That's not what this thread is about so why do you and others keep harping about it.

Alright tell me this , what solid/useful conclusion can we come to by.

A.Comparing 3rd party exclsuvies alone

B. Not including Multiplatform games which make up the bulk of the libary

C. Excluding the Wii

Because those things are not what this thread is about... derailing a thread is a bannable offense as well... please if you're not going to contribute anything then just don't post on here anymore.  The Wii isn't included because it's so far ahead that it's secured number one and multiplatforms are not exclusives and even if he added them most of them sell better on the 360.  Generally 1st/2nd party will only keep you afloat and that's about it... even Nintendo  who's 1st party is alot better then Sony's can't push their sales much past the floating point.

He who wins the 3rd party race wins war... NES did it as did the SNES eventually... the PS and PS2 did it and the 360 will do it this time... The Wii is on it's own... I still have trouble understanding why so many people buy the system.

Thanks for the feedback folks. I like a good discussion, but please spare the hate to fanboy threads.

I see a lot of criticism as to the criteria chosen for evaluation. Specifically - why not count 1st and 2nd party games? Isn't ignoring it misses a critical part of the picture? How can you determine the "winner and loser" without taking those into account?

So let me be crystal clear about what this thread is and what it is not about.

This thread does not attempt to evaluate the overall winner between the 360 and the PS3. It does not try to evaluate the quality of their respective lineups. It does not try to predict the success of the titles in the market.

This thread also does not claim that 1st and 2nd party titles are not critical to the success of the platform. Of course they are critical. It would be silly to suggest otherwise.

What this thread IS trying to do is to evaluate only one aspect of the competition between the 360 and the PS3: 3rd party support.

I am not claiming in this thread that 3 party support over-shadows other elements of the competition like 1st and 2nd party titles, price, HW quality, brand name and other goodies. These are all very important in the competitive landscape. But so is 3rd party support. 

A gaming platform may win with poor 3rd party support. Just look at the Wii - took the market by storm upon introduction on the sole strength of its 1st party titles.  So yes, you can win with those alone.

But 3^rd party support can be a significant influencer on buying decisions and the “abundance of titles” on one of the platforms can create a perception of a “winner” (and vice versa – consistant lack of titles may cause “loser” perception).

So this thread tries to measure only this aspect. The conclusions of this thread will help us assess if one of the platform is differentiating itself from the other platform through this level of support. Will one of the platforms get week after week more titles released on it? Is one of the platform going to get the perception of “this is the console that has all the titles”?

So this is what it is about. I hope this answers some of the issues.

Current list stands on: 

360 3rd Party Exclusives:

1. Start Ocean 4
2. The Last Remnant
3. Left 4 Dead
4. C&C Red Alert
5. Splinter cell conviction.
6. Huxley
7. Dead Island
8. The Tales of Despereaux
9. Raven Squad: Hidden Dagger
10. Stocked
11. Velvet Assassin
12. Indianapolis 500 Evolution
13. Brave: A Warrior's Tale
14. Secret Service: Ultimate Sacrifice
15. Crash: Mind Over Mutant
16. Guilty Gear 2: Overture
17. SBK Superbike World Championship
18. Winter Sports 2: The Next Challenge
19. High School Musical 3: Senior Year DANCE!
20. Dance Dance Revolution Universe 3
21. Naruto: The Broken Bond

PS3 3rd Party Exclsuive:

1. Valkyria Chronicals
2. FF XIII VS.
3. Quantom Theory
4. Yakuza 3
5. Disgaea 3 (PAL only)
6. Naruto: Ultimate Ninja Storm

This is where your argument trips up , the consumer doesn't know the difference between 3rd party ,2nd or 1st party titles in many cases they wont' even know a game is multiplatform (possibly due to the way it was advertised) . A libary consists of 3rd party ,2nd part and 1st party games at the end of the day , 3rd party support can be a significant influence I agree but that's only dependant on the level of 1st,2nd party support ,multiplatform games , other consoles , the quality of the 3rd party games in question.

The reason other people are telling you to include these other factors is because the signifiance (or insignificance) of strong 3rd party support becomes more apparent when considered against or with the other variables.

It's all good and well making a list of 3rd party titles which will clearly favour Microsofts strategy of pushing 3rd party support heavily on their platforms but Sony and Nintendo's ethos is different they tend to push internal development more .We're not trying to derail the thread when we say factor in "X" or "Y" but we are in fact doing the very opposite , trying the make the comparison a better quality one.

you fail epicly just like your favorite Naruto character Lee... the thread clearly states what this is about if you don't like the way he does it make your own thread... you'd think he kicked your dog and banged your mom and gf at the same time from the way some of you are reacting.  If you don't like it make your own thread with all the other stuff you think should be in here.

Interesting.  So, are you trying to determine where the non-availability/non-viability crossover point on the graph would be, or do you already have a "ratio" in mind (total body of 3rd party games vs exclusive 3rd party games) and you are trying to see how close the current platforms are to that target ratio?

In other words, do you have a formula that states something like "when the competition reaches a point where its 3rd party exclusives divided by the total body of 3rd party games exceeds ratio X, then the death spiral begins"?

Perhaps there would have to be some sort of ramp up period where the total body of 3rd party games has to exceed a certain threshold to be meaningful.  For example, if you have consoles X and Y just entering the market (< 12 months), and the total number of 3rd party games = 50, with console X having 10 exclusives and console Y having 3 exclusives, then it would "appear" that console Y is in trouble because console X's ratio is very good (10/50 or 20% of 3rd party games denied to console Y).  But that would be deceiving because both consoles are in "ramp up" mode, and consumers and devs are just beginning to explore the options.

But take two consoles X and Y each being in the market > 2 years, with the total number of 3rd party games = 500, with console X having 10 exclusives and console Y having 3 exclusives, and it would appear that console Y is not in trouble, because console X has a ratio of 10/500, or 2% 3rd party games denied to console Y.

So, I would think that finding the ratio of 3rd party exclusives to all 3rd party games after the ramp up period would be important.

Just my 2 cents.

EDIT: I forgot to mention an important factor: title rank/appeal.  If title COD 6 was denied to console Y, then the impact would be very significant.  If title Billy Bob's Bass Fishing Adventures was denied to console Y, then the impact would be much less (at least I would hope so).

Hold on Cueil. Although I appreciate you coming to my defense (something that is rare around here) I think you picked on the wrong guy. Million is making a good and rare reasoned argument here, and not the usual kneejerk fanboy comment.

So please keep your vigilance, we'll need it. But let's save it to the posters who really deserve some sharp barbs.

Wow, I love your questions. Do I have a cross-over in mind? Not yet, but I do have some ranges in mind though. Let's think through it together (it is a bit subjective and I know others may have other cross over points in mind):

If one platform has on an average week 100% more titles overall (including 1st and 2nd) than the other platform (i.e. twice more), then this is clear and utter domination in market place. By now the winner/losers are well known.

If the one platform has 50% more titles on an average week then I think it is also domination, though in early stages.

If the one platform has 10% more titles on an average week then it will probably fly under the public perception radar. No harm done.

If the one platform has 20% more titles on an average week then I think it is reaching the point of visibility. People may start noticing that one platform has always more titles than the others.  This is the "red zone" for the lagging platform. It may still recover or get lucky and survive it, but it is certainly in danger.

With 30% regular advantage to one platform than I think we have passed the cross over point and the death spiral will start.

So I think we'll need to track which system is starting to trend towards the 20% and later the 30% advantage point. I don't think we are there today, but we need to track it over time to see what the trends are showing.

Do you think this makes sense?