early on in the generation, ps3 didn't seem to have much going for it; it was more expensive than xbox 360, supposedly really difficult to code for, had much weaker multiplats (supposedly orange box was terrible on ps3, for example), etc.
article from 6 years ago featuring gabe newell's opinion at the time: http://www.1up.com/news/gabe-newell-ps3-total-disaster
also, xbox 360 had gears of war and bioshock in 2007; ps3 never got gears of war (obviously) and only got bioshock a year later. xbox 360 also got oblivion sooner. those were all really big name games that a lot of people liked. --- I'M GAY.
Yes, the RPGs for me. PS3 didn't have the RPG library like PS2 did. Star Ocean 4, FF13 and such were all cross console. Plus 360 got Vesperia first, and since it's cheaper, so I went for 360 first. Eventually PS3 is getting some decent exclusive RPGs. --- There's no point telling stupid people that they're stupid. They're too stupid to know that they're stupid. Wasted effort.
Well for me it was the fact that my PS2 broke and the PS3 wasn't backwards compatible and it turned out to be cheaper at the time to buy a new PS2 and Xbox 360 than it was to buy a PS3 alone. The PS3 was really overpriced. --- GT & PSN - Xroalia
it came out first, riddled with technical problems and knowing it but having a foothold on the generation was more important to M$ than pleasing customers and it allowed them to secure exclusivity on some licences (Mass Effect, gears of war) and to have gmae publishers lie to customers about "full exclusivity" when it was "timed exclusivity" (Bioshock, Eternal sonata ...)
brand loyalty is silly considering all companies only care about money(as they should). Sticking with brand just because you used one of their products before should is just dumb when you have other viable options.