I'm surprised no-one has mentioned the ps3's media centre capabilities. It'll play pretty much anything and you can upgrade the internal HDD in 2 mins to dump your media onto (can also stream using a server or plug in usb drive) High def mkv's (with a quick 5 min conversion) look splendid! It's a pity the 360 isn't as friendly here. Games wise, well they come and go but I think Sony is missing a trick in not honing the PS3's media capabilities more. It's almost made me dump the old xbmc but not quite yet.

I wish to complain about the poster desolot,

This poster has posted a well thought out comment, which is both unbiased and fair. I do not believe such comments belong on any INQ news article.

Let me start by saying that I take no sides; all three systems have their place. I own 3 xbox 360's, 2 Wii's, 2 PS2's and a PS3. For exclusive content a true gamer needs each machine... As far as cross-platform games the PS3 and 360 are equal (yes SOMETIMES a game looks/plays better on one but then OTHER TIMES a game looks/plays better on the other). I prefer having Blue ray and Blue tooth on the PS3 side (come on M$ get with it..) but then I prefer the 360 controller (can't someone make an adapter or drivers so the PC version of the 360 controller will work on the PS3??) The wii is better for party's...
Now if Sony lowers their prices the M$ will have to follow and than so will Nintendo; leaving Sony at the high end of the price list again. People will still lean toward the 360 and Wii claiming Sony's prices are too high; it happens (people are never satisfied). True gamers will buy all systems, Fanboys will but what they like best and everyone else will buy the cheapest system they can play their type of game on. What the general undecided must do is look for the best bang for the buck. I play my 360 more because that's what I bought first, that's where most of my friends are (What's up Wreckin Crew?!) and I prefer the controller. But if I were buying one system today? The PS3 has built in wireless lan, bluetooth and Blue ray. Gaming aside the PS3 is superior to the 360 out of the box but that comes at a price. The 360 wireless adapter is $100. USD and you can't get Blue ray or blue tooth for it at all but it's cheap...
I guess what I'm trying to say is; the price of the system alone shouldn't be the deciding factor. Think before you buy and remember; if you enjoy it, it's worth it no matter how much cheaper it might get later..

YAY! good news although hardly unforeseen. screw these comparisons: from what i see, killzone 2 is probably the only ps3 exclusive game 360 couldnt equal or do better, and thats only because the thing has had 4 years of optimisation to do something useful with the SPE's in cell, texture wise it still looks sub 360. CELL is poor for games, the GPU is strangled by a sole 128 bit bus unlike 360 which also has sort of an 'overflow valve' high bandwidth low latency edram buffer, split memory creates a latency barrier for the GPU, and possibly worst of all 360's OS requires only 32MB to run, and is more featured than ps3's which takes up over 70MB. this is the ps3 memory problem developers speak of. there is 10+ percent less memory to work with from day one which is why high res textures usually get the boot, and not enough bandwidth or ROPs for AA on most games. its also nasty and twice as expensive to program for. developers would rather get easy performance from 360, than spend half their time wringing the ps3's neck to find a little extra. needless to say ps3 is ill designed for games versus 360. despite all this, there is power to be had in the right place and i actually prefer gaming on ps3, its an incredibly full featured piece of hardware and would defend it to the hilt. this year is going to be good for it, and 360 looks quite weak on the game front than past years!

Yeah, a very obvious aticle.

I've been enjoying my PS3 for a while. It gets a lot of use as a media player and BR player. There's a few games I like to play on it. Generally we prefer the wii for gaming- it's just more fun.

Then there's all my xbox friends who are all on their 2nd to 4th machine because of hardware failures or being forced to upgrade to the "elite". All of them want PS3's but didn't want to spend the money, so this price cut would definitely bring more people into the fold.

@Mark
Oh dear... It begins already...
Actually, i own both (did own all three, but sold the Wii). So I do see ALL sides of the coin. I'm afraid your comments come across as the biased ones... Impartial views and reviews regularly maintain the better version on multi platform titles are on the xbox, so that's where I buy 'em. How on earth can you compare exclusive titles? You can't, so I didn't... And 'significantly better'? Come on!! They really don't. Not a single game on the ps3 has blown me away. They look good, of course they do, but really, there's nothing that has made me sit up and showcase that supposed 'etra horsepower' of the ps3 yet.

I never made any comment about the ps3's extras, apart from the obvious, as they are indeed, extras. As a gamesplayer, they are not needed. They are sometimes nice, but NOT needed...

"so when the games are the same, they look the same, why pay nearly twice the price for the same result?"

That sounds like the talk of a Xbot, or Microsoft astroturfer.

The PS3 exclusives look significantly better than Xbox exclusives, and these days multiplatform titles do to.

The PS3 offers far more value for money than any other console on the market, the Wii is cheap and cheerful, but killed by low quality shovelware, the 360 is expensive and feature lite, with nothing to look forward to in 2009 (a couple of Halo rehashes and a boatload of shovelware)

Predicting a price drop on the ps3 in the next few months is like shooting fish in a barrel... of course they will!
As m uch as they can't afford to lose any mroe money, they can't afford for the ps3 to become a lame duck, they need it to sell, and fast. Price cuts are the only way they are going to achieve it against a substantially cheaper xbox.
With the exception of BR playback, there is nothing else about it that is a 'must have', few exclusives on either side remain, so when the games are the same, they look the same, why pay nearly twice the price for the same result?