Ah, the fanboy rant what would the industry do without this little MS, Sony and Nintendo minions spreading "the word" about their consoles. They are videogamings little politicians spinning the facts and spreading the lies.
I'll try to refute this "facts" just for the fun of it in a very fanboyish way.
Top 5 Ways the Xbox 360 has in NO WAY beaten Sony's PS3
5) Third Party Exclusives
True, during the first years 360's lifetime Sony lost quite a few exclusives to MS. The PS3 was still a year away and companies needed the cash since in the end money is what moves the industry forward.
PS2 won the console war on the strength of its third party support. Devil May Cry (Now multiplat), Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy(Multiplat), and Tekken (Multiplat) were all system-selling games for PS2. Now how many of those franchises has Sony been able to retain for the PS3? All of them, maybe no longer exclusively but they haven't lost a single one.
Exclusives will make and break a console platform. Take the GameCube for example. With high licensing fees and inadequate support, it still managed to carve it's own small niche with it's outstanding first party games and lasted as much as the Original Xbox did.
Microsoft made a heavy investment to lure third party developers into the 360 camp. By launching their system a year ahead of PS3, the 360 was able to give developers more time to acclimate to an already familiar-looking platform architecture, after all it is so similar to PC programming that most studios didn't even have to study the architecture and could get right to it.
Sending out development kits early made programming even easier, that's why evey studio does it ¬_¬.
Conversely, the PS3's cell has been notoriously hard to program for (or so did people say then. Since I'm not programming for it I can't really say for sure now, Can I?).
Bucketloads of money are why developers choose the 360 version as the lead SKU.
The benefit of being the lead SKU is that the game will be more streamlined for that platform since during the original development period, programmers had time to cater to the lead platform's strengths, processing power, and capabilities to maximize performance and tweak gameplay for that system. Since a lot of studios are changing their lead consoles to the PS3 that must mean that multiplayer games today are streamlined for the PS3 right?
Games on the lead SKU platfom tend to run better and look better than on a system for which code had to be ported to.
Porting code may take a year after the 360 version's release and is not usually handled by the original development team or developer and that is why multiplatform games in the first year didn't look that good, Nowadays ports aren't just about changing code to work on the other console but in building on the strenghts and deficiencies of each to create a game that is virtually the same on both consoles like Ninja Gaiden Sigma that looks about the same and Burnout Paradise.
Nabbing exclusive third party titles, even exclusive DLC like the recent Grand Theft Auto: The Lost & The Damned means that Ms is desperate to gat some sort of exclusive over Sony no matter the cost even if it means never getting their investment back
Why buy an expensive PS3 just to play a handful of exclusives, when the 360 is cheaper and has a wider variety of exclusives to choose from like what Halo, Gears of War, Fable 2 and uh, a few RPGs and well nothing more I guess.
Even a former PlayStation exclusive like Resident Evil has sold more on the 360 than on the PS3, it's what happens when a console has been more than a year ahead on the market and has a bigger fanbase and even so the gap isn't that big.
It's ironic how gamers must turn to the 360 for their steady fix of J-RPGs, which used to be a PlayStation mainstay. Blame it on Microsoft's deep pockets and the long production times, but hey Sony might get the Director's Cut a little later and at no additional cost.
4) XBLA & Community Games
The sheer number of titles that appear on LIVE is daunting, most of them are very good but they are a testament to the platform's viability and attractiveness to proven developers and serves as an outlet for up & coming indie developers.
XBLA and Community Games see a variety of games released each and every week, whereas Sony's PSN also gets quite a bit of games but are more concerned about their quality, why release 50 bad games when you can release 3 good ones.
Not only do gamers benefit by getting innovative and daring game titles to play, Microsoft is simultaneously able to invest in the future of gaming. By way of XNA, Microsoft is able to support and open up opportunities to young creators, which in essence ensures and fosters the growth of the next generation of game developers, what if they all make new versions of Pong and spend more money on developing them than they will ever recieve from their games. It's not like Sony has a similar initiative that is more concerned with the quality of the games and even funds part of them, oh wait, they do.
Why does it still cost $400 to buy a PS3 three years after the console's release? It's a rhetorical question because the cost to manufacture the PS3 is still so high, Sony refuses to take the hit. After all they are in this thing called economy. I mean they could do what everyone else did and loose a gazillion dollars just to place their console, it's not like loosing bucketloads of money will bring a huge economic depression is it?
Look at the 360. The arcade unit costs $200, it doesn't have a thing other than the console so you have to invest in basics like an HD drive and Wireless among other things, at that price and value for it it's imposible not to buy a Wii instead.
The 360 has a ton of exclusives if by exclusives you also caount the multiplatform games and this is amazing, people still prefer the 360 version if they don't have a PS3!
This is a make-or-break time for Sony and they're fumbling the ball so bad, it only magnifies tenfold the "sound" business decisions Microsoft is making like spending 50 million on DLC and even more money in timed exclusives.
In this economy, it becomes an obvious choice to pick up a PS3 versus a 360, I mean would you rather spend 400 once or spend 300 for the console and a lot more later to deal with the Red Rings and E74? Extended warranty you say? Sure, I enjoy buying a console and being unable to play it for 3 to 4 weeks every 6 months. And don't even think about dual wielding two consoles, buddy, that would completely destroy your inner fanboy.
Third parties used to love the 360 because their deep pockets would allow them to make games for multiple consoles in the future. More third party software means more hardware sales, and so on and so on goes the loop.
2) Persistence - A Lesson In Economics
It's Microsoft. They have a lot of money. A lot of money to invest. And a lot more to burn. If they don't get you on the first try, they'll come again a second time, and believe you me they will get you eventually, that is how they became number one in the operating system business by giving us crap like Windows Vista, then again the competition wasn't as stiff as it is in the console business.
The original Xbox was far from a success story. What it did was lay the ground work for what was to come. It's all part of Brand Building 101. Something Sony and Nintendo have been doing for more than 10 years.
Microsoft took their hits, learned their lessons, and jumped ship as fast as they could without any consideration for the millions that trusted their console and bought it, as soon as the 360 was announced, Microsoft had all but given up on supporting their original green machine giving all those buyers the finger. Who knows maybe history will repeat itself and they'll do the same with the 360.
In the earlier days, the 360 was considered a still-born in Japan. Look at them today and you'll witness they are exactly in the same place. Slowly but surely, Microsoft is whittling down Japan's defenses, renowned as a protective parent of home-grown brands and will forever remain in third place after Final Fantasy XIII releases on the PS3 and as history established previously they will abandon the console soon after in japan.
The Number 1 and most obvious reason why xbots believe Xbox 360 has beaten PS3 is the quality of its Xbox LIVE service. Time and again this has been brought out as the deciding factor when gamers choose the 360 version of a multiplayer title over the PS3 one. Even if they are essentially the same thing.
Sure LIVE has built a vibrant online community by offering a full-featured service that includes voice chat, achievements, friends-list, gamer nights, and weekly gamer-centric video content and Sony still has to add voice chat and a cleaner and easier to use friend list but with each firware update they get closer and closer to matching the service.
Ever since the original Xbox debuted with the LIVE service, Sony has had plenty of time to observe how Microsoft would tackle the online arena, and is slowly following Microsoft's example and implementing more advanced features (features that gamers perceive as basic and have grown to expect) that make LIVE such a compelling service.
Achievements, voice chat, friend's list, custom soundtracks, and now NetFlix HD video streaming are now getting to Sony's console.
The NPD numbers show month after month a clear victor is emerging, Nintendo Wii.
When this console generation finally draws to a close, we may soon look back and say it only took two generations for Microsoft to remain in second place tied with the PS3 or maybe even fall back to third if worldwide sales are any indication. Who is to say what new heights they can achieve in the coming years?