If you look at their launches and it matches their console philosophies to a T.

Microsoft wanted the Mainstream US Market. So their launch was a party for "everyone". The stars they had we're meant to entice the mainstream US market. If they had Drake and Macklemore at their event then they would get those who were intrested in those celebrieties to pay attention. Probably tried to Appeal to the UK market as well.

Sony wanted the focused gamer market so they had it more organized focused on what the console could do, what games would be coming, how the specs would entice developers. They could do this because they had staggered multiple launches, so the European and Japanese launch were definetly more like parties, but unlike MS which aimed at a US focused World Wide party, Sony's events were smaller and more pertaining to the region. This is why Western Audiences (especially the mainstream western audience) couldn't give two flips about the Japan Launch.

IMO, MS didn't really grab me that much more than Sony's because they both felt superficial and staged. But I could tell that MS focused on the mainstream and Sony focused on the gamer. 

I think pottentially, MS would've had a larger audience on Launch but, the mainstream was too distracted with smartphones and tablets that they didn't care. And Sony's Launch matter even less to the mainstream since it wasn't aiming for them, but it got more gamers and early adopters. And unlike the launch events word of mouth is more authentic.

Launches are really strange events because they are a recent affair. Reveals used to be more important and obviously Apple has the best reveals.

Just no to point 1. Let everyone enjoy every game possible. Wasting money just to prevent some gamers from certain games is probably the stupidest way to promote your console. Instead spend that money for creating new games, which is what Sony seems to be doing.

I don't have any comment to make about the content of the OP other than:

Is Titanfall considered a "twitch" shooter these days?

I understand why you'd say it's faster paced than something like Battlefield but it's still a long way off being twitch.

Interbrands list of best global brands 2013

1 - Apple

2 - Google

3 - Coca-Cola

4 - IBM

5 - Microsoft

...

46 - SONY

Microsoft is unchanged from 2012. Sony is down from 40.

http://www.interbrand.com/en/best-global-brands/2013/top-100-list-view.aspx

You are generally right. Sony lags behind MS in the pr department and they still have a lot of work to do. However, I wonder how much MS paid to have the "party-like" atmosphere, the endorsements, celebrities and ads. This is obviously pretty difficult for sony considering their financial position, and yet while they may not have the exclusives YET, that have the gaming world buzzing (unlike MS with Titanfall), they do have some reasonable exclusives (including the pc titles you have already mentioned) which does give their lineup respectability. Plus once their key exclusives start releasing, it will match (if not overcome) the exclusives the X1 has.

And as a few have pointed out above, the ps4 is still leading quite reasonably. so I dont think they have to change much at present

Irrelevant, by brand we are talking about Playstation Vs Xbox, not the entirety of Sony vs the Entirety of MS, why do you think Nintendo isn't listed.

Fair enough.  In that case perhaps this Harris survey of the UK market will help provide some insight.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/vault/HI_UK_TMT_Brand_Buzz-Gaming-November_12.pdf

Interesting to see that while people familiar with the PS brand like it more than those familiar with Xbox, when they looked at users of each brand Xbox was slightly ahead.

Obviously this predates PS4 & Xbone but it does suggest that PS has a slight reputational advantage over Xbox.

Everyone should be able to, but Microsoft uses third party exclusives to cover up their weaknesses. Sony mostly doesn't need to but at their last launch for instance it was like a barren wasteland.

Totally agree. Sony's investment in first party devs is more advantageous because it assumes a bit less risk (the franchise) being succesful, over a much longer term, they keep making new ips till they stick. However, because they aren't Nintendo (And everything that lies therin), they should fund succesful looking franchizes in the interim like Microsoft does. Unfortunately, Sony doesn't really have the capital to spend money on instant gratification(popular looking ips) vs long term unguaranteed success (in house studios).

Courting Indies is probably the close thing since they shoudl be cheaper. But the Indie Stigma that all forms of Mainstream Media has makes them very low-profile.