For one thing multiplat games make more money. They establish good relations with all the console makers. Im not saying that all of the games should be the same across the board. If PS3 version has some Joker in its Batman, Fallout 360 gets DLC first, Wii Force Unleashed has some multi mode. Im all for that. that boosts competition between consoles and everyone involved gets the same basic game. make it easier for multiplat owners to decide which version to get as well. I mean all the games should be basically the same. Not that NFS Hot Pursuit crap that EA pulled on Wii where they used the same name but the Wii got a MUCH worst game. "but the Wii cant handle some HD games" fine, then just dont make them, if a game cant be done (like Fallout) then keep it on PS360.   I know what some will say "but if a game goes multi then it wont live up to that console's full potential, look at FF13"  that brings me to the real reason I think there should be no more console exclusives. It FORCES the 1st party devs to really step there game up. Ninty gets this they've had a strenuos relationship with 3rd parties for years (except there portables), so they pretty much solely rely on themselves. I would be so bold as to say that Ninty could survive on their games ALONE. Sony is discovering this they know the glory days of 3rd parties flocking to them like the PS1 n 2 are over so they are putting there devs on it. Look at that exclusive lineup for next year. Ms it seems still have not got it, but i think they will im hoping the Mass Defect will make them realize "oh crap we really got to work right now" as of now im not seeing that outside of Kinect. The days of them throwing money around are just about to end, they need more of their own IPs and they need it soon.

The 1st parties know their own system so really it should be them pushing the limits of their own consoles I mean they are the ones that have something to do with its development, who better to make the best games on the respective consoles

LOL, I love these threads.  

3rd parties should do what makes them the most money.  And that doesn't always mean multiplat.

Who? What?

obvious statement is obvious

Due to the extreme high costs of developing this gen, I can see where you are coming from.  But being exclusive can help the game, take Dragon Quest IX for example.  Let's say this game came out on the PSP as well, it probably wouldn't have sold that much better in Japan and probably worse in the West as Nintendo would be less likely to put their full marketing muscle behind the game.  That's not even taking into account the costs of porting the game, in short it's better DS exclusive.

3rd parties should gang up and say FU to these dumb ass console makers, and force the to come to a standard. I don't get why they continue to sit back and battle to pay the bills while Sony, MS, and Nintendo get to sit atop the hill and just hemorrhage cash, and still make a profit. 

If I was in control of any of these third party companies I would have started this campaign ages ago. Why the hell should they have to make 17 version of Madden for? Its total bullshit, and ends up in a game that is no where near what it should be. Due to this practice, 3rd parties games sit years behind, 1st party, and will only continue to decay.

If third parties stopped making console exclusives then there would be no MGS 4, and I would rather have MGS4 then have anything any other third party has come up with.

They've pushed toward something of the kind before (Activision is open about this desire), but it's not going anywhere.

The problem with your example of the console makers: one of them doesn't hemorrhage money and two of them haven't made a decent return on the gen yet.

Been saying this for years. Why should only group X who constitutes only a fragment of the potential market enjoy game Z. Where as including markets Y and Z for game A would only increase sales potential. Personally while there would be much bitching about the suffering of graphical quality. The overall result would be companies ending up being healthier and produce more games and an overall general better quality. 

1)  The console makers risk billions of dollars to develop said consoles (and I emphasize risk: the list of console makers who've lost billions in modern dollars trying to make a console include names like Atari, Sega, Magnavox, RCA, Mattel, NEC, SNK, and a lot more).  If third-parties want to form a coalition to fund and create their own box, they're welcome to do so, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

2)  If third-parties really want to create games in an environment where they don't have to pay royalties to any console creator, they're more than free to make games for the PC.  They can even satiate their creativity and artistic vision by utilizing the much-better horsepower and module capabilities of the PC!  Win-win, really.