I would not over blow it and think things have changed completely to result in the end of variety and ,"cultured" gaming as I would hardly say platformers that used to rule the gaming world are cultured and full of tons more variety. What I do agree is that at least for the foreseeable future we will continue to see a dominance in shooters in the North American market and for them to continue to thrive in Europe if not grow. Now as a shooter fan that will leave me with tons of games to play as it has all gen. But when I get tired of shooters which is often I often fell that MS does least of the big three concerning variety. Especially if you take  kinect out of the picture ( as I do not care for it).  That stated, I get back to what I said before, platformers used to rule and now shooters do. In the future, the genres will continue to evolve and we will have a new popular genre, one you may like more. Nothing is static, not even Mario will rule the roost for eternity.

The New Super Mario bros game alone sold over 50 million copies on the Wii and DS. Whats that again friend? Microsofts strongest games just so happen to be shooters. Go outside of that element and they are naked. Thus...any Xbox is the perfect console for the American audience seeing as shooting is heavily in the culture. Nintendo is the best console for everyone and Sony has the ability to cater to both and fill the gaps (as you said) which Microsoft doesn't fill outside of shooters. They need to market and popularize such games to everyone and find one heavy shooter next gen instead of selling 4-5 and only using the marketing budget for one. Sony needs to help repopularize JRPG's as they would profit off of Japan heavily if they did once more.

I think its best you leave this thread.

Well thanks for ignoring most of my post and spinning it into your direction amigo. You completely ignore that Canada is a part of North America and like shooters about the same as America. You also ignore shootyers are largely popular in Europe and have shown increases in their popularity this gen. I do not agree that shooting real guns is as heavily done in the US as you want to claim. Stop stereotyping all americans as the same that is narrow minded thinking.

Now I know Mario is popular, but you are looking at a micro future when I am looking at a macro future. Shooters will probably be popular for a good number of years in many markets so stop trying to be short sighted and say it is only because of one countries tendincies.

The popularization of JRPGs would not bother me if they had less feminine characters, but even if they are popularized by remaining the way they are, I wouldn't mind, but I much, much prefer wrpgs.

Mario is one platformer and and you are trying to say in 100 years everyone will be playing mario virtual reality. Please. Mario is also not the entire genre there are many different platformers many good ones on MS consoles as exclusives on live.

I was just taking a jab at battle royale and LBP karting. But yeah, exactly. Sure, they could make different games but there's a risk no one will play them. Why not make what will sell? Companies like profits. And I'm telling you, get gold! We can play that one game we like that isn't a shooter..

So many genaralizations and wrong assumptions, yet so little time. 

Instead of being happy that MS is creating a new IP, lets bash it even though we have no idea what it is and complain about MS successful methods. That'll teach them to try and cater to the largest portion of their demograph.

I hope they do that so nobody will doubt that jrpgs are some of the most dated, cliche pieces of shit ever.  I'll be happy if Sony throws more money down that sinkhole.

Where to begin debunking some of the nonsense in this thread. One Microsoft is not the shooter box that some are overly zealous to proclaim. Microsoft has a good variety of exclusives for most genres. This has been proven before time and again. The majority of exclusives on the platform are not gasp shooters. Not to mention Microsoft has put out more then its fair share of novel titles.

Two there is another way to look at the popularity of shooters, and that is North American players are more social then say their Eastern counterparts. They like to play with a lot of people at the same time. Since we are being just plain hurtful. Why not say it the other way around there are a lot of players outside of North America that are just plain anti social. Who prefer to play with minimal human interaction. Shooters just mean more people to play with online. Where as other genres don't necessarily lend themselves to playing with more then a couple other people at any time. You want other genres to be more popular. Then lobby for a greater group dynamic in those games. I guarantee platforming titles would be far more popular if you could play them with a dozen players at the same time.

Three are we seriously saying Microsoft isn't innovative, or driven to try new things. Crackdown, Viva Pinata, Nuts & Bolts, and 1 vs 100 are all prime examples of thinking outside the box. Sorry these games just blow that kind of nonsense thinking out of the water.

Four I am sorry to shatter some illusions, but funneling resources towards JRPG development is not any kind of a good answer. Microsoft tried that, and it didn't work out too well for them, and foregoing shooter development on the part of Sony would have been very bad for them. One genre is dynamic, popular, and justifies online play. While the other is stagnant, formula based, and fairly unpopular. I like a good JRPG, but it is not a needed genre. You can get by without them, and Sony proved that point. While you cannot get by without having some decent exclusive shooters.

Five I cannot speak to M.A.G, but Halo has a pretty good variety of objective based game modes. Not to mention that the game is not as simple as run and gun. To succeed in Halo team play you have to maintain control of the best terrain, and keep the more dangerous weapons out of the hands of the other team. When a team doesn't work together in Halo that team usually ends up getting their asses handed to them.

Definitely a poor choice in expansion from a strategic perspective