That was never meant to be permanent exclusivity though.

And have it sell worse because of it? The PS4 version came out later and sold better than the Xbox One version ... 

*I know the same thing could be said about Bayonetta as well. 

Does not matter. Devs can do what they want. They need more balls. Its a buisness after all.

Exactly. People want and cry for exclusives and when they happen they cry again for being exclusive.

Well that's a false equivalence if I've ever seen one. No one cries about exclusives if they're made by or owned by the company publishing them. Buying a timed exclusive or even an exclusive isn't necessarily good. When people want Microsoft to make more exclusives, they want them to make or buy studios. It's not really the same thing as taking a game that was clearly going to be multi-platform and making it an exclusive for the sake of a cock measuring test. Part of it is Square Enix's fault of course, and I'm certainly not holding a grudge with Microsoft for it (didn't even care about it till early 2017), but I don't think we should pretend like what you're implying is hypocrisy is actually hypocrisy. 

I'm 99% sure you'd have a different opinion if Tomb Raider was a timed or permanent exclusive to PS4.

No, they can't. If Square Enix tells Crystal Dynamics to make it multiplatform, they kind of have to comply.

Ultimately, between this tweet and the 15 part tweets Kamiya put out, Bayonetta 2 and 3 are Nintendo exclusives, whether non-Nintendo console owners like it or not. Nintendo took the chance to fund the development when Sony and Microsoft apparently declined to do so for 2.

It’s probably the same for Street Fighter 5, since it was a partnership between Capcom and Sony. It is what it is.

Im using Tomb Raider as an example. I am not a fan of the series or that genre for that matter. I could care less for it on where it goes. However i hear the term Console A needs more exclusives, weather its timed or made is all up to the buisness. SF5 is a brought out exclusive yet did Capcon get any death threats like Tomb Raider did? Not that i recall. The industry is full of hypocrisy.

I also dont play exclusives i play games. I just hear alot that exclusives matter yet when ever the big three fight over exclusives its a different story. I dont hear Steam gamers talk about Exclusives, must be a console thing.

So it happens, its a executive decision, every company has that. Gaming should not be treated any different to any other buisness. Its all about the money.

Exactly, they determined they'd make more money putting it on the PS4 than they would keeping it off.

Did they though? How much did MS cover for the Timed Deal? Did you notice one thing, 2013 Tomb Raider they told the industry it undersold.. yet Rise of the Tomb Raider has been kept quiet.. probably because of the pay check.

"weather its timed or made is all up to the buisness"

..... Okay? Is this a ... point? I'm not saying it's not up to the business ... ? I'm just saying that there's a reason people react a certain way to some exclusives and not to others. Whether or not it's up to the business doesn't make it a respected move or not. 

"SF5 is a brought out exclusive yet did Capcon get any death threats like Tomb Raider did? Not that i recall. The industry is full of hypocrisy."

I didn't really follow either Street Fighter 5 or Tomb Raider during their development cycles, but points like this always scratch me the wrong way. Whether or not a developer receives death threats isn't something that's common knowledge. A lot of developers get a death threat and they just ignore it. Some developers get death threats and they go to the press. Some developers treat death threats like spam. A comment on a forum could be considered a death threat, yet most people aren't going to take them seriously. Just because one developer goes public or announces that they got death threats doesn't mean other developers don't. Besides, it doesn't even matter, because any developer who makes a controversial decision will get harassment. If you don't think that Capcom got harassment just because you never heard about it than you're sadly mistaken. But this isn't a game of who can be the biggest victim, because one company getting more harassment doesn't necessarily mean hypocrisy is at hand, it can just mean that one fanbase is more affected than another and thus more upset.

"I also dont play exclusives i play games. I just hear alot that exclusives matter yet when ever the big three fight over exclusives its a different story. I dont hear Steam gamers talk about Exclusives, must be a console thing."

Console gamers make a big deal about exclusives because it's one of the biggest deciding factors in what console you'll get. An Xbox One and PS4 are almost exactly the same, the PS4 is a little bit stronger but not noticeably. So unlike the PC, a platform which gets a lot of it's audience from objectively better performance(if you have the money), consoles are competing directly and don't have a lot of leg room to gloat about power. So console gamers focusing on exclusives actually makes a lot of sense. Also, can we stop with this "I don't play x" metaphor? It's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad. You can't play a graphic, and you can't play an "exclusive" without the game, but that doesn't mean we should use such phrases as "I don't play exclusives I play games!". So because you play the game people shouldn't complain about the exclusivity? Uhhhh ... the exclusive nature, and the graphics, are part of the game ... 

I think we might be getting a little off topic here though ... the point is that there's kind of a valid reason why people complain about third party titles being nabbed up as exclusives. It's not just pointless crying.