Actually including 360/PC games was unexpected and I respect him for that. It is a step in the right direction. 

If its on 360 and not PS3 (and vise versa), it deserves to be mentioned. 

There is no need to make 360 "look" better. I think me proving 360 has a vastly overall superior library speaks for itself. 

1) No, i didnt count the 70-79% because i only wanted to count games that are generaly considered quality. and in most cases thats 80+. and i seriously doubt xbox has significantly more exclusives with those score than PS3. and is that something really to be proud of? having more games that are essentially "C" rated games?

2) again, i also didnt include PSN, and this is because retail games are not comparable to download only games. they arent reviewed to the same standards, arent looked at with the same standards. if you released some XBLA game as a retail $60 game, do you honestly think its production values,  and content would justify the purchase, and do you honestly think reviewers would be a generous, with giving out an 80+ score to it? they arent on the same footing and arent comperable.

3) that actually removes more PS3 games than xbox ones, and it was again to look at games that are comperable, held to the same reviewing standards.

4) again, this is redundant with your 3rd point, and is explained by my second. its all to look at games on the same level. apples and oranges. furthermore, im pretty sure Move has a few, Eye pet comes to mind. and if you really think sports compilation mini games, and dancing games deserve to be looked at on the same plane as the likes of Halo, and Gears, and Killzone and Uncharted, then go ahead, and make that list.

furthermore you contradict yourself 1st you complain that i left off 70-79 score games , then you go ahead and talk about MOve games not scoring above 80, while there are a few Kinect ones. Which standard should we use 70 or 80?

lastly you are very hypocritical in all of your slanted view points. you constantly talk about how all the PS3 games dont count because they arent relevent to gamers, because sales arent 5 million+ for every single game.

then when someone mentions reletively low sales of an xbox game, you say well look at the reviews, that's what matters: see Forza series.

You constantly deminish games because they arent "relevent", then you go on and champion XBLA games. accoding to your standards those games arent relevent most will be lucky to get 100,000 in sales let alone 5 million or even 1 million.

So what matters? Relevancy? Sales? Reviews? one can never know with you, you constantly contradict your own arguments, just to make you feel good about yourself. as if you need to reafirm and convince yourself that you made the right purchasing decision. it seems you have a really inflated ego, presumably because you are insecure in real life, when not hiding behind the safety of a computer screen. but if you somehow find joy in making everything into a fanboy competion, go ahead, but leave it out of here.

as for your other post. No games, listed, no source, no nothing. also it has a lot of faults in it too because not all games are reviewed by the same companies or given the same score. just look at Mass effect 2, or even Batman. furthermore, that list includes tons of DLC and add-ons.

it also seems odd that you arent complaining about me including PC games on the list, not even Xbox exclusives.

No one can ever make a list, have an opinion that could possibly fullfill your standards because you have none. They constantly change to fit your fanboy wars. 

but isn't his focus mostly on retail releases v psn/xbl? 

LMAO, you didnt prove anything, you didnt list one game, at all.

And a C+ is a 65-69?? Where the f**k are you at, some down water state in Mississippi??? I have never seen it that low ever. Ive gone to school in NY, NC, and PA. Your either lying or they have low standards, if its the latter then that would explain a LOT

i think you quoted the wrong person

That's a poor list and you know it. That's why you named one game twice to make it appear longer than it actually is. Not to mention that you threw in timed exclusives and insist that an average game is great. The next guy might as well put Cross Edge on his list of great exclusive PS3 JRPGs.

had? What are you talking about? Only really good JRPG on the PS3 to date is Valkyria Chronicles. Folklore and WKC are good, but no better then Blue Dragon or The Last Remnant.

360 has Lost Odyssey, Tales of Vesperia, Infinite Undiscovery (which I think is great), Magna Carta 2, Infinite Undiscovery, The Last Remnant, and it had Star Ocean for a bit. The first 3 I consider AAA, or great, the others are just good. Top that off with some good WRPG exclusives (dear god, NOT FABLE! That game is shit), 360 is the RPG machine this gen.

but next year....that might balance it out a bit with 2 Tales of __ exclusives.