Generalizing the population of one subset of consumers to a related, but different other subset, without hard facts to support that generalization, is a fallacy of debate...a logic flaw that may support your argument, but honestly makes it no stronger.
IF the top 10 games for the 360 were 90% shooters and 20% shooters for the PS3, maybe you'd have an argument. A 60%-50% split is hardly definitive evidence though, particularly as Killzone 2 will probably be a top 10 PS3 game soon enough.
In fact, a larger install base, by definition lends itself to more diversity, while the smaller one would tend to be more homegeneous, good reasons why the PS2 had such a diverse install base (and the original XBOX had such a "shooter" centric one).
Nobody said x360 sells only shooters. We simply said the vast majority of HD shooter fans bought a 360 instead. Considering the reputations of the ps2 and xbox, this isn't surprising. Also, being a shooter fan doesn't mean one doesn't buy games from other genres. Frankly, even a ps3 fan like myself would probably buy my multiplat shooters on 360 if I had one.
For all we know the 8 mil+ lead the 360 has on the ps3 could be 90% shooter fans while the rest of it's userbase is diverse. For proof of the ps3 sales prowress, look no further than the RE5 sales on our homepage. Ps3 has a much higher attach ratio. It even has higher attach ratios than the ps2 so I'm simply tired of arguing against this same sentiment over and over...
"Dr. Tenma, according to you, lives are equal. That's why I live today. But you must have realised it by now...the only thing people are equal in is death"---Johann Liebert (MONSTER)
"WAR is a racket. It always has been.
It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives"---Maj. Gen. Smedley Butler