Metacritics =/= how good a game is. I don't agree with Metacritic arguements, but since were not debating which game is better, this is fine.

Killzone 2 is the best rated PS3 exclusive FPS at 91/100? Well Halo Reach is 91/100, Halo 3 is 94/100, Gears of War is 94/100, and Gears 2 is 93/100. Now for PS3 FPS's Killzone 3 is 86/100, Resistance is 86/100, Resistance 2 is 87/100, Uncharted is 88/100, and Uncharted 2 is 96/100. To put metacritic quality into perspective. the average rating per franchise in terms of metacritic is Gears of War (93.5), Halo (92.5), Uncharted (92), Killzone (88.5), and Resistance (86.5). The only well reviewed "shooter" (most would argue that genre classification) Sony has is Uncharted, and well Uncharted 2 sold well did it not? Gears does a little better because it's been great from the start, and Halo is FPS, so brownie points. A drop of 4 or 6% for games like this, and how much of a focus multiplayer has affects sales greatly. People don't buy FPS's for story only. However the multiplayer focus for outweighs the scores.

ODST still sold well because 1) it was bundled for 1 million units, 2) buying ODST got you access to the Halo: Reach Beta. There were 2.3 million unique beta players, I'm sure 1 million must have bought ODST for the beta. To support this, notice how ODST sales jump during April/May of 2010. 4 million for a FPS exclusive is still a lot, but the Halo name brings in sales too. Still this is why ratings =/= sales.

Actually Assassin's Creed, among many other franchises, are selling worse on PS3 then 360. AC2 had the closest number of units sold both in raw numbers, and by a ratio between console owners. AC:BH sold less units on PS3 compared to 360, both with raw numbers, and especially with a ratio between console owners (# of copies sold / console owners). AC isn't the only game following this trend, nor the only genre.

As for InFamous, I think God of War, and MGS4 would get strong numbers on 360 too.

My point is, if MS made a good Action/Adventure game, it would likely sell. If Sony made a good multiplayer focused FPS (Killzone and Resistance are more single player focused if you ask me), one that's up to the level of Halo/Gears, it would sell well too. A Halo might not get 9-11 million like it does on 360, but it should hold about as closely as a CoD title does between the two consoles.

What about MAG? I know it's not the most refined shooter ever, but it was damn well done and everyone I know who plays it loves it. 

MAG is nothing special? I played it, it's okay. IGN gives it a 7/10, not sure about the metascore. Why would you expect this game to sell well?

Giving MAG attention as a FPS for PS3 is like giving Crackdown attention as an A/A title for 360. I would never expect either to sell, quality just isn't there, but some people really love it.

By this stage, with many sales in many countries, it should be pretty obvious that both the 360 and PS3 are home to a fairly varied demographic base.

They are not identical of course, the somewhat different ratios of sales, etc. pointed out by many in this thread show that, but they are fairly similar (not really a surprise given probably 90% of their games and features are the same, in fact probably 95% or so) and in most cases you'll see similar sales on each (particularly in ratio to install base).

The PS3 probably has more diverse main game exclusives at the moment (MS really only has Halo, Gears and Forza as active main franchises it seems to me at the moment while PS3 has Killzone, Resistance, LBP, GT, inFamous, etc. etc) while PSN/XBLA titles are spread across all genres really and cancel each other out IMHO.

So they're not the 100% same and you won't see identical genre sales ratios, but they are very similar and you'll therefore see a lot of similarity.

The main difference regarding demographics I can see is more geographical - the PS3 has sold to more countries while the 360 is heavily skewed to English speaking countries, however for the most part this doesn't massively affect genre sales except in a couple of cases IMHO.

There is no doubt the 360 with its strong US/UK base has a higher percentage of shooter fans, but the sales of CoD on PS3 show it has plenty of shooter fans too. Similarly the PS3 probably does have a higher percentage of JRPG fans, but again its not black/white and JRPs can sell well enough on 360 too.

The difference is therefore the active percentage of demographic on each relative to the genres released for each rather than some simple black/white 360 is all shooters and PS3 is a even split over all other genres myth the OP is referring to.

Just replying in your Killzone and Halo meacritic score..

i think Ive read mixed personal reviews on Killzone versus COD's multi-player .. some like it better, some not.. but COD and Halo have an edge over other similar games - They aren't just good games - They have been there longer..Halo was there first ( but its obviously not multi-platform ) .. Xbox Live has been around since 2002  ( a bit after the First Halo game: Halo CE )......but Halo 2 ( 2004 ) was when (console owners*) first started findiing out the craze of how fun & addictive FPS shooters were when playing against a human opponent via the internet - Xbox Live .. (* Yes PC owners have know this much longer, but we're talking about consoles ) .. So in the middle of PS2's life.. 2004... when Halo 2 Launched ...PS2 owners had no universal online option yet.. PSN didnt launch until 2 years later ( late 2006, some places 2007 depending on where you lived in the world ) .. So Halo was building a loyal following on Xbox years before PSN existed... COD started alittle after Halo, but it too began to build a following on Xbox Live.. So the formula for COD's online play was already being tweaked so when PSN came online and PS3 was out the winning formula for COD was ready to go and probably the best overal option of PS3 FPS fans.... so fans keep buying it since more people play it online  they have more freinds that play it together online.. So the hype stays around those games.. If Halo was on PS3 it would sell more then 5 million because it has superb online multiplayer..it would most likely be PS3's  #3 best selling game ( instead of GTA IV ).. possibly even #2 .. unfortunately its not multi-plat.. but it is a great game most FPS fans would enjoy on any console.. As I mentioned millions of people own multiple consoles so its the best of all worlds..

You know, there are better games to play on consoles than FPS games..... really should go PC if you are serious about FPS games since console FPS games are kinda weak. More and more people are coming back to PC too since the prices are getting lower now and there are a lot of nice looking F2P games coming out that easily beat console 60 dollar games.....

remember quality is an opinion of how a game looks, fills, and plays.

i find it funny how i personaly hate every halo except reacg and most halo fans around me say reach is the worst.

quality can be proven but only for the games we actualy know suck, but not games that get low sells.

as a owner or back catalog of every sony ps3 ip except lair and white night chronicals that should tell you only 2 games that sony published suck'd. lair still sounds cool and i may pick it up in the end.

in the end its all about appeal. if you change the word from quality to appeal then u'd be right as rain.

now see that statement is not true, and we can look at it as opinion, perception, or personal experiance.

i find the only thing COD has over Killzone is customization for weapons and speed of gameplay, but KZ is the shooter that actualy has the weight of someone carrying alot of equipment which is how a true military shooter should feel.

maybe KZ3's AI is to smart for some people which is the case most of the time when i sit someone that plays COD down infront of KZ. that say they can play any shooter and as soon as i put the controler in there hands they either say this shits to intence for me, or how the fuck that dud got up from that headshot.

even the online multiplayer overwhelmes them.

COD has become to casual and simple of a franchise and overtly predictable.

KZ is online friendly, and it even has a sortove hord mode called botzone. you can set and customize your own matchs which makes KZ community friendly.

KZ3 should not have been coop and nore should KZ ever be. its just not that kind of game.

i've got several 360 owners because of KZ3 saying fuck playstation. the games are to hard to play they should make games easyer to play. yes i find it funny.

Try to continue a Killzone 3 co-op campaign in single player, or vice versa? You can't! When I first played KZ3 I played it co-op, and I nearly completed it. Then in order to finish the game, I had to play it in single player....from the very start.

How is something so basic like this ignored? This is an example of the lack of polish a Halo game doesn't have.

I will stand up and claim Killzone 3 isn't as well designed online as Halo or Gears are. It's a great game because the controls, story, and graphics make it so. Online is fun as hell too, but there are some critical flaws which hurt it from sales IMO.

CoD and Halo are both very simple games, but Gears of War is just as difficult to play online, yet it's online base is still huge? I'll agree simple FPS's appeal to casual gamers, and that's one reason why Halo and CoD sell so well (even the map layout is pretty simple). This is why I said public appeal plays a factor into sales. Killzone is hard, casual gamers don't like hard. This is 1 reason why Killzone 3 sales and MP aren't huge, and I think you'll agree with me.

I would argue Gears of War is actually more difficult to play online. When I first played Gears of War 3, my kill/death was 100 to 1. I had no shotgun skills, and Gears 1 is extremly close combat online. I actually put the game down because it was so hard and switched to Lost Planet. However when I basically maxed my level in Lost Planet, and got bored, I tried it again, and it took a while, but I did get better. Gears of War is the only game I ever had difficulty playing online. I can easily go into a Killzone game nowdays and get a 3 to 1 KD. I just have to know the maps and move slowly, getting enemies at choke points. Call of Duty is even easier because of how many newbs there are. Halo gets difficult as you rank up (since it matches you up with people of the same rank), and Killzone is the same. However Gears of War is always hard. If you are having a bad day, you will get a negative KD score, and even on a good day, it's damn hard just to get 1:1. It really depends on how good your team is, and well....damn I cound go so into Gears online, I love it. It's hard, but it's rewarding, and you always have Horde mode for the days you just can't keep up online.

Botzone is nothing compared to Horde or Firefight mode. This is another reason why Killzone MP isn't as polished as Gears or Halo. Instead of fully polishing, and implementing a wave based enemy mode, Killzone has a half ass "sorf of" Horde mode. For games like Halo, Gears, and CoD, it's either in and 100% designed the way it should be, or not included at all. There are no half assed modes. You don't have to play bot-mode, but the fact that it is there, and nowhere nearly to the level of quality it should be is a reason why I state Killzone 3 isn't as polished for online multiplayer as the bigger selling games.

As for Co-op, I completly disagree. Rico follows you around throughout the entire game anyway, and he is annoying as hell. Also the down system is a core principle of the game. Killzone 3 is better then Killzone 2 because of co-op if you asked me, and co-op is one of the most lacking modes in video games today. Heck I can't stand Resistance anymore because co-op was removed. I think co-op should be a part of every game, and the inclusion of co-op to me gives the game a higher review score (personal score).

If I don't respond, it's because I will be away from my computer for the next couple days, but I definatly want to continue this, you are one of the best debaters on this website, and you actually think about things. I see no bias, only personal preference with you, and I love to debate with people who view games from a different perspective then me.