As someone who watched the show for about a year, I think I'm rather informed on the topic.

The reason for his rant is to try to cover his ass by insulting even more people.  Half the rant is insulting PS3 fans, and the reason he gets so much crap from them is because they show bias all the time.  To get back at them, he brings up the worst comments he can find as if that represents all dissenters.

You do not insult an entire fanbase by saying "finally there's a game to play on PS3" when the PS3 had more great games in 2008 than the other 2 systems.  It was bad enough when they used to do that during every good review in the first 2 years of the PS3's life.  It's a little outdated now, and it wasn't funny then.

And if you think Wii fans don't feel the same, then I suggest you look up some old topics on here.  X-Play is watched predominatntly by 360 fans, and if you don't believe that check out their own statistics and polls.  They don't welcome fans of other sytems because they are always taking jabs in an attempt to be funny.  It doesn't help that a 5 point scale is virtually useless, but that's another topic.

As someone who watched the show for about a year, I think I'm rather informed on the topic.

The reason for his rant is to try to cover his ass by insulting even more people. Half the rant is insulting PS3 fans, and the reason he gets so much crap from them is because they show bias all the time. To get back at them, he brings up the worst comments he can find as if that represents all dissenters.

You do not insult an entire fanbase by saying "finally there's a game to play on PS3" when the PS3 had more great games in 2008 than the other 2 systems. It was bad enough when they used to do that during every good review in the first 2 years of the PS3's life. It's a little outdated now, and it wasn't funny then.

And if you think Wii fans don't feel the same, then I suggest you look up some old topics on here. X-Play is watched predominatntly by 360 fans, and if you don't believe that check out their own statistics and polls. They don't welcome fans of other sytems because they are always taking jabs in an attempt to be funny. It doesn't help that a 5 point scale is virtually useless, but that's another topic.

edit:  just saw your post, blizzid, and I agree that 85 is an arbitrary value.  I'm sure they chose that just because it's a multiple of 5.  either way, there was no reason for the comment that PS3 fans finally have a game to play during the Killzone 2 review when that is clearly not the case, though it is representative of the lame jokes they are always trying to pull off.

True, but as far as I can tell it's also a completely meaningless, cherry-picked statistic.

In 2008, the PS3 had 23 games rated 85+, compared to 22 on the 360. However, the 360 had 17 games rated 86+, compared to 16 on the PS3. The 360 also had 28 games rated 84+, compared to 26 on the PS3. I mention this to show that the cutoff point of 85 is arbitrary, and comparing 2008 libraries, you'll get different results depending on which cutoff point you use.

On top of that, many of those 85+ games for the PS3 are also on the 360 - but they don't count for the 360's list. Battlefield: Bad Company is 85 on PS3, but 83 on 360. Same thing goes for Civilization Revolution, Madden NFL 09, and Call of Duty: World at War. On the flip side, Pure and GH:WT count for the 360 but not the PS3. Correct me if I'm wrong, but to my knowledge none of these games are substantially better on one of the two platforms; the differences in metascores are basically statistical noise. Meanwhile, BioShock counts for the PS3 but not for the 360. Again, I'm not saying this to argue against the PS3's library - I'm doing it to show how arbitrary the exact rankings can be.

The truth is that both consoles had comparable 2008 releases in terms of quality. Saying otherwise is just stating personal preference, and can't be accurately backed up with Metacritic.

I think Kantor said it best though:

Great post.  You get a picture too.