2010: the year when I shift completely to the ps3 side and never went back.

Well, that's okay then. Sorry if I sounded harsh at first.

Don't worry. I was going to say sorry, because i thought that my response sounded harsh too, XDDD.

Xbox 360 is a great console, and if microsoft wants Xbox One to have the same success, they have to look back at the 2005-2009 era when their priority were games and nothing more than games. 

The 360 is still 82 million ahead of the PS3 in software sales that the domination that really matters since that is how they make their money.  On top of that the the gap when it comes to digital sales is probably even bigger since the 360 has the highest selling digital game in Minecraft.

your logic is whats bogus, nothing else. 

so sony comfirming they have 20 tittles but decided not to show all of them is questionable? no, its called logic, they dont need to blow their load early and show everything they got. Microsoft did because of the bad press they were receiving and it didnt work. showing a concept art? tittle? yeah, that worked out amazing for black tusk, look at all the people talking about it their game. 

and let me get this clear, announcing a number of games to be coming out on a console without showing them is questionable at best? you didnt seem to think that when MS announced the number of games back at the reveal and before E3 when you thought they would have more games than sony.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=5364567

when MS says it, we KNOW it. when sony says it, its questionable.

bogus 

bias at its best. 

As for the thread itself:  yep.  Been saying PS3 has been on a roll for  years now, but nobody believed me, or would come up with arguments and get aggressive.  Facts are facts.  I guess some people need an actual visual image to understand the difference, otherwise it doesn't count.  "I don't see it, therefore it doesn't exist" 

Sony brought games, they were just new IP's without proper marketing. I am sure they've learned from the Last of Us what decent marketing can do. They had games in 2006 and in 2007, its just a matter of whether people knew. That and they are majorly first party. It wasn't like MS who had third party timed exclusivity and third party exclusives everywhere outside of two Rare games within those same first two years up until 2009.

 Shows you who is better at marketing doesn't it? I believe the consensus has always been that Microsoft is the better marketing entity and Sony and Nintendo are better at publishing and developing. What happens if the same gamers who bought 360's because of the pricing went back to the PS4 and helped community sales of items? Sony gets good scales for titles just like they did during the PS2 and PS1 era. Remember Microsoft cut their marketshare from the previous gen and provided all the relevant third party titles which made the active gamers jump ship based on price. Its either mans game when it comes to third parties which initially sell the most consoles. Exclusives increase the marketshare but increase the core front. Sonys games are so varied compared to MS that you dont know who buys what. There were just too many games this gen and the community was spread out, instead of slimmed down and centralized like MS had it.

In the period 2009-2010 i was thinking "how is it possible that wii sells so much compared to ps3 and x360??, it doesn't have games!!!", then 2011 came, wii was relegated to 3rd place. After that, in 2010-2012, i was thinking "how is it possible that certain games of ps3 doesn't sell that well??, they're pretty good!!, and compared with x360, ps3 have a lot more games!!" and then 2013 came. I think that time puts everyone where it belongs.....

Hahahahaha. This made me laugh.