fixed

Looking at the figures people posted and doing a little maths, the 360, out of 474 games 27% are above 80 in score. For PS3 out of 214 it's 34% above 80 score.

Generally out of what games have been released PS3 has the better percentage ratio of good games to crappers.

But 360 has more, therefore more good games and more crappers...just seems a few too many crappers bringing it's score down.

 If you remeber it was the same with the PS2 for every good game there was 3 or 4 crappers. It was just the amount of titles available for PS2 that made that machine so diverse.

damn strait thats why i got a ps2 for some of those low rated nitch games, ptoIV warship gunner 2, navelops warship gunner all koei games

So how is the online multiplayer for Virtua tennis 3, Virtua fighter 5 and Tony hawks project 8 but to name a few on ps3? Oh yeah, thats right, those games don't have online multiplayer on ps3 but they do have online multiplayer on 360

Go compare the scores for those 3 games on metacritic 360 v ps3

And just as many have said, 360 has more AAA titles

Therefore 360 has the better "overall" library..... Bottom line_______________

That true for most 'winning' consoles it seems. The higher the console sells and the more popular the more chance of people releasing their games on it will be no matter how crap they are, to basically make more money. PS1 and PS2 was filled with some god awful titles. This along side some of the best games to be released those generations.

i think im repeating what a majority of people have already wrote but 360 has been out longer, yes that gives it an advantage but you just can't ignore that the 360 has:

A) More games
B) More highly scored games

If that is not a definition of a better gaming library then i don't know what is.

or i guess you could say it's opinion...i would have to disagree.

But whatever keeps you happy, PS3 does have a fantastic library but because the 360 has got more games then i can say without any doubt in my mind that the 360's is better for now.

Nowhere did I ever said it bothered me.  In fact, I continue to apply it doesn't bother me by the respect of other opinions...

"My gaming preferences are not the same as others so it is not better than anyone else's. Therefore, no one should claim that their opinion (or claim that anyone else's like pointing to Metacritic because it does NOT prove which console has a better library) is better than someone else's. As I gamer, I will never say that my choices and preferences are better than anyone else's because it's just opinion whether it's popular or not."

What bothers me is people trying to shove opinion down people's throat by using opinion to "prove" a point.  Please do not attempt to put words into my mouth to "prove" a point whhen I have presented a point that is unrefutable. 

"...gamers buy consoles to play the games that they want, not just because some site 'said so.'"

Have a nice day.

I understand your argument that the decisions and views of the majority does not mean its right. But what else do we have to compare, other then our personal opinions? - Nothing

All we have are professional critics who gave their point of views and sites that averaged them all up for us and given them a score out of 100. That's it... accept it or not but that's all we have to judge a gaming library.

PS - Enchanted Arms was GARBAGE!!!

The only redeeming quality and reason why I continued playing was because it was the only JRPG on the 360 at the time.

Does a console ,which has been out for an extra year. which is about 50%of PS3s life-span, and has really robust third-party support ,have a better library?
Yes, it does