Erm, Kinect Sports is very successful. Over a million and still at full price.

Can't wait for the future RARE Kinect games, Conker Kinect? Banjo Kazooie Kinect? Viva Pinata Kinect?

Nintendo is doing it right because their exclusives actually count for something and many sell millions of consoles. However given the path that both Microsoft and Sony have taken to truly stand out they have to outspend the 3rd party publishers which is a catch 22 when the games themselves are limited to only the userbase of their specific consoles as they are exclusives.

Microsoft as a publisher are doing pretty well for themselves. If you count home consoles they will outpublish Sony for 2010 which isn't bad considering how Sony is supposed to have that much of a bigger first party studio portfolio. It isn't the size really, it is what you do with what you have. What Microsoft did with what they and likely against the relative investment is probably significantly more cost effective than what Sony has done in this generation. Who are we to say that it is a poor strategy?

I am 100 percent in agreeance in that you have to use your games right exclusive or otherwise. But if one games consoles has x games and another console has x 4 games what has the better games library per se those 4 games are actually worth getting.

Right now MS knows how to advertise in their bases, thus its working, they still have Halo, Gears (under 3rd party) what Kinect can do and said games under their sleeves. Also Alan Wake and Crackdown and Forza etc if they continue supporting them correctly. BUT Alan wake is 3rd, Gears is 3rd, hell even a second party not necessarily part of MS, like Bungie was.

Microsoft needs something, they need their own IP's. Sony has been backed into a corner this gen and will fight back see Mass Effect for proof. Microsoft needs to show that they can fight back just as hard.

Just a thought anyway

So because a game is succesfull it's suppose to be good. IMHO Microsoft kills Rareware. I'm glad Bioware was not bought by microsoft because i'm not quite sure they would have release so many great games. I think microsoft should stick to their formula to use third party developpers creating games with IP owns by microsoft. Once Microsoft buy you you never know how it's gone end. I think it's time for microsoft to launch a good new IP for their own good.

It is better to have a Gears of War in the hand in 2006 than it is to have 4 Uncharted 2s or God of War 3s released in 2010. It is also better to have one Halo 3 in the hand in 2007 than it is to have a dozen exclusives with an average sell through of 1.5M each. You as a game buyer would also prefer one sublime game to three good games, wouldn't you? For starters that sublime game costs $60 whereas three good games would cost $180 assuming of course you don't sell any.

You can't look at the number of games/exclusives released or even their metacritic to say how good a first party has been. You need to also look at the number of hours sunk into each title. It is better for the game player that the exclusives released are both excellent and time sinks. Halo 3 for instance with >10M sold @ > 100 hours average is clocking at over a billion hours played. Those are McDonalds numbers. You can't say that they are short of any exclusives if people are still putting hours of game time into them today, a game is still worth something if it is still being played.

Now as for I.P. Well they are coming. You have to remember that a game with a new engine can take upwards of 3 years to make. So if they dedicated their teams to making new I.P for 2011 then they would have had to have started in 2008 or 2007 to make it for 2011. There is a significant time lag which must be accounted for. Thats the reason why Firebird Studio, Lionhead team 2, 343 studio and Rares teams have hardly been heard from. It is also the reason why new Kinect games don't really take advantage of Kinect, the engine technology is simply too new. I remember seeing the Unreal engine splash logo on a few of the games.

I completely disagree. As a gamer, I would much rather have 3 very good exclusives to a single good and popular game. I'd much rather have the choice and the variety. Is money an issue? Possibly, but I'd still rather be spoilt for choice then have only a small set of games to choose from. For the console manufacturer it can also be beneficial as you're bringing in users and customers with diferent tastes which can increase sales of all software in a range of genres.

Also, your point about number of hours spent on the titles is true, but just because their are more titles out their doesn't mean people don't devote large amounts of time into those titles. The content available in Sony and Nintendo exclusives is more than enough to keep people playing for over 100 hours, and many do.

You fail to see that most people within a games company don't want to be so close to Microsoft (Rare for example) What will happen, as has happened before is Microsoft take over a games company and the real talent leave and set up their own company. So really it's a lose lose situation for Microsoft. Besides nothing good has ever come to a companies employees that has been taken over by Microsoft in the past

The console makers have found out it is better to sell one game to people who buy between 1 and 4 titles per year or even increase the numbers of titles they buy than to sell 2 or more games to people who buy 5-15 titles a year. Cue Nintendo for the former and Sony for the latter, Nintendo of course being the more successful at moving units of the two given the fact that the thick edge of the wedge is a much better side of the market to work on. This is the market reality and here what you prefer doesn't really factor into anything.

Before I respond I must say I feel dirty because No Internet Explorer version in my house I can respond to so i have to use Google Chrome for my Lappy which i just d/led and Mozilla for my Desktop (I like change :p )

Back to the point at hand, I said those 4 games in the x 4 scenario would have to be good in their own right. Yes MS has done very very well with Halo's audience. Call of duty has done better. But hey lets not go into semantics.

PS3 fans response to halo is cod, because even on 360 COD is properly more popular and as some people have said is probably more of a casual audience game (my bro in law plays it and he is not what you would call a gamer). Mass Effect is one of those games that people whoever tastes will appreciate it for what it is. That should have been MS and would have if they guaranteed it as an exclusive by buying Bioware when they had the option. Look don't get me wrong I am rapt that PS3 fans get to experience the game if they don't have a good pc or a 360 but I would prefer it to stay on the 360. 

Exclusives are important for systems to stay unique. This may stem from my Sega Mega Drive II days vs Nintendo. The games were soooo different it was crazy and that was the good thing. There were obvious differences. If you wanted to play Sonic, Altered Beast and After Burner you got a Sega (which I did, though it was for a present but I grew to love <3) but if you got a Nintendo you did it for the Mario series, starfox series, Zelda series, FF series at the time and so on.

Exclusives used to define systems now Timed bullocks define how pissing contests happen. These forums imo would be a much much friendlier place if we didn't get MGS will go to 360 and will announce it at x or Gears will go multi plat at y. Those conversations suck and bring out the worst in people. In house exclusives help make people understand that that game is for that console. No ifs or buts. Halo is 360, Mario is Nintendo, Drake (i think that is in house) is Sony. It is good to have those. No it is great. If next gen we have 3 consoles (this theory is nintendo is not part of the gen) that are exactly the same, i can see no platform game differences and that would suck.

Last time it took an ET ad to destroy and industry, not saying this will destroy the industry, but its certainly going to bring down competitions between exclusives and without competition we have same thing over and over again, FIFA and COD anybody? These companies know they can get away with it because they don't have serious competition. And that is the sad truth.

So do we need exclusives? hell yes, Does Microsoft need more? If this answer hasn't been given to you in that little piece of information, I don't know what I can do. I think it is obvious. But I will say it anyway, hell yes. 

Sorry for the length :-/

Yes no its Microsoft's fault that is why Ensemble was itching to leave... Um oh wait no they weren't. Rare seems to love MS, Epic can't seem to get enough of MS. The Crysis guys are doing an exclusive with MS, Bungie by all reports has a fantastic relationship with MS. I am failing to see how you can pigeonhole Microsoft to be this way. Elaborate please :)