Why do some people consider microsoft buying games as "stealing"?

[Squilliam]

patapon said:
I think there's a major difference between buying developers and buying games. When a company (Sony) buys devs or even creates them in some cases, (Team Ico) that group becomes apart of said company. They're hiring them as employees. So games like Uncharted, God of War, SotC, exist because of Sony and games like OoT, Super Mario 64, galaxies, etc. exist because of Nintendo. Those companies get the credit because they made the game. There's nothing unethical about keeping their products on their system. It's to be expected.

When Microsoft gets their checkbooks out, they're paying for a game *NOT* to come out on another system (ps3). That's very important to note. And in some instances, the gamer (me) is surprised to find out that his ps3 version of Fallout 3 was fucking money hatted. Microsoft didn't make the game and Microsoft didn't play a part in it's conception. The only thing that results from MS little transaction is me (the ps3 owner) suffering from not being able to play said game. And that sucks.

It's okay that a game like Viva Piñata doesn't come out on the ps3 because Microsoft developed that game (Rare which are employees of MS). But I have a problem when games are kept from gamers just because of bullshit. This whole thing of 3rd party exclusives is junk. It's okay that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo have the games that THEY make exclusive to THEIR system, but anything else is no good.

In short, console company devs = apart of company........console companies buying 3rd party exclusives = BS

/rant

I hope you don't have a PS2 because you're so morally agahst of these tactics. Actually your opinion of Sony should be so soured that you don't even own a PS3 for what went on last generation. Your rant seems like 'if it happens to me, f%^& you! If it happens to someone else? Ok!'