Nope, to quote Cliff Blezinsky it was "Bad-ass"

This list convinced me the PS3 isn't worth getting except for LBP.

Wrong. 360 had the larger installed base with the year head start. 3rd party developers decided to make multiplat games on the 360, because of the solid installed base including the amount of installed base made purchases to one system per purchase. After Sony lost alot of 3rd party exclusives Sony vowed to focus more on 1st and 2nd party titles. You have your timing incorrect. The programming was one of the last reasons developers decided anything. Developers know full well that you can make a game with equal graphics to the PS3 on the 360 with a much lower budget and much less work and it takes up less memory.

Sony learn what it was like to see themselves bleed after having dominant market share last gen after losing some of their most prized 3rd party franchises. Microsoft found their weakness and so they had to change their gameplan. It's about damn time. They were too dependant on 3rd party games.

You tend to forget that Microsoft has the system that has nothing to lose and everything to gain don't you? (Rhetorical question). Last gen was a learning experience for them. You cannot give Microsoft any time to understand how the industry works as a whole or else they will bury you beneath them once they have full wind. Sony understands that money talks in business, and Microsoft is willing to play that game with them. Don't tell me that you don't remember that Sony paid to keep GTA out of the hands of Microsoft for 4 years from the launch of GTA 3. Rock Band is a favored game on the 360 not just because of the payments but the developers like Xbox live better. The Xbox live response for Rockband was amazing and they talked about it at E3. This is why they are getting DLC and perks. PS3 will never have Gears of War 3 just like the 360 will never have Killzone...and quite frankly...the 360 is better off without Killzone, because it will break the trend of shooter diversity of exclusives.

1) No, they're not. Read my past couple of replies.

2) How about unnamed games that were announced 2+ years ago, and haven't had any info released on them since?

3) ...except a large percentage of them don't belong on the list.

4) You're a random poster. On the Internet. Now, either fix up your list by doing some actual research, or just lock this thread before it turns into a bunch of fanboy bickering.

 Microsoft has plenty of the time to find themselves. I even know that I hated the first Xbox. As I told you, you cannot allow Microsoft to learn how the industry works or else they will bury you. Microsoft is a company with monopolistic intentions as you well know, if you were privy to knowledge of Microsoft before the Xbox came to existance. Microsoft acquired companies to work on their first party under the watch of Microsoft Gaming Studios. You need not worry about their dedication to first and second party. Sony needs to worry about first and second party because unlike Microsoft Sonys most powerful exclusives were always 3rd parties. Once Microsoft stripped them of their dignity they stood naked for a moment and ran to don themselves with 1st and 2nd party titles that they could rely on. The problem with Microsoft was that during the PS2 era their 1st and 2nd parties were so useless compared to the 3rd party that they dropped publishing for most of them. Crash Bandicoot was a good example of a game that averaged over 6+ in sales before the PS2 came out and Sony stopped covering it. Now it's on the 360....a 1st party game gone...just like that. This is one of the reasons I don't value Sony's word. They could have a huge library of first party, but they dropped their guard just as long as they could have their precious 3rd party games.

Mark my words...Microsoft will buy property rights to gears just like they gained the rights to Halo from Bungie.

What are those 3 Cellius Game?

^Your sig owns.