Do have to echo the whole 'lack of diversity' point, but to be fair it was more of an issue with the last few years of the Xbox 360 than it is (so far) looking to be with the Xbox One, as this time Microsoft is in a position that leaves them hungry to compete. That and they're no longer so focused on churning out Kinect games. Whether due to trying to shake things up, or perhaps become more competitive, Microsoft's showing signs that they might be looking to expand their roster, albeit with the sluggish course-change you'd expect when games can take three or four years to develop. Although, granted, a lot of said diversity so far is coming from contracted third party titles, but I'm hoping the third-party titles are actually a stopgap measure to give them time to build up their first party development capabilities, which would then be used to pursue a variety of gaming goodness. :3

However, I think the long-term question on whether or not that change of heart will maintain throughout the generation will depend on how these new titles are received; if Xbox gamers, (and I mean a significant number of them,) embrace quirky, non-traditional fare outside of Halo, Gears and Forza, then I believe quite strongly that Microsoft will see the good business sense in catering to those markets, leading to a wider variety of titles for all. ^^ If, on the other hand, too much of their market largely focuses on the few genres for which the Xbox brand became known, and titles outside that bubble struggle to find their place in terms of profitability or even attracting new gamers, Microsoft might eventually go back to maximizing profit by focusing their development efforts on what the bulk of their consumer base wants.

As for which one'll happen, I really have no clue. =P I don't pay much attention to multiplatform software sales between the Xbox One and PS4, so I don't know how well RPGs or other non-shooterbro-esque titles fare on both consoles. I also don't know Microsoft's mindset, and how long it will be before their thoughts turn from primarily focusing on expanding their install base towards maximizing profits from said install base.

Anyway, while you might have a point insofar as 'lookers,' I should point out that as far as first-party output goes, Sony simply has a reputation for offering more variety, one largely earned over the end of the PS3 and Xbox 360's generation. And that's excluding Japanese titles, which just dumps a whole bunch of OTHER exclusives on Sony's side of the fence, assuming of course you enjoy Japanese titles.

But indies are not what makes the general public buy the PS4. This is an advantage of PS4 but it's an illusion thinking 20 million people bought a PS4 because of diversity and indies. They bought the system because of hype (which is in no way meant negative) and the "good" image of Sony and the PS4.

Sony managed to do nothing wrong with the PS4, as I heard spent way more money for marketing *and* made the campaigns way better than last gen while MS ran into mines every step they made.

20 milion bought Sony's hardware because for each one of these 20 million there is a game in the library that is what they want play.. AAA, indie, remaster, etc... that doesn't matter... the game is on PS4 and they bought it becaue this game.

PS. It can be games too... in plural... not a single one game.

For me Xbone was faded to do worst than Wii U but MS have games that people wants too that is why it sold that much.

Ok so we don't agree about why PS4 sells more than Xbone which is totally ok, ethomaz

Why should they do this? Sony is making less money from third party games than first party games. If EA sells a game sony is only getting 11% while selling a copy of Bloodborne gives them almost 100%

I didn't say they should do this.

Uncharted is awesome, I love it... but Halo outsells that franchise by a mile. I don't think they would trade Halo for any franchise that Sony has. 

Lack of diversity is the problem...all the put out is halo,gears and forza. Don't get me wrong I love them all but let the developers spread there wings

I thought we were talking about FIRST PARTY games here. I didn´t know that indies were first party.

For most of last generation (and still to this day) the 360 had way,way,way more indie games than the PS3. Does this FACT has any relevance now that we are discussing "diversity"? Would you say that the 360 had more "diversity" and thus Microsoft because of the overwelming quantity of top tier indies?

Or may be "diversity" only matters when we add all those obscure Japanease games that no one out side Japan. 

I´m also currious how you´d tell if a TYPE of game is BETTER than any other. Is RPG better than FPS? Well, probaly if it feets your narative... too bad Sony has no RPG franchise yet (may be Horizon will be classified as RPG)

PS:Do you think Dead Rising 3 and Sunset Overdrive are also bad games?

Like it or not, the image that the world has adopted for the Xbox brand is that it's the place to go when you want to get popular, casual, corporate designed, expensive, mainstream, AAA tittles. Even if I appreaciate that they're trying to get a decent 1st party line up for the Xbone, it's pretty much a lost cause, a pathetic attempt at fixing their abismal output last gen when regarding 1st party, no wonder Xbone exclusives go to PC later, the fucking things don't sell shit. The fact is, the people want what they expect, and people don't expect Xbox to be "da good exclusives machine that doesn't suck (WiiU)". PlayStation just has a lot more of history within gaming and the brand has been related to so many fucking things on the past, it's earned the reputation of doing whatever the hell it wants and be beloved for it, something that I think it's too late for the Xbox brand to achieve.


Also, sacrifising 60fps? No. I ain't even playing the game, but no. The 1080p "trend" needs to stop somewhere, and this a good place to start.