chesh

I summon Hideo Kojima, who inflicts confusion and panic on all enemies with overly convoluted plots.

I'd be most scared of a Grunt, as I'm not strong enough to defeat anything in the Haloverse in hand-to-hand(or claw) combat, but the weakling Grunt would take the longest and most painful time to dismantle my puny body.

Phantom Dust was my favorite game that no one liked, I'm happy now :D

"A gamer who wants the most computing power for his buck will naturally prefer the subsidized console, ceteris paribus."

That's certainly true. But I fairly certain that no one who buys a Wii is looking for the most computing power for their buck.

"Whether this is ultimately healthy for Microsoft and Sony is another matter entirely. The ultimate profitability of a game manufacturer is no concern of ours, as gamers."

Actually, it is. I enjoy Mario and Metroid games, a lot. If Galaxy and Corruption are the last of their respective franchises, I will likely burst into tears upon hearing that confirmed. It is in my best interest for Nintendo to remain profitable.
Likewise, I really enjoy a lot of Sony's games. I hope there's more Jak, God of War, Gran Turismo, and something from Team Ico coming in the next few years. I'm not mad about the continuous fuckups and lies with the PS3 because I don't like Sony; I'm mad because I love Sony and want them to keep doing what they do well.

One final point: if a company doesn't believe in its product enough to take a small loss at launch, what does this risk averseness say about executive confidence in the long-run prospects of the product? A larger, up-front investment indicates stronger confidence that a product will eventually be successful enough to pay for initial investment.

"Most comments below are ignoring the ceteris paribus stipulation of the argument."

Maybe if you used words most people knew, they would heed them.

In case anyone hasn't bothered to Google it, it means "all things being equal".

"To put it another way, would you buy a Wii at $600 or at $100? You'd buy it at $100, because the $600 model is exactly the same."

Certainly, if Store A was selling it for $600 and Store B was selling it for $100, I would shop at Store B. Thankfully, all stores will be selling it for $250, which I percieve to be a great value, as opposed to the other options (a system that, with accessories, will cost $150-200 more, and another that will cost probably somewhere along the lines of $500 more with accessories; neither figure includes actually buying games to play on them, or the fact that I'd need to spend $1000 on a new TV to take full advantage of the other systems).

To put it another way, would I buy a PS3 at $600 or a PS3 at $1000? The answer is 'hell no', either way. I'll consider it at $600, if a game comes along that manages to induce religious ecstasy in all who so much as gaze upon the disc, but excepting that I'm waiting for the price drop.