This is totally just a theory intended to incite discussion, and I absolutely welcome dissenting opinions and debate. Besides, the basic idea has been argued before. 

For a long time -- even after the release of the Wii and PS3 -- many people criticized the the 360 for its relative lack of diversity in its library. Or, at least, the relative lack of SUCCESS of titles outside the traditionally succesful genres on te Xbox: shooters, sports, racing. And to some extent, that is a weakness.

At this point, however, I think one coudl argue that it is also a strength, as it sufficiently distinguishes the 360 from the Wii to make it a viable alternative. Because the 360's game library so heavily tilts towards shooters and more violent games (to avoid flames: I'm not saying it literally has NO games that do not fit this description, just that it has disproportionately more than most succesful platforms), it provides a legitimate alternative to the Wii for the user.

The comparison struck me after looking at this month's NPD results: Uncharted did much poorer than expected, as has Ratchet and Clank. Assasin's Creed and Call of Duty, however, did quite well on both the PS3 and 360. Which, when combined with games like Viva Pinata on the 360, makes the PS3/360's success rate with non-violent games shockingly poor. 

The problem is that these less violent games play a very important role in the PS3's library; Uncharted and Ratchet, for example, were intended to be two of the PS3's headlining titles this Christmas (and they are great games, from all critical standards, just not from commercial ones). By contrast, the 360 has never intended to rely on these games to make up part of its core audience, and thus the fact that the Wii has soaked up nearly everyone who would play such games has affected it much less. Unlike the PS3, the 360 not only has Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty, but also Mass Effect and Halo 3 as legitimate hardware pushers this Christmas; two more games that significantly distinguish the 360 from the Wii. In other words, at this point, the 360's lopsided library may actually be helping it at this point, since the Wii has taken all the non-gritty sports/violent demographics anyway.  

Just a passing thought, really, and would be more than welcome to criticism. For starters, I think it's possible that the PS3 may end up eating away some of the more casual, non-violent market share, in which case the inclusion of games like Uncharted and Ratchet and Little Big Planet will have paid off; but I have assumed, for the purposes of this discussion, that all such demographics have essentially made a mass exodus to the Nintendo console. Perhaps that will prove unfair at a later date; I'm just basing this on recent sales trends.  

I never saw that as its weakness. On the contrary, its large library has been nothing but beneficial.

Came in here thinking it was about the poor quality of the hardware & RROD lol.

360 makes a good secondary console with your Wii if you don't have a gaming PC

I agree with you, most XBox 360 owners are FPS fans (due to games like Call of Duty, BioShock and Gears), so releasing a game like Halo 3 will do very well amongst its userbase as will other 3D shooters like Mass Effect. Halo 1 and Halo 2 were the original XBox' most important games, so I think it's not much of a surprise. The Wii has a much larger percentage of yound kids and females playing, while PS3 and XBox 360 is preferred by older teen and mature males according to surveys.

I do applaud the approach of game diversity though, games like Singstar and Ratchet & Clank can be enjoyed by the whole family. On the PS3 there's still a lot to keep the hardcore FPS fan satisfied with good 3D shooters like Warhawk, Resistance, Unreal Tournament 3 and Call of Duty 4. I think having a large game diversity is good for the long run, eventually there will be a slimline PS3 for kids to afford and there will be a nice selection of games to choose from.

Killzone 2 (and of course Metal Gear Solid 4 and later Resistance 2) I think will be very important for the PS3 to be more viewed as the ultimate shooter console, I think that in people's eyes offering the best is more important than the amount of games offered within the gerne (quality above quantity). Personally I applaud the addition of light hearted games like Snakeball and LittleBigPlanet to it's games library as I'm not the type of guy who plays 3D shooters all day long and like the ability to play some game with my girlfriend (she hates FPS games, she loves Motorstorm, R&C, Super Stardust HD, Super Ruba Dub, Fl0w though, of the PS2 games she likes are Ape Escape 2 & 3, but for instance she doesn't feel like playing God of War games although see likes to watch me playing these, unlike FPS games, I guess too hectic/disorientating to watch).

If the 360 library is lop-sided as you say in your post wouldnt that (not saying it does) take away potential buyers.

Take me for example...I have a Wii and have been saving money to buy a 360 or Ps3 as i want to play games with high end graphics.

Do I:

a) buy a 360 due to its large library? even though its mostly consists of FPS but is cheaper.

or

b) buy a PS3 as its has a diverse of games?(not as large as the 360 tho) and has some good upcoming-games and already good games outside of the FPS genre. And plus it costs more.




- right now im straying towards the PS3 as its game library has lots of potential for the future....

but you are right bod saying that the 360 is getting a advantage since im already wanting to play some o the FPS on the 360.

 Entirely possible, Mike, and I do agree from a purely philosophical perspective that a well rounded library is better. As a game player, as well, there is probably more on the PS3 that I would want to play than on the 360, because I personally tend to prefer the Afrikas and the Viva Pinatas to the Killzones and Gears of Wars. 

But from a sales perspective, it isn't clear, and it may end up that Uncharted and Ratchet style games wasted resources (again, from a purely economic perspective). Let me put this in a crude but clear manner: if the Wii is going to take 90% of child and female gamers no matter what you do, wouldn't it be best to put a hugely disproportionate amount of your company's resources into capturing males age 18-30? Because all that money spent trying to capture younger and less masculine audiences is essentially going into a pit.

Again, this entirely assumes the Wii continues to remain dominant in all demographics outside males age 18-30, which it may not. But if it does... well, again, the 360's weakness becomes its strength.   

I think price is still a huge barrior to the Xbox 360 and PS3. Im sure a million kids or even 3 million kids wanna play Ratchet and Clank but its just too expensive. If either of them wanna get to the mass market, there gonna have to eventually get to the $199 or at least $250 mark. Honestly, I cant imagine anyone honestly not wanting a PS3. I think everyone wants one. It is a great system. Its just the price. I already got a 360 and probably wont get a second system until prices go down. I wont get a Wii until its $150 cause I think Ill feel cheated. But thats just me.

You flaws are what make you perfect.
Except when you failed to perform.

 Your arguments are totally reasonable in a world where the Wii  does not exist, and that's why the 360 was criticized so much before the Wii became so popular (and even afterward, to some extent). The point is that now that the Wii IS here, and has soaked up such a large portion of the demographics outside males 18-30, is it even worth Sony and MS' time to try to get those demographics back? Because as of right now, games like Viva Pinata, Uncharted and Ratchet are running in to a brick wall and losing money. 

Every company has a limited amount of resources. Is it really better to be spending money trying to recapture the female/child/elderly markets, or would it be better to accept those markets as lost and focus entirely on the demographics you have succesfuly captured?  

I wonder how good it is to give the same image as the original Xbox...

According to Pachter, 90% of the Xbox 360 owners are hardcore gamers and gamers who did have the original one....