i had that exact same question. if the 360 was in the PS3 spot it would suffer alot. The Wii and PS3 have many 1st party games that become successful. The 360 has some 1st party support but highly rely on the efforts of third party support. that is why i question microsoft's long term chance of staying in the gaming business.

What I think we're seeing here might be a long-term shift in gaming as we know it. Just as much of the business world has learned to do over the past 20 years, gaming might start to outsource. While massive companies like EA and ActiBlizzard will always fund and publish their own titles, smaller developers can maintain their independence and still remain financially secure through allowing a manufacturer to publish and fund their title to keep it exclusive.

It might work, it might not. So far, MS has done pretty well by themselves using this strategy (excepting some of the JRPGs, but even those have given it influence in the Japanese market, something it didn't have previous to Mistwalker). Mass Effect and Gears have been humongous successes for the company while they've faltered with smaller titles like Too Human.

Can this be maintained over the long haul? Dunno. Can this remain profitable if Ninty and Sony also enter the market to bid for these exclusive IPs? Dunno. But, as it stands now, it's been a pretty damned successful venture for Microsoft.

I stand corrected as far as Guerrilla and Naughty Dog (and Lionhead).

But according to this article Insomniac does (likely) own the Resistance and Ratchet and Clank IP's; http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2008/02/12/insomniac-shoots-down-acquisition-speculation

 http://www.insomniacgames.com/terms_use.html

COPYRIGHT AND TRADEMARK NOTICES

All content of the Site is Copyright © 2004 Insomniac Games, Inc., and or its suppliers. INSOMNIAC GAMES and the Insomniac Games logo are the registered trademarks of Insomniac Games, Inc. SPYRO THE DRAGON, SPYRO 2: RIPTO'S RAGE, SPYRO: YEAR OF THE DRAGON, RATCHET & CLANK, RATCHET & CLANK: GOING COMMANDO, RATCHET & CLANK: UP YOUR ARSENAL, PLAYSTATION and PLAYSTATION 2 are the trademarks or registered trademarks of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. or its affiliates. Other trademarks and copyrighted material appearing on this website are the property of their respective owners. All rights not expressly granted by this Agreement are reservefd.

http://www.us.playstation.com/Resistance/

Resistance: Fall of Man is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. Developed by Insomniac Games. 2006 Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. "PlayStation", "PlayStation 3", and the "PS" Family logo are registered trademarks of Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. The Sony Computer Entertainment logo is a registered trademark of Sony Corporation.

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Games/Resistance_2

Resistance 2 is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. Developed by Insomniac Games. © 2008 Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.

http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/Games/Ratchet_and_Clank_Future_Tools_of_Destruction

Ratchet and Clank is a registered trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.. Developed by Insomniac Games.©2007 Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc.

I think that cover all their games, I'm missing Quest for Booty but you get the point.

Sony are in a much much stronger position should they be abandoned by third party when compare to MS (and neither of them could hold a candle when compare to Nintendo who have literally survive the last 2 generation off first party software)

As for support -- both Microsoft and Sony have a 4:1 ratio of third-party published/first party published top-selling titles in each of the last two generations.

In other words, 16 of the top 20 selling games on Xbox and Xbox 360 as well as PS2 and PS3 were published by another company.

(The ratio for Nintendo is exactly the inverse, by the way.)

What this means is that both rely on third-parties for many of their top selling games.

As for other support, Sony is having financial trouble and Microsoft is also going to layoff people. But both should survive.

(Nintendo meanwhile has enough reserves to weather almost any storm.)

So the topic is moot.

Mike from Morgantown

And there are even more studios than that. Sony also has some smaller studios as well.

Trademarking a game title doesn't mean you fully control the IP:

"Spyro the Dragon, Spyro: Ripto's Rage and Spyro: Year of the Dragon were marketed and distributed by Sony but Universal was officially our publisher on the deal and retained the rights to the IP.
As I state above, being independent means that you always have the option to go to another publisher if things don't work out." - Ted Price, Insomniac ( http://blogs.ign.com/Ted-Insomniac/2006/10/09/33075/ )

And I doubt Insomniac would be this popular among publishers/investors if Sony is the owner of all their big hits:

"Price conceded that he is constantly approached by those "who are wondering if we want to sell, if we want private equity money."" - Ted Price, Insomniac ( http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/were-happy-with-independence-says-insomniac )

Um, I'm not going to read the whole tread since I don't have that kind of time, but titles which are released simultaneously for the 360 and PS3 typically sell a lot more on the 360 than the PS3. As such, I would not expect 3rd parties to abandon the console anytime soon.

This thread has failed in it's most fundamental logic.

The PS3 relies on the Xbox 360 for it's software support, and vica versa.

But the PS3 is FAR more dependent on the Xbox 360 than the Microsoft console is on the PS3.

Nintendo and Sony are in completely different first party situations. Sony has very few first party system sellers. The only primary one is GT5. Microsoft has Halo 3 to counter. Other than that neither company has the massive system selling games of Nintendo. They both have a number of titles that sell well enough to make money and round out game libraries. It is ridiculous to suggest that Sony has any sort of advantage over Microsoft here given some of the games Microsoft works with third parties to create though.

I'm not sure what that list of studios is supposed to prove.

I never said Sony doesn't own many studios/dev teams, I only commented on the specific games mentioned by the TC. My point was that many of Sony's biggest hits have been developed by third party studios, just like Nintendo and Microsoft. I really don't see a fundamental difference between the three companies in this matter.