@Zero_epyon: you're the one saying quantity =/= quality.. (I used "vs" but clearly you should be smart enough to know the intended context)..
You talk about how more games doesn't mean that there will be higher quality, but when challenged you resort to list wars?.. it doesnt matter how many additional games are developed (as you are already clearly saying), what matters are the end results..
and the end results of Sony's top games didn't come from tons of risk taking, it was based on established franchises and established developers who made the same types of game genres that Sony is already known for.. taking "risks" had virtually nothing to do with that success..
and at the end of the day, sure taking more development time doesnt guarantee higher quality but it definitely is a contributing factor.. Games like Sea of Thieves and State of Decay 2 were hammered primarily for lack of content and/or bugs.. both of which could have been eliminated or reduced with more development time.. again, who's saying that more development time is a silver bullet?.. but clearly it's a tried and true way to increase the overall quality of a game.. and with more games in development to relieve the pressure of releasing certain big-ticket titles, those titles could potentially be released at a higher quality than otherwise..
it's just that simple.. the reason it seems like you have an axe to grind is because you're trying to insert criticism into a clear-cut and well-known ideal of game development: more development time tends to increase the quality and overall polish of the finished product.. period.. that's all Phil was saying.. yet, you decided to insert a "b bu but".. that's your right to do so as this is clearly a forum for such comments.. but don't act surprised when people call you out on it..