Eh its business as usual. Im getting the PS5 anyway.

How is Street Fighter V being permanently exclusive to PS4 and PC in any way different than Titanfall and Dead Rising 3 being permanently exclusive to XB1 and PC?

Listen, I agree that timed exclusivity and 3rd party moneyhats need to stop. But you guys have to be consistent. It doesn't make any sense to complain about the instances on PS4 and ignore the instances on XB1.

In the case of DR3, because Capcom said the game was never going to happen without Microsoft. In the case of SFV, Capcom said it would have taken a long time without Sony. Not to mention you're talking about a pretty small time franchise versus Street Fighter. One franchise Capcom was going to let die without Microsoft support, the other you'd have to be an apologist to actually believe would have never happened had Sony not gotten involved.

Personal taste also plays a part in this. You won't see me complaining about Shenmue 3 exclusive stuff because frankly I don't give a shit about the game.

Titanfall is different and I've said on this forum numerous times that I wish PS4 users could have played it. But in that games case Microsoft was already heavily invested and EA struck a deal. If they made Jedi whatever Xbone exclusive I would also say that's a bum deal and PS4 owners should get to play it. Who are "you guys" exactly? I'm expressing my own opinion here.

At the current pace, here's what the all-time top five best-selling home consoles will be by the end of the year:

1) PlayStation 2
2) PlayStation 4
3) PlayStation
4) Wii
5) PlayStation 3

Seeing a pattern here? Sony knows what they're doing! They usually win because they usually have the right focus: games. (It took them a while to get on that point with the PS3, but they figured it out once their initial arrogance caught up with them.) It's inescapable that the appeal of PlayStation systems has everything to do with the sheer volume of games that they offer in comparison to the competition. (It is a business, after all.) That and I think Sony's first-party titles have started to get pretty damn good over the last generation all in all.

Now the Switch's success is obviously different in nature since people seem to mostly buy a combination of indie games and first-party titles for it, not so much third-party releases, but I think most people approach the Switch as a secondary system specifically for Nintendo and indie games and already own a PS4 for other stuff. My point being that it's not actually a threat to Sony's market so much as Microsoft's systems are. There's a lot of overlap between PS4 owners and Switch owners, but not so much between PS4 owners and Xbox One owners.

So yeah, I think this shows that they've still got the gaming market in perspective.

What you don't seem to understand: there is a difference between moneyhatting and timed exclusivity.

Timed exclusivity is a broad definition. It doesn't matter if the exclusivity time frame gets announced or not. It also doesn't matter if someone pays for exclusivity or not.

ROTT was a timed console exclusive for 11 months, but only a timed exclusive for 3 months. "Timed console exclusives" is and intersection of "timed exclusives" and "console exclusives":

And why is the Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy not a timed exclusive? PS4 version in June 2017, PC+XBO versions in June 2018, so 12 months difference. PCs and XBOs EVEN EXISTED in June 2017.

And why is Detroit: Become Human not a timed exclusive? PS4 version in May 2018, PC version in autumn 2019, so 16 - 18 months difference. PCs EVEN EXISTED in May 2018.

And why is Batman: Arkham VR not a timed exclusive? PSVR version in October 2016, PCVR in April 2017, so 6 months difference. PCVR headsets and PCs EVEN EXISTED in October 2016.

And why is Moss not a timed exclusive? PSVR version in February 2018, PCVR in June 2018, so 4 months difference. PCVR headsets and PCs EVEN EXISTED in February 2018.

And why is Skyrim VR not a timed exclusive? PSVR version in November 2017, PCVR in April 2018, so 5 months difference. PCVR headsets and PCs EVEN EXISTED in November 2017.

And why are the listed DLCs no timed exclusive DLCs? For most of them the timed exclusivity was even announced.

They very well may be.  If we see evidence of it, I'll take their check mark away. 

Exactly.

Looking at your avatar, it's expected that the post I'd agree with most in this thread would be this one :D

MS did timed exclusives all this gen, trying to gain some sales, but it never worked in their favor.

Doesn't mean that it's good behavior just because the other one is doing it too.

What a cop-out!

So you can't explain why Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy, Detroit: Become Human, Batman: Arkham VR, Moss, Skyrim VR and the DLCs aren't timed exclusives.

So can you explain why Battlezone, Borderlands 2 VR, Polybius, Resident Evil 7 VR, REZ Infinite, Tethered, Danganronpa 1 - 3, Dragon Quest Builders, Final Fantasy X/X-2 HD, World of Final Fantasy, Ys VIII aren't timed exclusives.

I wasn't even thinking about the Switch version of Disgea 5 when I listed it above, i was refering to the PC version... and PCs are existing since a few decades.

No, you don't have to look into the game and if the developers planned to release other versions later. The game was exclusive and the exclusivity gets broken by the second version, making the game "timed exclusive". You are making your definitions and exceptions up to fit your argument.

If not "timed exclusive" what is a game after the release of a second version on a different platform? Still an exclusive? Was it never an exclusive to begin with? Is it in exclusivity limbo now?

This is the second time you are trying to pull the discussion on a personal level.

And do you know and can prove the definition of a timed exclusive? Where can we read that definition?