Trying to argue against the fact that a PS3 has little to no quality titles is a bit ridiculous. Nobody is saying the PS3 sucks, (I have had one for over a year now) it's just not there yet.
I for one will enjoy my 360/PS3/Wii/PC and not have to worry about justifying how much I spent all day to other people.
I think we can all agree that the Wii sucks. Yes it was expertly marketed and flawlessly deployed to create a false sense of exclusivity by Nintendo but the product itself is no better than the Gamecube. Bravo to the ad-execs who worked for Nintendo but a big **** you to Nintendo's R&D staff for releasing such an inferior product.
Oh, and I have a 360. I figure I'll get a PS3 as soon as they have a better game selection... Of course, I said the same thing last Christmas.
I'm going with what Mr. Irreverent said. There is no doubt that there are some great games for the 360 right now. But there is this false statement going around that the PS3 has no games whatsoever. That is simply not true. First of all, the 360 had a one year head start. That will clearly give them the advantage as far as having more games right now. But then, there is the DVD vs. Blu-ray issue. Most developers are still learning how to create games on a Blu-ray disc. The 360 uses DVD's which have been used since the previous generation. EA even admitted to not knowing how to make NHL 08 60fps rather than 30fps (the PS3 version still looks great though).
Despite this, the PS3 still has games like Resistance: Fall of Man, Ratchet and Clank Future Tools of Destruction, Heavenly Sword, Uncharted: Drake's Fortune, Folklore, etc. that are exclusive. By next year, it's second year (which is how long the 360 has been out for now), there will be Metal Gear Solid 4, Gran Turismo 5, and Final Fantasy XIII. This claim that the PS3 doesn't have games is just wrong.
Then lets look at the other things the PS3 does. Blu-ray playback (considered one of the best Blu-ray players on the market), internet browsing (just hook up a keyboard and mouse and you can check your e-mail if you want), Folding@home (help humanity), free network access, and of course a big one for me is the ability for it to be turned into a DVR possibly by next year. There is also the fact that the cell processor, when used to it's full potential, will be able to do a lot more than the 360. According to developers (whether you want to believe them or not is up to you), Uncharted only uses a third of the processor power and that game is already great. People say the PS3 is too expensive but if you compare it to the 360, you're getting a much better deal.
Add all of this up plus the fact that the PS3 doesn't break down because of faulty design, and you'll see why I prefer Sony's console. The Playstation brand has evolved. It can't be looked at as only a game console anymore. Judging by your comments OP, I think you understand what I'm saying about the PS3. I think where we differ is that you want all the 360 games now and I want future games and other capabilities. Stop me if I'm wrong.
By the way, I'm with you guys who say the Wii sucks. It's a novelty. Nobody ever talks about the lack of games for that system. The graphics aren't nearly as good as the other consoles and I don't really feel like swinging my arm around all day. It's funny because a couple of people at work bought the Wii earlier this year and were really excited about it. Just recently, one of them sold his and his games and used the money for a 360 and the other is advertising his to be sold so he can buy a PS3. The Wii is a fad.
360 for the win.