@putaspongeon: Don't be mad.

@valgaav_219: MS has taken this approach with more than gaming. Microsoft office as an example. Who cares what motive drives MS to make the decisions they do. The fact is that the direction allows a PC player to play an xbox game without the expense of an xbox and an iphone user to use MS office without windows. The functionality/superiority will determine whether MS office will continue to exist or not as example. We see some of this taking place in the web browser market as an example. MS is trying to PAY people to use bing and they have the entire weight of Windows behind them. Does Bing control a majority of the web browser share? No... because it is an inferior browser. The PC operating system and gaming environement is no different. The most functional and superior system will prevail. Crossplatform games doesnt chnage the fact that the consoles still need to compete.

@pinkanimal: How does cross platform games across all platforms make microsoft technology more popular? Are you suggesting that MS has the superior console and consumers flock to Sony exclusively for their games? I do not follow how this favors MS technology in any way.

Cross platform games requires the companies to innovate on the console front rather than lock gamers into whatever console they have created to play a specific game (i.e. halo). In my mind it forces companies to give consumers a reason to buy their hardware based upon the work they put into their hardware. It hopefully reduces the PS3 and Xboxone failures because the hardware suddenly becomes more important.

@pinkanimal: The belief that MS could every monopolize the gaming industry is pathetic. That is like saying that MS could monoploize the PC with windows. It will never happen. Apple and Linux exist specifically because of their differences from Windows. Same with consoles. Nintendo, Sony, and MS will most likely always be around in the console landscape. Because they each have their own take on consoles with their own Pros and Cons. Sony is a business. Microsoft is a business. Nintendo is a business. None of them are benevolent. They exist for one reason. To make money and survive. That doesn't mean that the gaming industry doesnt change (forwards or backwards) based upon the actions of these companies.

@Sam3231: Are the decisions or recent vision from MS in gaming driven by the right motives? Maybe... Maybe not... I just know that it is a change in vision that has some possible gains for gamers despite the motives.

I will start by saying that I have owned consoles from both companies throughout all generations. Some generations Sony has had the edge and others MS has been on top for me. On this particular generation I have to side with MS and here is why....

Lets move beyond all of the fanboy BS and step back to an idea we all have in common: we love games. Under this common theme we should be united by furthering the gaming industry as a whole. This is where I believe Sony is flat out missing the mark. The exclusivity of Sony games is close minded and restrictive on the gaming industry as a whole. I fail to understand why this is a desireable feature of any platform. This is what supporting exclusivity says to me:

-"Please require me to own multiple systems to play the games I desire. The idea of owning only one platform to play every game is absolutely absurd and undesireable! I like the extra expenses of owning a Sony console, nintendo console, and a PC/Xbox to have access to all games."

-"Please limit the community in which I can share these games with! I like to limit myself to a small fraction of the gamers that exist on any given game. God forbid if I could turn on my xbox/PC and play destiny with some friends playing on a PS4. That would be awful!"

I commend MS and Nintendo for crossplay on Minecraft. Although this is just a small act... I believe this is a small step towards a future that benefits us all. Crossplay between PC and xbox is also starting to become more prevelant as the generation develops. MS has started to make attempts towards dissolving this barrier as of late. It was introduced in E3 2016 with crossplay and again this E3. When these barriers start to dissolve the only ones to gain are the gamers. Yet there seems to be a large chunk of the gaming community that finds the exclusivity barrier as a positive feature. Please help me to understand. If you are in a boat that supports exclusivity... you might just be a fan boy.

Am I the only one that has this view if you take a step back and look at the companies/current state of the gaming industry.

Some might argue that this would dissolve the console market altogether in favor of PC's.... this is why I disagree.

-Consoles are plug and play: anyone who has owned a PC knows the amount of tinkering and maintenance PCs sometime take. Some gamers dont have this desire or time.

-All consoles for a given company are the same. If I buy a PS4... I am getting a PS4. The developer tests a game on a PS4 and therefore doesnt have to be concerned with the infinite possibilities of software, gpus, cpus, etc on a PC.

-Consoles have a lower price point

-Consoles have a set OS and simplified interface unavailable on a PC

Consoles arent for everyone and definitely do not have the capabilities of a PC but they have some perks that guarantee a market share in the gaming industry.

@osan0: You pose an interesting thought. I guess i always assumed that consoles existed due to the hassle PCs offer. That is why I play on a console rather than a PC. Plain and simple. Consoles are a no strings attached, easy, affordable, way to play newer releases. This is why i think consoles are relevant but i could be wrong.

I completely admit that PC has superiority over consoles in gaming but I do not have the time or money to keep up with PCs. The technology advances so damn fast and developers are always trying to develop to top of the line systems. It makes it hard to maintain a PC that is relevant for newer titles. I hate dealing with anti virus software, different game clients (steam, oracle, etc), different communication software (teamspeak and god knows what else now a days), etc. I really could go on.

I figured those that have the funds and dont have similar annoyances with the above would just stick to PC gaming.

@Shewgenja: I am going to ignore your "12 years of age" comment because I do not see how it has any impact on the matter. I am not trying to be a "fan boy". I was raised on the Ps1 and SNES. I have enjoyed many things Sony has come out with. I just do not think Sony as a company is heading in a progressive or sustainable direction.

I think that MS believes connectivity of devices, communities, more powerful devices, ease of use, etc. are the future of the industry. In following the massive success of companies like google and how they market and do business... (connectivity of devices, developing communities, trying to improve ease of use, new device iterations that keep up with the times, etc.) I think MS is adopting a strategy that will work for MS in the future. There has been similar shifts in all of their other products. All Sony has done as a company is stay rather stagnant if not decline. (I am talking the company as a whole. The gaming division has done well for Sony thus far)

At the end of the day business still comes down to who leverages their resources and cash the best as a company as a whole. It takes free cash flow to develop and invest in new games and technologies. This is where I see Sony losing steam. I see Microsoft attempting to do this and their conference painted a picture of their planned direction. Whether or not they will be successful in the future is unclear but I think the future for MS is much brighter than it currently stands for Sony.

Also, iconic games will still be made whether exclusives exist or not... That is a fact. You act like exclusives are the leading cause for innovation in the game industry. This simply isn't true. What drives innovation is the free market and I dont believe that is necessarily driven by the existence of Nintendo, Sony, or MS as exclusive platforms. I think time will prove this to be the case.

@Shewgenja: I 100% do not understand exclusives. Does it make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside when you play one or what...? I really dont get how it makes so many people feel so special... In my opinion, exclusives are for individuals that are already dead set with unwavering devotion as to what company they want to support.

Since when is trying to unite gamers across platforms a bad thing? MS understands that there will always be a market for consoles until the day PC's get easier or more cost effective. That is why they aren't afraid to break the "exclusive" barrier.

If you want to argue the pointless "exclusives" argument... PC absolutely s**** on both xbox and ps4. If that is why you own a console than you are retarded.

Honestly, I think the strategy is genius. There is more of an incentive for a developer to go "exclusive" with MS (Windows 10 and Xbox) than with Sony. Throwing PCs into the mix really expands the possible sales base for game developers and MS can now leverage that when brokering deals.

@cainetao11: I am on the same page as you. Who cares about "exclusives"... I want to be able to play my games with as many people as possible. MS is heading in a direction where my friends dont necessarily have to own an xbox to play games with them. Sony's model is short sighted. The whole tech industry is shifting towards connecting in general... whether that is connecting with as many people as possible or seemlessly connecting my devices. Sony has no future in this... They will eventuay be swallowed by tech companies that are evolving with the times like MS, Apple, Google, etc..