said it your self sony buys the devs, creating more exclusives and exclusives you know are not on pc and not timed.

a sony exclusive and nintendo exclusive are in my eyes exclusives. ms are just a case of been patient.

That again is why i'm more than likely goin to be tough to convince with the 720. The exclusives list has dwindled for the 360 as the generation has progressed, mass effect is available on everything and stuff like alan wake and most other MS studios games have appeared on PC.

Really, you're looking at forza, gears and halo all of which have their equivalents on sony's machines anyway. Even halo and gears have made appearances on pc.

Agree.

exactly. as much as my faith in them is pretty non existent, i want to see what RARE are up to, just so there is a first party developer potentially making a new IP. just something awesome, new, and internally developed so it doesnt appear anywhere else, EVER.

This is true.It may have been a money choice for Sony, but i feel it was a sound one. Microsoft have the money to go the same way as Sony and buy these games studios, but they choose to go the exclusive route instead, i for one would prefer they buy up the studios.

they've had so many opertunities concerning developers that had been loyal to them up to that point. bizzare creations, and bioware being prime examples. they where ready to be bought by MS, yet despite throwing around 50 million for timed exclusive DLC for GTA, they didn't even bother with them. if they did mass efffect would have been an exclusive trilogy on the 360 (and potentially more in line with the first game, not the shitty sequels) and there would still be PGR titles being released now. the way they do things is just weird. i mean, they've bought companies in the past and effectively destroyed them (RARE) but it's better to have genuine exclusives that cannot be found on other platforms, then timed ones that hit the competition within a year.

I agree, but i guess from an MS standpoint it has worked for them with the 360, so they figure it will again with the 720, what happens over the next few years will be very telling.

The timed exclusives worked this gen as it was a new thing. We didn't know how long they would be exclusive, we didn't know what the content actually was either. In the end we have seen most games or content released on other machines with extras so you might get it early on the 360 but the ps3 gets an extra level or cheaper game or all dlc packed in.

Getting something first isn't as appealing anymore, it isn't something that would entice me to choose one machine over another. It again is just one of the things working against MS going into next generation. 360 was massively fortunate in its early release and being on the forefront of new monetisation schemes. The consumer is much wiser going forward and the same luck won't be there, if anything it had created ill will as they pushed all of these rubbish money making methods so hard.

Great point. I hope Sony really puts the screws to MS this go around, and pushes them on price/content.

I think the biggest problem is Microsoft managment. Their strategy is they will provide a platform for entertainment like games, apps, tv etc. This allows them to have pretty much all third party games apart from this Kinect voice and gesture, kinect games, having apps, tv and illumiroom in future. I think this is what they are going to show in May 21st. Specs don't even matter too much. Even if it is down on performance. Probably 90% people don't even care once it is released and they play games on it.Online is also not free and Netflix also requires xbox live gold. So yeah, that is definitely not cool. It will be intresting to see the improvement for 720 and if they make it free just like anyone else apart from subscription based model.

I guess we will see how it runs out in the next few years, there is an advantage of having big 3rd party exclusives as launch line ups as they create buzz and do move consoles.Very telling.

I agree that for the first few years of the launch, any big exclusives 3rd or 1st party can help move consoles and create interest with the majority, but can it work in the long run?, this i'm not to sure off.

So? Would it have read better if the article said, "Microsoft is shoving unfinished titles out the door for launch" Or "Microsoft moves ahead with untested hardware" They KNOW how important it is to get it right this time, they are probably taking unusual steps to not repeat the same costly and embarrassing mistakes. And it wouldn't bother me in the least if Microsoft announced at E3 that they were going to launch in early 2014 if that meant a cool, quiet console with a healthy list of launch titles.

As for axing internal titles and then taking that cash to secure Core IPs..............doesn't make me feel bad at all. For all we know they could have been canceling "Kinect Hello Kitty" Without knowing what those games were, it's little hard to get worked up about it at this point. Now if any of those games turned out to be Blue Dragon, I fully expect Optimus to commit murder, but then he has nothing to worry about because that game wouldn't have been developed internally anyway.

The rest of it, Source etc, it's just a rumor without a clear vision right now. Don't chase every negative tail, why not wait until we hear something more concrete?

The fact that this matters to you really says it all, I think. You're playing this silly game of console wars gotcha, as if Microsoft and the xbox platform, or xbox owners in general, have somehow suffered in any shape or form by these games eventually ending up on the PC well after they've more or less sold as much as they're going to sell on an xbox platform.

Why does it matter so much to specific people that Microsoft allows certain games to, in some instances, release up to a year or more after its already been out on the xbox platform? Hell, it took close to two years for Alan Wake to show up on the PC, and the Halo releases some folks are referring to were something like 2 years after the games were already available on Xbox, and Gears was a year after tons of people already bought it on the xbox platform. Gears on PC apparently sold like, what, 100,000 copies? I'm sure Microsoft believes the Xbox platform really could've used those sales when each game sold close to 6 million copies on the 360, and don't even get me started on Halo sales.

Wanna know why this matters to some people as much as it does, even though they already know the stage at which some of these games being released on the pc could in any way seriously impact the xbox platform, has long since passed? Because nothing Microsoft could ever hope to do can convince certain people, and the silly arguments being used against them are clear evidence of this. People act as if Microsoft should have zero interest whatsoever in seeing games end up on a Windows operating system. Why would they ever want that?

I would've kicked kittens and puppies and enjoyed it, too :P And, no question, we know some of those games were likely to be Kinect related. On top of that, Phil Harrison has been talking on twitter like they got a pretty serious lineup of games to show between the reveal event and E3. He says they have more content to show than time, and that could just be talk, but we will see, won't we? :)

Just stating not all these "exclusive" franchises are even that "exclusive". You already know exclusives are the be all/end all of a console for me. So not entirely sure how you're somehow surprised they're going to be equally important to me next gen?!? The fact what i say bothers you so much is what really says it all...lol.

Cue incredibly long response that could have been said in the space of a sentence...

Well, here's the thing, the Xbox platform has "actual exclusives", too, plenty that can't be bought and played for the PC or any other platform. The Xbox 360 wasn't exactly short of exclusives that made people want to buy the console, believe it or not. The two primary games that made me buy a 360 (Blue Dragon, Lost Odyssey) aren't available anywhere but the 360. I see Gears being used in these silly arguments saying that they aren't true exclusives, but then a Gears game hasn't even touched the pc since the first game. So, it's basically like, since one game is on the PC, might as well lump them all together in the same boat. This is a part of what's going on. What we're really discussing here is a silly game that some people like to play that goes "Hah! Yea, we all thought for the longest possible time this game was a 360 exclusive, but I reveal to you Mass Effect on the PS3, 5 years after the 360 version." Even some of the games that released between a year or 2 after their initial xbox release, had pretty lengthy periods of apparent xbox exclusivity before a PC version was ever confirmed, hence achieving, in my view, a significant goal of exclusivity in the first place, which is getting as many sales on the primary platform as is humanely possible while you can get em.

Do people think those timed exclusive releases of GTA didn't benefit the PS2 far more than they ever did any other platform? Do people not think, for example, that a timed exclusive of the next big COD game, where they literally don't acknowledge any other versions of the game for at least 4-6 months, or even a year, after release, wouldn't pretty much get the job done for the primary platform? The point is does exclusivity matter using the rules that some people here are using? I really don't think so, and history suggests that I have a point. The few holdovers rarely end up mattering to the main platform in the grand scheme of things, besides a few extra bucks for the publisher/developer. Beyond that, it doesn't matter how Microsoft does things as it relates to exclusives, they'll always get some kind of criticism for it. Most of the games that people are most excited about on the PS4, are existing franchises, and there's nothing wrong with that, but when people are excited about existing xbox franchises, somehow there's a problem with that. If the response to that is to say "well, the playstation brand also has other exclusives," the same is also true of the Xbox 360. Banjo nuts and bolts, the viva piñata titles (only the first was on pc), kameo was a solid game that I wished we got more of, Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, Too human (remember that?) I had some fun with this game, it was different from the ordinary, but it obviously didn't come anywhere close to the huge expectations. Then there's infinite undiscovery (another big disappointment for me).

I can go on, but the point is the 360 has many exclusives that aren't on any other platform, that are also outside the core "go to" exclusives, and even if some are on PC or end up on playstation, who really cares? If a game being on another platform besides xbox gives someone who doesn't like Microsoft a chance to avoid a Microsoft product, that's their right. I agree, First Party can always be better, even Sony's *gasp* is far from perfect, but Microsoft didn't have as much trouble with true exclusives as people like to believe.

GTA is GTA though, it isnt this weeks FPS #431, it also isn't a DLC pack. Timed exclusivity of COD would help sell the box if it was launched at $300 but the people buying consoles at launch are VASTLY more informed than the COD audience who wont touch it until their mommy can afford it.
BD and LO may have sold us the 360 but I REALLY doubt we're gonna see anything similar going into the next generation, it just doesnt fit with microsofts position in the console market anymore. Those 2, too human and crackdown were early releases in the lifecycle of the 360, since about 3 years ago it's been halo, gears and forza. They can't just launch new AAA IP's, they don't have it in them anymore and the likes of mistwalker have moved elsewhere.

Sony's 1st party is far from perfect as you say, but they try and they are consistant in the investment and vision they have.

True, I doubt we get anything like BD or LO ever again on an xbox console, but I'm hoping that I'm wrong, and I have a backup plan or two, PS4 and Wii-U lol. The only thing that gives me hope is that Sakaguchi and Mistwalker aren't owned by MS and can still make games for Nintendo or even Sony if they wish. I'd love a Mistwalker jrpg on the ps4, because the chances of Microsoft doing it don't seem that high.

Yea, sony's first partys are more diverse and they just seem, to me, collectively more organized. I think of MS first party and get the sense that these teams hardly interact with one another or share anything amongst themselves, but maybe that's just me. I wouldn't say they can't launch new AAA ips. They kinda did that on the 360, so until they prove they are no longer capable, especially as it relates to a brand new console, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, but the good news is that all my eggs were never going to be in their basket anyway. I say it all the time, and it's true, I would never have bought a 360 if it weren't for Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey. I have no issue moving on from Xbox, even if they kinda do have a few hooks left in me because I've become such a huge fan of the Halo games, but Halo alone isn't enough to make it my primary gaming console. It's only just enough to ensure that I buy it, but not much beyond that.

Of course they benefitted the the PS2. But then they where titles that people ASSUMED where real exclusives. People can't assume such things now, because it rarely ever rings true and is typically a lie. Especially for games and content blatantly money hatted. I ASSUMED mass effect and bioshock where at the very least, console exclusives. Some of them even claim "only on xbox". It worked back then, i was naive, but not anymore. As someone has already stated. Third party "exclusives" boil down to patience, not the fact they're actually exclusives.