Yeah, you have a point as far as Master Chief Collection, and Gears Ultimate go. If I'm allowing remasters  of Vita games then you should be able to allow remasters of 360 games. Gears Ultimate, Gears 4, and Forza Horizon 3 should all be counted towards PC's games that can't be played on PS4. That brings PC's number versus PS4 up to 13 games. Since remasters count, let's be fair and say that TLoU Remastered counts too.

Halo Wars doesn't have 10 reviews on either gamerankings or metacritic, so it didn't meet my criteria. RIGs and LBP both have 80% or higher, and Halo Wars 2 does not. Killer Instinct season 3 is not a game, but DLC to a game, so it doesn't meet my criteria either.

Titanfall, Gears Ultimate, Gears 4, Killer Instinct, Forza Horizon 3 and Ori are all on PC. If you count Arkham Knight XB1 has 7 games that are not on PC, that meet my criteria.

That would be 12 high rated XB1 games that can't be played on PS4. Meanwhile PS4 has 18 high rated games that can't be played on XB1. Honestly counting Forza (which releases every year), is about as silly as counting MLB the Show (Which also releases every year), but I'll allow it. In case you were wondering, I'm not counting the MLB games towards my PS4 numbers. Edit: Why are we counting Rare Replay? That would be like counting PS1 games on the PSN store.

So now only Gamerankings matters, needs a certain number of reviews, Forza doesn't count, must have a designer named Steve, must be made in a country that exports wheat, etc etc. Like I said, shifting goal posts. I don't care if you want to alter and move stuff around to put Sony ahead, just don't be silly and say MS has nothing when going by the criteria you post, they have more than the others :)

I think its about how many exclusive franchise a console has.. Halo was the hottest franchise leading upto 360, then gears happened. But in mean time Sony was losing previous exclusive franchise, but they were busy buying studios to deliver franchise after franchise, Uncharted, Infamous, littlebigplanet, the last of us, resistance, Motorstorm, Demon Souls (spiraled into dark souls).. these are all franchise started just on PS3.

And Sony turned on Beast mode in terms of releasing exclusive by the mid ps3 life cycle, as opposed to MS who didnt had enough first party firepower to support 360, which was dwarfed by ps3 exclusives. And MS had to drop 360 support in order to focus on xbox one.

So I think it was the momentum from 7 gen which helped Sony lead the sales with PS4

If Microsoft fucked up hard then how the hell did they manage to be as successful with that Xbone as with the 360? Quite the mystery isn't it. >_>

Sony owns the ips insomniac made for them (hence why they left). They wanted one to themselves. Microsoft was just a publisher. The franchise could go anywhere at anytime. They we're third party for Microsoft. 

They likened their offerings to Sony as much as possible making it easy for people in Europe and America to jump ship to the 360. When Sony dropped the price of the PS3 and kept the hits coming with the exclusives there wasn't much ms could do to stop their ascent. The only brand that could ever close a deficit in sales to their main competition based on their exclusives, third party and brand power.

Good ps3 support, continued with the ps4

They just made what everyone wanted at a good price

Nintendo bought into their own BS and keep releasing garbage. MS pushed a fad with the Kinect and tried to force it down everyone’s throat. MS also killed any chance they had by announcing the ridiculous DRM plan. Backpedaling later doesn’t work when you are so adamant about it in the beginning. They lost consumer trust.

I'm right on topic.  You mentioned that the price of the Xbox One was the factor.  I expounded upon it, and you can disagree all you want.  That's your opinions as well.  But if you are too scared to answer a question that requires critical thinking, then you are in denial of the fuller picture of why the pricing was an issue.  Because either Microsoft promoted a product that the consumer wanted at a reasonable price or they pushed an agenda that served them more than the consumer.  So let's see which is it.

Looking back, the two groups of consumers who would have wanted an Xbox One at launch were rabid Microsoft/Xbox fanboys or those who wanted something specifically from the Xbox such as Halo, Gears, Kinect, etc.  Because who else in there right mind would pay $500 for a item when you have another option that costed $400 and did those same things better?  So why was the Xbox One $100 more than the PS4?  Maybe it was Kinect because a camera wasn't bundled with the PS4.  But did the consumer wanted it?  Apparently not since Microsoft had to debundle it from the Xbox unit a year later due to poor sales, and they charged $150 for Kinect standalone.  So if you were to buy a standalone Xbox One for $400 and later bought Kinect for $150, why in the hell would you since a the original bundle costed $500?  Obviously, most of us didn't want an overpriced, underpowered console with "junk" hardware.  The Xbox One itself isn't a bad console.  But the reality I live in has the option of the PS4, and the One looked prety pathetic when compared to what Sony had to offer.  So it wasn't just about price.  The One just wasn't worth it because Microsoft bundling Kinect with every Xbox One is just as bad if not worse than Gamestop bundling hardware people didn't want with a console.  And why pay more for less?  Microsoft thought people were stupid enough to buy into their bullshit.  This is why Sony took the market.

Yeah, we all know why Insomniac chose MS over Sony for Sunset. That doesn't change anything I said. Insomniac was still a great 2nd party partner for Microsoft.