NobleTeam360 said: I could name all the kinect shovelware and that would make the number of PS3 exclusives look small in number compared to xbox. But then im sure someone will bitch calling kinect games not real games.

well said

well i think because xbox only has 3 -4 major exclusives while sony has a lot of them and halo is mega popular since 2001 and other than gran turismo and metal gear all those sony IP's are new from this gen. And just for the record god of war 3 sold more than 5.20m and uncharted franchise is undertracked by 2m.

God of War 3 sold 5.2million vgcharts didn't update the games sales

maverick40 said: it is simple. There are more ps3 exclusive games than 360 so the ps3 gamer has more of a choice.

well said i agree

TristanV1 said: God of War 3 sold 5.2million vgcharts didn't update the games sales

True, but Halo 3, Halo: Reach and many others are also under-tracked

_crazy_man_ said: I'd like to see vs. Wii exclusives...

HUAHUAHUAA

man-bear-pig said: Jay520 said: Oh you said tie-ratio. What's that supposed to suggest? The Xbox had a higher tie ratio than the PS2. Doesn't change the fact that the world was pretty much Sony land at the time. I was just pointing out that X360 has more games sold per console than the PS3 in Europe too to disprove the Europe = Sony land myth. And yeah, tie-ratios don't mean much when the userbase is vastly different (PS2 and Xbox), but it means much more in current gen context because hardware totals are very similar

A factor isn't significant if its significance is based off another factor. In your case, you're saying tie ratios are important, but it depends on hardware sales. In a situation like this, its clear to see that hardware sales are what's really important here. Not tie ratio.

Like you said, a tie ratio is only important when the hardware totals are close. So, before you even consider using tie ratio to prove something, you have to check hardware totals first. But after you discover the hardware totals, you don't need to even consider tie ratio. The hardware totals alone can be used to prove your point - and without the need to clarify other factors. So, instead of saying "because tie ratios are close and hardware totals are close, then Europe isn't Sony land," just say "because hardware totals are very close, then Europe isn't Sony land. "

One other fact.

After Slim the software sales is almost the same for PS3 and 360.

Year	360 (Ratio)	PS3 (Ratio)	Diff (Leader)	Cumulative (Leader)
2005	2,849,162 (2.42)		2,849,162 (360)	2,849,162 (360)
2006	25,207,607 (3.16)	2,033,730 (1.62)	23,173,877 (360)	26,023,039 (360)
2007	61,447,450 (3.88)	37,173,227 (4.05)	24,274,223 (360)	50,297,262 (360)
2008	108,909,458 (4.07)	88,788,171 (4.58)	20,121,287 (360)	70,418,549 (360)
2009	107,118,181 (2.90)	96,837,921 (2.99)	10,280,260 (360)	80,698,809 (360)
2010	133,691,251 (2.68)	131,311,968 (2.83)	2,379,283 (360)	83,078,092 (360)
2011	154,713,292 (2.43)	148,409,212 (2.45)	6,304,080 (360)	89,382,172 (360)
2012	58,551,518 (0.86)	61,486,694 (0.93)	2,935,176 (PS3)	86,446,996 (360)

MS has fewer exclusives and they tend to stand out more on the X360. The PS3 has a lot more exclusives and they do not stand out as much as the X360 exclusives.

Maybe people should start buying games instead of bragging on about them