It doesn't really sound like the kind of competition that makes you interested in the competitors product.

The kind you describes is just to benefit one brand and one brand alone. Treating the other almost like a personal whipping boy. 

I want Steam to have competition for example, but not just to make Steam good, so I can stay comfortably within it's storefront. No, I want competition with them so I can then be enticed by others to use their storefronts, rather than just Valve's.

Besides, if Sony get lazy, the fans can talk by simply not buying into their laziness. We have a voice, we can and have voted with our wallets before. Just recently we got wind of the new Hitman coming to us in a more complete form. The last one was sold in pieces, and as a result it didn't click well with everyone (myself included). The decision to not buy the previous game and voicing our opinions has caused them to shift back towards making it a more complete game, rather than one being sold episodically.

Monopolies can be bad, but so can it be for us when we stagnate and stay with the same brand for so long. I was with Sony for a number of years, then Xbox and now Steam, GoG, B.net and Origin. At this moment of writing, I'm using Steam more than the other clients, but that's only due to the fact that the other clients are not directly competing with Steam. Once they get really hardcore with their competition, I'll gladly move and try the other clients more often (same goes for client features). 

Nonsense, if the competition (MS) starts making great games, how is that not good for those interested in getting an Xbox?

Or are you talking about me personally? I benefit from Sony making good games if Microsoft competes strongly with Sony but so do people that are interested in Microsoft.

How is that benefiting one brand alone? It's good for everybody if there is strong competition not just one brand. obviously.

It's good for those interested in getting an Xbox, but I was more talking about thos who were not on the Xbox fence already. The kind that want to be enticed to buy from them.

I don't really see it as a good thing, to want to stay with a brand. Then when it gets lazy, they want someone to become a means to whip the other into shape, but not care about the person/entity they called over to help the other one out.

The way I see it, competition is good, but it's at it's best when it entices you to buy from the competition, rather than just the one brand all the time. For some, there will come a time when that brand dries up or changes into something they don't like using/buying from anymore, which would then force them to using another. It would have been better for them to be enticed with other brands at the time, making their move much more comfortable, rather than forced over time. 

Yes, competition is good for everyone, but it's nice to make use of both sides of the competition, rather than "make this company I like look good, but you stay in second place ya hear?".

Again are you speaking about me personally? Because I said I have no interest in Microsoft hardware or do you mean people in general?

If you mean people in general, well people do change brands and loyalties. A lot of people left Microsoft for Sony and Nintendo and PC in 2013 when Microsoft had their E3 conference that drove people away from their brand. The same thing could happen with Sony if they are not careful about what they do with their future PS5. I would hope they would learn from MS's mistakes but we'll have to wait and see...

As for me personally, MS games were simply never for me even before when MS was very successful and now that they are moving to GaaS and online multi-player models as their main model MS is even less for me. I'm a single player, hard-core, platform gamer. I'm into games like The Last of Us, Bloodborne, God of War, The Witness, The Talos Principle, Limbo, Dark Souls, Sonic Mania, Kingdom-Hearts etc type of games. I don't want games like Halo or Forza or Sea of Thieves online and co-op. It's simply not for me.

If Sony got lazy and their games were not as good or interesting for me I'd probably move to Nintendo as they also have games that interest me (Zelda, Metoid, Prime, Super Mario Odyssey...) So I'm not stuck with Sony, it's just that Sony has been good for me since the PS3. Why would I change something that works well for me?

And that's where I say, MS please don't get too far behind, don't screw up too much, don't make Sony a near-monopoly because that would not be good for me AND ALSO for those who want to play on Xbox.

I'm talking of people that want competition for the sake of them being able to remain comfortable within their own confines.

Yes people move when things get hairy, that's common, but what else is common are those who stay loyal to the brand, even when it's in and faced with a bad situation, even when the competition is doing better.

MS will still give out some SP games, but their focus and philosophies are different than Sony's, just like how Nintendo's are different to both Sony and MS.

There are quite a lot out there that would like co-op over PVP. I count myself as one of those who loves both SP and co-op, but also a dash of MP.

What if Nintendo also become lazy?. Where would you move to then?. Would you not want to voice your say toward those two rather than moving and remaining voiceless?.

Really MS being behind hasn't really benefited Xbox users, but it has done for Sony's side in terms of sales, buzz, and popularity. 

It's not about sales it's about development costs. 

Sony is profiting on the games for PS4 so they have no reason to stop releasing them. In PS3 they had to go even more out and a lot of games lost money, but I'm not sure that was better output all things considered.

Delaystation 3, will Sony ever learn ho wait, Karma is a bitch

Together with Days Gone, not sure they will get much limelight.

It's a bit silly to suggest that MS has to up and move it's games to completely avoid Sony's release schedules, which in turn put MS in range of third party bulk release schedules. 

May as well say they can't win at all, past present and future.