Nonsense, the 360 controller has been voted best controller this gen. From sites like ign and EGM (R.I.P.)

No hard feelings, good discussion, maybe next time you can win:). As for now, I gotta roll

You cannot argue a subjective thing..The 360 controller was the worst d-pad ever, and ps3 controller was vastly better for fighting games and games that required d-pad useage and combos.....Nice try...not really.

What example? 2008 2009 was when Sony started pulling ahead of Microsoft especially after the MGS4 release. It set the tone for the fleet of first party Sony releases after the buzz that MGS4 launched occured. They've been outproducing them for almost five years now in first party. I think you're talking about them being their most competitive was from 2005-2009. They bought a lot of third party real estate and paid a lot of third parties to make games for them. Few of the studios were in house and most of those IP's outside of Crackdown (as a first party) fell through the cracks. 

I don't care what you think about their games. Thats not my problem. They have had more game of the year contenders than any of the competition and Last of Us will continue the trend. Keep talking because all you're doing is giving an opinion on how you feel about a company and not facts.

Yea MS will do well but Sony Im sure will do better. As many suspect anyway

That's for having no more games.

Right...

very few people would argue the xbox d-pad is better than the dualshock's d-pad (tbh I dont think anyone would)
as for the analogue sticks, I dont see any logic to asymmetry being better than symmetry.
triggers on the dualshock suck and shoulder buttons on xbox suck. - even there. (personally i find it faster pressing shoulder button to shoot on fps' than pressing a trigger and i hope on ps4 shooting stays with the shoulder buttons or atleast has the option to change to it)

size and shape of controller depends on person using it. Ive used dualshock since ps1, no problems what so ever, i can understand if people with big hands find it too small, but hey...being big has its advantages and disadvantages, you have to live with it.

Given xbox's lower graphical power, people are more likely to say its better at other things like the controller and online but at best, I see the XBone controller being marginally better (not for everyone) and I just dont see XBL matching PS+ so as far as this thread is concerned, I dont think they will get away with it.
300,000 servers is just marketing. no-one knows how small those servers could be, or how many of them are available/exclusive to XBL, and not already used up by other MS services.
I agree MS currently has a huge advantage when it comes to DL speeds but I think a years of PS+ revenue for sony will fix that issue.

Good marketing and/or new features is only what matters for a console to be a success or not.
Whether you have the best hardware, or best looking games doesn't matter, except for the core audience (which is small). Gaming forums does not represent the 250M+ audience WW.
The only way the X1 can be successful sales wise(same goes for the Wii U and PS4) is if they can market their product as being something new with exclusive features that can turn ''viral'' and make people impulse buy the product, it's that simple.

PS2 sold well because it was able to play games and DVDs and was pretty cheap, and well marketed.
Wii Sold well because it was able to distinguish itself from the competition by being something completely new as well as being affordable and marketed as being so.
iPhone sells really well every year, because of the marketing, not because it's the most powerful phone, sure it's not a gaming console, but if Apple didn't put ads everywhere, it wouldn't sell like it does.

So please stop with all that pixel count arguments and try to think instead.