The usual rants:
Halo 3 wasn't that good - SP particularly. Backward step from Halo 2's broadening of the Halo Universe to a scared re-run of Halo with a bit of jungle combat thrown in. Classic third entry of a franchise that doesn't know how to close it's own story so simply repeats what was initially popular. The game looked distinctly average too.
Mass Effect 1 is pretty weak in pretty much every area: terrible code, poor combat, stiff characters, dull functional dialogue (okay shares that with a of written SF but still) coupled with a terrible inventory system and settings/concepts covered many times before.
Open World games are often anything but in terms of allowing meaningful freedom of choice.
The 360 controller is too big and the battery case is awful. How can a controller with less functions than a Dualshock be that bulky?
On that topic neither the 360 gamepad nor PS3 dualshock is truly 'better' for gameplay. The stick placement makes no difference and neither does the shape of the grip. Any preference is down to personal ergonomics and confirmation bias. The only definite difference is the D-Pad is for sure better on PS3 but I find few games use them enough to make it hugely noticeable.
Nintendo failed to follow through with their own motion control revolution and left the Wii to stagnate in terms of fresh experiences.
Halo 3 was most certainly a gratifying and well-made game, but the pre-hype was so ginormous, it let me down in the end.