You are entitled to your opinion of course but i don't see how this qualifies as something that doesn't hold true anymore.  I for one think the Wii-mote is better for FPS but it's not an argument, it's my opinion. 

For the argument to 'simply not work' anymore there would need to be some conclusive, objective proof that this is no longer true.

Saying 'the PS3 doesn't have any good games' works for this topic because there is proof (Metacritic, for what it's worth) that this is no longer a valid or reasonably defensible position.

OT: Wii doesn't sell third party games.

Good one. I guess this argument doesn't work anymore!

your not  fanboy or anything.

oh and before you say anything, i admit i am.

That applies to both PS3, and the 360 ... it's just that it hurts the 360 more.

Honestly though, there are a lot of factors that need to be taken into consideration for this statement to be true or false.

If you are just comparing 360 to Wii, or 360 to PS3 then that statement is wrong.

But if you are talking about 360 in relation to other platforms in general, then it still stands. I just think that it gets blurred because it's pretty much just 360 and PS3 fanboys argueing. 

The only time one should bring up console exlcusivity as oppose to normal exclusivity is when the gamer does not have access to a computer that can play the games.

In that case PC/360 games do make a difference. Otherwise the point is moot, and 99.99% of the time used as fanboy fodder.

"The Ocarina of Time is the best game ever ... metacritic says so."

Though I agree that the agregate gives a better sense of the quality of game; one has to consider when the reviews took place.

This is not to say that old reviews are wrong, or anything like that, it's just that the population of the aggregate is alot smaller the farther back you go.

Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker was reviewed 80 times and had a meta of 92.The Ocarina of Time was reviewed only 22 times with a meta of 99. The Twilight Princess was reviewed 73 times with a meta of 95.

The population of the reviews is something that needs to be considered ... no doubt. It just seems that today with a more commercialized video game market, there will be more reviews. It makes sense.

I guess if you wanted to, you could just take the same 22 reviewers from the OoT and hope that they reviewed the other two games, but that would take too long.

Both sides:

"The PS3 has no games" - Go play Uncharted and tell me that. One of my top 10 games, ever, and I'm a 360 guy.
"The 360 only has a bunch of FPS" - Like Halo 3 and Left for Dead? The rest are multiplat, you dingbat!

Add this--I don't want to get a 360 because of the RROD.

Alternative title for this thread: "I own a PS3 and i need to reassure myself that i made the right purchase."

Yeah, sorry, this kind of screams "I'm going to pretend like I am talking about all consoles having arguments against buying them, but I'm only going to refute the PS3 ones"

I don't have a problem with Sony. The PS2 is and always has been my favorite last gen system. However, I have to say that XBL kicks the hell out of PSN.