Now lets talk games. PS3 doesn't have too many good exclusive games. Yes PS3 has more exclusives than Wii and 360 but, I'm talkin quality exclusives. Most of thoes games seem boring and derrivative. I mean I'd rather play a fun game Halo 3 or SSBM than friggn MGS 4 or SOCOM.
That's all a matter of opinion. I have all three systems, but my PS3 library is currently larger than my other two game libraries combined. The Wii hasn't had anything worth playing SINCE Brawl and I still prefer playing Melee. It's sad that the most fun you can get out of the system is the pack-in title and Nintendo doesn't seem to give a rat's ass about making games that exceed it.
Microsoft cares more about cross-marketing PC games. I'd rather get most 360 games on the PC where they look and control better. And you consider MGS4 derivative, but Halo 3 to not be? That's a laugh. Even the RPGs they've bribed developers into making have been lackluster, very derivative, and more often than not, boring. The only reason I keep the system at this point is because a friend of mine gave me Rock Band for the system and I don't want to buy all the downloadable songs again.
At least on the PS3, I can enjoy games and experiences I can't get anywhere else, like Valkyria Chronicles, Little Big Planet, Warhawk, Eye of Judgement, Uncharted, Heavenly Sword, Disgaea 3, Ratchet and Clank, etc. I'd rather play any of them over Halo 2.1 or either of the Gears games. The only other notable games on the system were Fable 2, which I find as monotonous as the first, and Mass Effect which is a game that had it not been on the 360, people would be able to admit how awful it is.
Your first paragraph is also pretty laughable. It's full of misquoted or just plain wrong information. As Inkmonkey said, the Dualsock 3 is a standard pack in with every system at this point. It has been since the MGS4 bundle was released. Plus DVD and CD playback are still possible on all versions of the PS3, I can't even fathom where you would have gotten the idea that either was not possible.
As for prices, the controllers cost more than $29.99, but that's pretty much to be expected these days. You pay $50+ for controllers on any system these days. With cables, you can get them for less if you know where to look and it's not like Microsoft and Nintendo are any better in that respect. The Wii supports up to 480p, but if you want the clearer picture, you still have to shell out for a component cable. Nintendo was too cheap to even support full HD on their system which looks pretty awful on large screen HD TVs. The 360 only comes with the HDMI cable if you buy the more expensive Elite system and you can't get even their upscaling to 1080p resolution without it. Sucks for those early adopters who have no HDMI port AT ALL who have to pay even more for an adapter.
Lets also not forget the little fees you end up paying just to get the system working with your home network, like the $100 wireless adapter, or the $50 a year for a live gold membership. It may not be an immediate charge, but if you consider you'll be playing the system for at least four years, you're talking a minimum of $200 added to the price of the system (if you opt to hook up directly to your router). The arcade is pretty much worthless without a hard drive and Microsoft charges a premium on those. So that $199 system that seems like such a steal ends up being more expensive than the elite and standard systems once all is said and done. And you can't really use the argument that you don't NEED live gold since you've already stated that you play Halo 3, which is pretty worthless without online play.
You want a slap in the face, Microsoft makes PC gamers pay-to-play on their PC-based version of Live, as well. They are the only company that charges for online gameplay functionality. They hike up the prices on cheap hardware so they can get you to pay more on their low cost systems. $100 for a 60GB hard drive, $180 for a 120GB hard drive, $100 for a wireless adapter, $20 for the play and charge kits ($15 if you get it with the controller), $50 a year just to play online. Microsoft loves to slap you in the face with charges all over the place. Don't kid yourself into thinking they are somehow more altruistic than Sony.
Nintendo is the same way, they just hide it better. They still split their controller into two separate pieces that you have to buy individually. They cut costs wherever they can to put together the cheapest hardware solution they possibly can come up with. In the end, it means less convenience for the consumer when they find their flash RAM isn't sufficient for their download needs or they find out popular online games don't allow any sort of communication to keep the game G rated. Nintendo didn't HAVE to use friend codes on the Wii, nor do they HAVE to go to the lengths they do to keep everything kid friendly. They charge you a premium on games you could have gotten for a fraction of the cost just months before they hit the VC. While the BC of the old gamecube games works flawlessly, it doesn't in any way interact with Wii functions, meaning you need to use different controllers and memory cards just to play your old games. Nintendo also continues this shortage farce in the US with the systems. They can be found pretty easily overseas where Nintendo can make more money off of the hardware and software sales.
I do find it funny that people are still referencing these ancient videos as an argument, though. Even now, when most people are admitting that Sony has really started to make a good showing in the market with a lot of good exclusives and a system that has proven it has a degree of quality vastly superior to the 360 in terms of durability and functionality, you still get people posting these dumb videos from youtube that weren't even funny back when they first came out.
