This is a really stupid way to do things since most of the really good PS3 games are 2nd party. You can pretend those shouldn't count but Sony having a WAY bigger 2nd and 1st party dev base is a big reason to pick the PS3 over the 360.

I mean Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Killzone 2, Little Big Planet, Infamous ect ect....there are SO many great games for PS3 from so called 2nd party devs.

Yes there are less 3rd party ones, but thats because Sony buys the really good 3rd party devs and they become 2nd party. That doesn't at all reduce the quality of the games.

Also 90% of your list are games that are VASTLY superior on PC or made by developers who exclusively make crap games. I mean come on, gamecock? Didn't legendary get like a 2 and hail to the chimp a 4? Southpeak? Same story. Destineir? I mean come on...

Yes Left 4 Dead is a legit semi exclusive that will be missed by anyone without a decent PC (though it is VASTLY better on PC, and overpriced anyway till it hits 30 bucks which is what a game without a real single player should cost) But I wouldn't want to play Command on Conquer on anything but a PC (RTS games on console are HORRID).

Really though, that list is a mix of horrid crap and games that are better on PC.

The second party and multi plat games are where its at on both consoles the vast majority of the time. That's where the console exclusive games are too, the only timed exclusives for the 360 are more or less all 2nd and 1st party, the rest are only "exclusive" to the 360 in a sense, they're on PC too (its just the ease of exporting direct X games that lands them on the 360).

Seriously though, anyone who is playing Left 4 Dead, Command and Conquer and the like on the 360 you need to check out newegg and built yourself a 300-400 dollar PC which will play those games VASTLY better then the 360 does. The fact the PC games all cost 10 bucks less (and get superior features, extra content and way better graphics) is just a bonus.

Both the 360 and the PS3 are full of 2nd party exclusives. No doubt the big multiplat blockbusters and the 1st/2nd party titles are going to take most of the $$$ in the market. 

However, I will let fanboy threads deal with evaluating the quality of the big titles and "who has the best lineup" question.

This thread is not about this at all. It is about quantities and not qualities. It is about variety and sheer perception of “leadership and losership” and is associated with abundance of titles, or luck thereof.

No doubt that most of the titles on the list are going to be small and crappy (heck, most of titles are crappy multiplat or not). But if there are going to be many of them, then the sheer number is going to determine the perception of who is winning and who is losing. And we all understand that such perception is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

LTR will prolly sell well on the ps3 if they can sort out the kinks.. freeze game issues, crappy slow loading textures etc. SONY seems to be focusing more on 1st party development right now and to me that seems like its edge

Naruto Broken Bonds is a 3rd party exclusive from Ubisoft

^ Of course how can Sony focus on third-party development? The ease of development, development costs and return of investment are all sided with the 360 this gen...there's little to no incentive for a third party to be exclusive for the PS3.

The 360 also has the 2-for-1 appeal amongst developers with the PC, that is the development costs associated with porting games either way hardly factors being that the architecture is so similar.

That isn't what the thread is about and it's because of things like this that you get banned.

wow this thread is getting alot of hate

kill all humans should be takken off, as it has been confirmed for an EU release despite not releasing in the states

I will take destroy all human off the list for now until I verify the PS3 release date in the EU vs the US release date for the 360.

The thread seems to deserve the hate. How you can say that "its all about sheer quantity" and then disclude a game for being Japan-only and another for being $30 is beyond me. In fact, it really doesn't make much sense to disclude things for being 1st party or non-exclusive either, if we're just looking at quantity, and not, say, cherry-picking a scenario where our console of choice looks dominant.

And if this is about "identifying a loser," then you should count all consoles. Maybe you'd find out that the two consoles you're looking at now are both losing by a large margin to the third one, at least in terms of sheer quantity.

But c'mon, the rules are basically:

1. Wii doesn't count
2. 1st/"2nd" party (where Sony is stronger) don't count
3. Non-exclusives (which make up bulk of 360 and PS3 3P support) don't count
4. Single territory exclusives (FF13 vs. Destroy All Humans) is at list-makers discretion.
5. Other games can be discluded at list-makers discretion for things like not costing enough.

And oh yeah, it's all about seeing who has the biggest quantity of games!

I say, just look at release lists! Wii has a crapload of games coming; 360 has slightly more than PS3. We already know what this means: Wii has tons of low-quality exclusives, and 360's higher userbase and more targetable (US-focused) audience nets it more games than PS3. This thread is all about discounting everything except for those segments where 360 gets that fairly small margin, to make it look proportionately bigger.

But Sony still compensates it's lack of 3rd party titles with 1st part offerings , comparing 3rd party titles alone doesn't paint a complete picture.