Success should be measured by profit. This is the ultimate end.

There are a lot of third parties who have generated success on the 360, and they've given MS a good, solid library. Microsoft, on the other hand, has done everything it can to undermine that success by releasing low quality product, failing to fix product after testing showed it unreliable, etc.

Game companies have seen a lot of success on the 360. Microsoft has seen a successful year, but overall a lot of failure. And in terms of mind share and future profit, things don't look great for MS considering that Sony and Nintendo are getting the most positive momentum and mind share lately.

If succuess was measured by rabid fanboyism instead of games, the Wii would indeed sell those 250,000,000 units some claim....

Using the fact that the Wii has 3 very highly rated games is like saying the N64 had a much better lineup than the Playstation 1: sure the N64 had a few ultra-awesome games, but it had crap in the middle section of "good" games, whereas the PSX, although not having tons of spectacular games, had a much higher quality of middling titles which made it so good.

What would you prefer: 5 really, really good games, or 100 really good games?

A game that has been rated shit or average by reviewers may be seen by some people as being the greatest game of all time. Where as some games with high scores are like given those scores by reviewers because they are paid bribes. Halo 3 has an average of 93% on gamerankings, it sells well but alot of people see it as being a load of rubbish adding nothing new to the genre. Halo 3 single player campaign was utter garbage, the graphics in the game were substandard, it claimed to be 1080 p but could only deliver 640p. The multi player game of Halo 3 was well exactly the same as Halo 2.
"Halo 3 was the most over hyped game ever and it failed to deliver."

 Nintendo wins. This debate is over.

As a gamer, do you care who's making the money? As a gamer, shouldn't you know.....Be caring about the quality of titles, since you play the games, and not play with N's money?

 Heh, exactly what I was thinking myself.

Depends on who's point of view you are looking at it from Legend11.  If it's from a gamer who bought the system, yes, absolutely the games are what will make the system successful or not in the gamer's eyes.  If it's from the console manufacturer's point of view, it's simply on profit.

If it's from the point of view of someone going to a sales tracking website, then the quality of games don't matter.  It's the number of units sold.

And hey, wait, this is a sales tracking website.  Are you seriously complaining about sales numbers being discussed and used to compare consoles?