 360 switched to a PS3 because of the RROD.