who has the better first party/publishing strategy from Nintendo, Sony and MS?

[Weedlab]

MDMAlliance said:

Weedlab said:
Sony! They have a diversity of titles and they're supporting both major platforms with good measure. The PS3 is still receiving good support and as Cerny said in a recent interview the first year of the PS4 is all about the core games. Let's not forget the strong relations Sony have cultivated with indies. Nintendo don't seem to be making the right moves in my view. They're getting better but as it stands they seem to be behind the curve. Microsoft's plan on paper doesn't seem bad either. I get the sense both Sony and Microsoft will provide a diversity of games consistently. Plus, Microsoft is locking down exclusive content such as timed DLC (though I do not care for this much, but some do).

With that said, I rank them as follows

1 Sony
2 Microsoft
3 Nintendo

I thought this was about 1st party stuff.  Meaning games made by Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo (studios owned by them).

It is, but it also says publishing strategy. Those don't necessarily have to be made by them. Look at Bayonetta 2 and W101 on Wii U for instance. Are those being made internally at Nintendo? With Sony they've been building relationships with indies and in some cases they get to publish exclusive indie games on PS platforms (Journey). Microsoft publishes games that are often timed exclusive titles or pays for them to be timed exclusive. Ninja Gaiden 2 for instance was published by Microsoft even though it wasn't developed by one of their studios. That's not unlike some of the games for the One. Titan Fall may not be a true exclusive for instance, but it will be exclusively available on Microsoft platforms, and for people who want the 'true HD experience' there's only one option to do so for at least a year. That's defintely going to give some people, however small the number, a reason to get the XB1 over the PS4.