ah - the good old times. Zelda Oot was actually my first console game, too. And the amazing MM, probably the most revolutionary Zelda ever, as it completely deviates from the usual path of storytelling and advancement, a more emotional Zelda with a fascinating time system...

Strategically, it would make a lot of sense for Microsoft as they could bundle "Natal" with revised 360 hardware putting a lot of pressure on the competition while keeping the transition to higher spec hardware easy. In a way, all the big three hardware manufacturer face the trouble of having to upgrade overtime their hardware in order to maintain momentum and a marketing edge while not doing a whole hardware transition, which would alienate the existing consumer base and pose huge problems for the developing community. The solution to this dilemma could be incremental hardware revisions, as a lot of analysts argued in the past. But as this generation of hardware has become obsessed with new control schemes and accessories, it could also make introducing new controllers an easy exercise.

We will see what the future holds, but such a move by Microsoft could pressure Nintendo to go HD or upgrade fully (something they wouldn't like to do right now) and leave Sony on the sidelines, as Sony still has to recover from introducing the costly PS3 in the first place. Thus Microsoft could potentially widen the gap to Sony (especially if revised new 360 hardware would match the then "old" PS3 price-wise), while narrowing the gap to Nintendo (if not closing it).

Actually I disagree with you and here is the reason why: The PS3 does not compare to the PS2 in terms of sales and thus is far less interesting to develop for. Look, gamecube and xbox got dropped after 4 or 5 years not because their hardware couldn't compete with PS2, but because of business viability (same story N64 and PS1). No publisher is gonna care about PS3 for 7 to 10years if doesn't move enough numbers.

So yes, I am getting it, and no, I do not believe Sony on their 10year lifecycle.

Here is the key problem for Sony, maybe the PS3 could last 10years hardware-wise, but if there are new kids on the block looking smarter (i.e. new consoles from Microsoft or Nintendo), Sony will have to move. It's a question of momentum! And no, the PS3 doesn't have the momentum to last 10years currently and doesn't look likely to get it in the next two years. Thus it will be over far sooner than 10 years.

In my opinion, they gonna continue with a PS4 or similar after 5 years of PS3, just in order to turn their business around. In order to do so, PS4 could basically be just an updated PS3 with maybe some new control schemes bundled and other faceliftings, but nothing more. It'd have to happen more marketing-wise, than hardware-wise.

If I was Sony or Microsoft, I'd start to look into vitality sensors. Though I do not know what a vitality sensor is about and how it could positively impact my gaming habits, it's a Nintendo product and it's gonna sell. Simple as that! And yes, Nintendo is gonna smile at us - for being so stupid and buying into that. And yes, in three years time PS3 is gonna have a 20 year life-cycle and a sensor sold separately which tells you exactly how many more years PS3 is gonna last. And because it's a Sony product, it's gonna cost 249$.

While everyone has been predicting doom for Nintendo (myself too, thank you very much), they are still printing money and there is one simple reason for it, they were first to market with new technology that worked and everyone else is late.