OR

Which is the right way to consider game libraries? 

There's more than one way of looking at things but lately, it seems like people prefer to look at the 2nd way instead of the first when it comes to determining the quality of a game console's library.  Is it better to include everything (Table "A") and take the worth of a particular device's library as a whole?  Is it better to omit certain games and just look at 100% exclusives (Table "B")?  I don't know anymore.  Depending on how you look at things, the entire picture changes.  Which is the best way?

--Keep in mind that this is just an example.  I don't know what the picture would look like if we counted only retail games, included downloadable games, tossed a Wii out of a window, or imagined Kinect games as real games.  I just want to know if we should count everything or give 100% exclusives more weight.

I just count the exclusives. Look  at it this way- a person has an xbox and PC and wonder if they should get a ps3. They look at the games- and theres plenty of exclusives to justify a purchase. Now someone has a ps3 and a pc, and they look at the xbox- and a lot of those games are on PC. So whats the point? 

What if someone can only buy 1?

I don't give a damn on what reviewers say unless I'm REALLY on the fence on a game, so I don't look at it as a whole, but what system has the most games I want to play.

The games I want to play determine the best gaming library from MY point of view. It may be unreliable for the gaming community as a whole, but.....

and about your exclusives question, I vote that they don't get more weight, but are still counted, ie table A for total games.

Gotta look at the games that matter most to you, rather than considering a "library". Libraries don't matter to anyone except insofar as they have games you want to play.

I picked the third option.

When and why did these people get a gaming PC  and Xbox/PS3? You scenario is ridiculous beyond the pale. People don't just wake up and find they have a couple of gaming systems then start asking if they should get another one. A consoles merits is based on everything it can offer. Not eveything it can offer supposing you magically gained something to artificially make it look worse.

I count whatever I can play vs what I can't play.

I look for the system that has the most games that I really want to play. So looking at it with just exclusives would show things likely to tip the balance. However it's nice to see the whole library when deciding and just have the exclusives or console exclusives marked as they are.

when comparing two specific consoles library's (like the 360 and ps3) i would only compare the games that i can't get on the other.  if i can get a game (like dead space 2) on either it isn't really a decision point on choosing what to buy.

when evaluating the quality of a specific consoles library (like the ps3) i would include any game on the system.

Depends on the situation for me. If someone is JUST getting into this gen, and choosing whether to buy a PS3, XBOX360 or PC, then I think looking at everything is the best way to go. However if you have one console/PC, and are looking to buy another console/a PC, you should look at the exclusives.

I say this because if you had a XBOX360, and you were choosing between a PC and PS3, I would personally look at the exclusives since there's alot of games which can be played on XBOX360 and PS3, and also on the XBOX360 and PC, but the PS3 and PC also have exlusives which make them stand out.