I've given you strong precedent to show that neither game would have done well, ones which used the best-selling console of all time (with its allegedly high "hardcore" base): you've responded with how you "feel."

You then cite an example wherein the 360's game had Capcom's A-team and several years of development, while the Wii's game was outsourced to Tose and done in a few months. I'd also like to point out that the Wii's game was shoehorned (there is no better word for it) into an engine made for a completely different type of game (part of the "let's spend no money/energy on this one" philosophy behind Chop 'Til You Drop).

I'm afraid that your cited support is not strong enough to justify your conclusion. The 360 would not have sold a million copies of either game, as sales of God Hand and Killer 7 et. al. show.

did I say wii sports no I am looking at removing all bundled games. im not looking at generated revenues but total games sales.

Godhand and Killer 7 don't show anything about the xbox as they weren't on there and given cover story status on OXM. 

 Even with the control in these games shifted back to a more traditional one these games would have sold well on the 360.  Look at The Crackdown it sold 1.48 million copies.

I think the 360 is supposed to have a motion controller from some company debuting later this year.

Interesting take. It's a pity so much data remains elusive (used game sales, digital downloads, etc) as there are many other factors that can skew results.

This does add another interesting slice of analysis, though, so well done for making the effort.

Its also a pity that the Xbox 360 others data is the most incomplete. The graphs would look a little different if it was.

Probably in order of bundling in terms of total software bundled, Nintendo probably leads the pack substantially. So I wonder what the data would look like without Wii Sports. The semi dubious nature of the Wii Play bundle probably evens things up inspite of its absence.

Very nice work, though like Reasonable pointed out, there are some loose ends that can skew the results considerably.

------------------Removed my comment-------------------------

Sorry I clarified my question. Sorry for the useless post.

360 is on the bottom of this chart becouse of a number of units that have been bought as replacment units (or spare ones for repair period) for RROD and those X360 owners who don't like paying for their soft :D

Also It's still only a partial picture as we don't have comparision on how many used games or rentals are in the hands of owners of those 3 consoles.

But in the all those graphs, tie ratios etc are only tools for our fun - what matters to developer is PROFIT and nothing else.

1) Saying those games' performance on the all-inclusive, 120 million+ owned PS2 is not indicative of how the game would do on any other system is nonsense. Unless, that is, you're claiming that the Xbox community is not only filled with people who don't play any other console AND that this community is willing to take a title that sold under 100k on the PS2 and increase its sales 1000%. Neither of those conditions are true.

Additionally, I'd like to point out a real-life example where this fallacy recently occured: remember how Okami was supposed to do great on a Nintendo system, and how its sales would easily eclipse those of the PS2? Sounds silly, doesn't it? Well, you're making the exact same claim.

2) I never mentioned the controls. I haven't played Madworld, but I know that they don't do much for No More Heroes. But then Suda's been dropping bombs with traditional controllers for twenty years now, so I'm uncertain what you're getting at here. The reference to Crackdown (sandbox genre) in particular confuses me. You should just drop that one.

3) It is. But see above.

nintendo sells more frist party software. but xbox sells more third party games