You make it seem as if, hardware wise, they were on even ground.  The PS3 was supposed to have the better games, technically.  It was the newer, more powerful hardware!  Yet somehow, the Xbox 360 was always able to keep up with it.  There were only a few exceptions and even then, nothing that couldn't be done on the 360.  We just didn't have two versions of Uncharted 2 to compare.

They weren't on even ground but these developers are making it seem as anyone developing games for PS3 were playing fighting games with their elbows.

Please provide sources for this.

Halo 3 cost $60 million (half of that is marketing) http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/25/spencer-halo-4-is-microsofts-most-expensive-game/
http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/halo_3/news/halo_3_cost_30_million.html
Halo 4 production costs: http://www.cnbc.com/id/49765686 

Uncharted 1 $20 million budget, Uncharted 2, $20 million budget http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/uncharted-sequel-costing-usd-20-million http://www.vg247.com/2009/02/04/uncharted-2-has-budget-of-20-million-says-wells/ 

Uncharted 3 $25 million production costs http://www.cinemablend.com/games/GTA-5-Cost-265-Million-Develop-Market-58922.html

We're talking about the company that spent or planned to spend 90 million dollars on a Halo MMO before cancelling it Sources before you ask: ( http://www.engadget.com/2010/04/12/halo-mmo-had-90-million-budget-canceled-as-microsoft-eyed-cas/ )

And 2.5 billion dollars to buy Minecraft. ( https://mojang.com/2014/09/yes-were-being-bought-by-microsoft/ ) Microsoft spends/spent WAY more on gaming than Sony does. 

No, what this shows is how much money MS spends on Halo and marketing.

Look at how much GT5 cost: http://kotaku.com/5397660/how-much-did-gran-turismo-5-cost-to-make

Why ask for sources then if you don't care? You said Sony spend more on first party titles, I showed you that's incorrect. 

GT5 isn't an example of PS3's power and quality which is what we're talking about here. I chose the best looking PS3 games. 
But GT5 costs so much because it had over 1000 cars and it's their biggest IP. 

Unfortunately I didn't have many First Part IP to choose from fir 360 when I was selecting my comparisons for 360/PS3 titles.

And I showed you that you are incorrect.

The part after it is "I hereby change the discussion so that it fits with what I'm saying. This means GT5 isn't a valid argument because although I didn't define before which games are valid, it's contradicting the point  I was going to make. And of course choose to end this discussion with a non-related hit against 360's first party games. Not that it has to do anything with what I was going to say when I wanted to "win" this discussion".

Oh dear. So in conclusion I'm incorrect because GT5 cost 60 million dollars even though Halo 3 cost 60 million dollars?  Nevermind the 90 million budget the Halo MMO had. Nevermind the fact that All of the Uncharted games combined cost 65 million. 

Lets not forget this gem that cost $100 million 


But all in all, this is proving that budget and a games visuals don't really matter as much as you originally thought. Which was YOUR WHOLE POINT.

Unless you've personally delivered a PS3 game or heard developers say otherwise, we're not in a position to debate him if we're being honest. From day one most of what we've heard is that the cell was over complicated.

I mean God of War and Uncharted looked great but otherwise I'm not sure it warranted its cost to sony or to the gamers wallets.

In fact GT5 completely invalidates your argument as the reason for it's budget is not it's visuals. Which this entire discussion is about (or at least what you started this discussion to be about)