Exactly! I've been debating whether they might have worked something out with Activision, but I can't decide if Bobby Kotick likes the multiplat monies too much lol.

@ Kowenicki: Title is just concise and a bit spicy, don't take any offence - I know the 360 has a diverse catalogue. ;)

oh god I hope not, I've owned one Activision game this gen and it was average. I don't think Activison can offer a quality exclusive unless it was COD (more so MW) but that will never go exclusive.

Perhaps Ubisoft and TakeTwo are better options? Bioshock infinite perhaps?

IMO the only reason the 360 can still even be called the shooterbox is because of Halo's hugeness and that multiplat shooters like Call of Duty sell higher on the 360 version. And it does have Gears of War as well obviously and Left 4 Dead but L4D could be coming to PS3 since Valve now apparently loves PS3.

Really when you just compare games and forget about sales, the PS3 is just as much a shooterbox than 360. I mean PS3 has Resistance, Killzone, MAG, SOCOM and Warhawk

There are a lot more exclusive nonshooters than Alan Wake and Lost Odyssey, and I'm pretty sure they outnumber exclusive shooter titles on the 360. Last time I checked, shooters sold the best on the PS3 as well, so how is it any different really? That being said, I think that jab you threw in pretty much undermine a few fair points you made in your first paragraph.

This is a great point. Interestingly, Sony has published more shooters this gen than Microsoft has, though some people here would like to ignore that.

Who said anything about the number of shooter titles outnumbering the non-shooter titles?  Not I, and I don't think that's a valid point either.  And as much as I hate to admit it, I personally feel that the PS3 offers a more variety of quality titles across genres that caters to a wider audience regardless of shooters selling more on the PS3.  But shooters are a very popular genre this gen so Iwouldn't doubt it sells the most PS3 and moreso on the 360.  I don't see the issue here.

Bad point because I hear that it's the consumers thatdetermine the market in regards to demand which by and large is true.  I don't see the consumers flocking to the PS3 like they do the 360 when it comes to shooter games.  This is reality. I can understand the argument that "shooters sell best on the PS3," but that doesn't necessarily make it the "shooter box" when you consider the bigger picture.  The bigger picture also includes the 360.  There.

Let me make a summary of my point then:

Xbox 360 exclusives are more nonshooters than shooters, yet best selling games on the system are shooters

PS3 exclusives are more nonshooters than shooters, yet best selling games on the system are shooters

"Variety of quality titles" is an opinion which can easily be attacked from the other side, but what I have listed above are facts. I think the only reason the PS3 doesn't get labelled as a shooter box is that while Microsoft publishes Gears and Halo and those do extremely well (and combined with Call of Duty are the three biggest franchises on the platform), the shooters Sony publishes aren't the biggest franchises on the platform, but Call of Duty sales prove that there's a large shooter base for the PS3 as well. That's just my take though. I just don't see why it's ignored that the amount of shooters is roughly the same on both consoles.

themanwithnoname  makes sense, but id like to throw it that another reason why the 360 is seen as a shooterbox is because the fans themselves swear up and down that the 360 controller is the best control for FPSs way better than PS3 and Wiimote. IMO besides the shoulder buttons its the same damn thing. I do just as well or bad with the 360 pad as with the PS3 pad. (except for fighting games, 360 controllers suck for that)

It is opinionated that the 360 is a "shooterbox," and I don't see why that should be a problem for anyone including kowenicki especially since he only considered PART of what was said to make his case.  And the facts you presented led to your OPINIATED conclusion.  As I mentioned earlier, "...it's the consumers thatdetermine the market in regards to demand which by and large is true.  I don't see the consumers flocking to the PS3 like they do the 360 when it comes to shooter games."  So are you saying that if a person is a shooter fan, they should buy a PS3 instead of a 360 out of default just because SONY makes more shooters than Microsoft?  That might be true on paper.  So that means that shooter fans should buy MAG or Resistance over whatever is offered on the 360.  But according to sales in the realm of reality, that's not generally happening when you consider the high sales of the Halo and Gears franchise, and multi-platform games such as the COD franchise that sells far more that the PS3 version.  And that's not counting the perceived association with these and other shooter titles with the 360.