Buy a console based on the number of games it has that you want. Simple. Buy a second console based on the number of games it has that you want that the 1st console doesn't have. Factor in price and the varying quality of multiplatform games on different consoles [ex:Fallout 3].

When I was bought my Xbox360, I was looking at available games. Not exclusives only, but on all games. And of course, I play these games, as Dead Space, Bioshock, Fallout, Oblivion, and so on. Simply say, I play games, which I want to play, even if they got low score (Last Remnant). After all, most important opinion is always yours.

And because of this, I really don´t get people, which go to topic as "Xbox 360 games in 2009" a spout nonsence such "most of the games aren´t even exclusives", and so on. Yes, there probably aren´t, but what of it? I still will be play these games, even if they are on PS3 or PC.

If we are talking about ability of exclusives to move consoles then of course total number of exclusives is flawed. Wii Fit alone will probably sell more consoles than all the exclusives coming out this year on PS3 or 360.

Yea I follow you. A lot of exclusives shouldn't matter and so it should be reduced to "good exclusives." Still, it's important to factor exclusives because they're what differentiate the consoles.

Who decides what constitutes a good exclusive? I loved Bulletwitch and Earth Defense force. I had more fun with these games than I did with Heavenly Sword. Good and bad games are subjective. Exclusive games are fact.

But it ends up not saying the same thing as I was trying to say.  I say the ENTIRE library matters, not exclusives.  Exclusives are a factor, but not the main thing.  I know the NGage had a number of exclusives.  That doesn't mean it was a great system.  However, I will say that Pocket Kingdom did motivate me to get it when it was on clearance.

As in other cases, the Wii throws a monkey wrench into the whole system of exclusives, because it's very hard to make a game cross-platform between it and the others and get some sort of parity out of it, so often the exclusives argument can just be reduced to PS3 vs 360, where it is still relevant

Within this more limited field of PS3 vs 360, it's not about bad exclusives or good exclusives as it is about big exclusives, which i suppose would be defined by hype and the weight of their franchise. Thus, Haze was a big PS3 exclusive (hyped greatly, though popularly regarded as a bad game). Big exclusives are what give a console it's weight, which isn't exactly tied to quality (though it often is)

But in a wider view, putting Wii back into the picture, the problem just becomes murky, between the Wii's countless, horrible exclusives, as well as its rapidly growing field of good-but-little-known exclusives, and its small field of big exclusives, and the fact that with the wii's strategy "big" no longer has much meaning.