I mean... if you want to call the fourth highest selling home console of all time "a catastrophe" then that's your prerogative.

Microsoft isnt bad, but their reasons for entering gaming seem to be rooted in multimedia and not really on games, even though they published great simulators when I was a child. They seem to have a philosophy that if you want to win a generation all you have to do is rely on third party. You can do well, but you wont win. They persist because they want to win. Hopefully Spencer can take them there, but as it stands right now the Shane Kim era was the best era of the Xbox ever. They werent as transparent but people didnt need to complain because we found an alternative to Sony which had exclusives even though Microsoft didnt have many hot ones from their own studios. Their OS will always be the best and their controllers are great. See thats where they excel.

There were many things that MS scewed up on at launch and the price was just one of them. 

- Always on (this was big for some people)

- Kinect (telling us how important it was) 

- Price

- DRM (not being able to trade in games after you bought them) 

-  PS4 having a slight power advantage

These were all things MS had going against it at launch, and the FACT that MS completly reversed positions on the Kinect (not so important I guess right?) Always on and DRM kinda tells you something. They may have not "lied" about a few things but they did try and feed the consumer a line of BS about Kinect. This is why there was such a revolt at the start, they basically handed Sony this generation on a platter. I think Sony would have won anyway, they were just gaining so much momentum and there 1st party stable of IP was FAR better then MS, however it may have been more of a dog fight. 

I have tried to get into the XB1 on two different occasions but each time I was not impressed with the exclusives.  MS really needs to fix that. 

Even though Wii won in numbers against PS3, I'd say that Sony is leading overall since PS1.

Sony made some poor choices on the PS3 and it didn't sell well for a while but it manage to sell alright in the long run. It never lost it's "glory" with just one bad home console. If it did lose it's glory then what does that say about the other brands with their products? You have to keep in mind that Sony has been the top brand in home consoles for 2 gens before that. It more or less has a good track record in that market. If Sony didn't mess up with the PS4, what makes you think it wouldn't outsell the other two?

Agreed...very few people understand that this has been the case.  Numbers don't lie.  And that doesnt include how many XBOX Red Ring of Death consoles that were sent off to the pastures early or replaced. When the failure rate fo the first/second gen XB360s were over 50 percent. Many people switched or just replace their xbox. I cant imagine how many burned xbox owners out there jumped ship.  That why for the longest time Sony stated that the ps3 was the most "played" console. Since the by the 2 or 3rd year...more people were activaly playing on a ps3 then xbox360.

Yeah. Wii sold tons on its first 3 years, but at the end of the generation, I think PS3 was really resonating with the community of gamers. Wii overall was collecting dust while PS3 were getting brilliant games and the price got cheaper enough for everyone to get one.

Still waiting for my SNES 32 bit CDROM...