Just to clarify, Oblivion being a timed exclusive had nothing to do with anything Microsoft did, except release a console first. In fact once the PS3 version came out it became the console version of choice for that game.

While the OP does show real m=numbers they don't jive with the fact that BOTH the PS3 and 360 have basically sold/shipped the same number of consoles with the PS3 coming out a year later. So, for MS and Sony timed exclusives didn't really matter. And I would argue that if developers would stop with the practice they'd probably sell more units in total between all the platforms.

Well now your just talking about Japans indifference to Xbox, basically the reason why PS3 shipped the same amount.

At the least, these timed releases matter in the markets they are relevant in.

In an ideal world, I would buy one console that could play everything.  That way I wouldn't have to chose between consoles.

I admit that this will probably never happen, but it would be nice, wouldn't it?  At the end of the year, if I didn't want to be limited in which console game I waned to play, I would have to have the following in my entertainment unit:  WiiU, PS3, PS4, Xbox 360 and Xbox One.  Needless to say, that isn't going to happen (for me anyway and probably the majority of others).

Do multiple devices gain you anything besides headaches?  With one device, you can still have competition between developers to see who could make the best game.  You would also not have to worry about not being able to play with all of your friends because some of them bought a different console from you.  You also wouldn't have to worry about developers making a game for the lowest common denominator, potentially leading to better games that can fully take advantage of the hardware.  We have already seen what a developer can do when they only focus on one platform (for example, Naughty Dog or Bungie).

The only benefit I see right now is that competition may force the console companies to come up with better hardware, but I think this would happen naturally as technology expires.  Competition may also force companies to spend more on R&D, but I think some of this is negated by money "wasted" on exclusivity deals.

Why on earth should I care if it benifits MS ? It's a cheap anti gamer practice.

The average gamer, who doesnt frequent gaming sites and forums, were largely unaware of this. But hey, its all subjective I suppose.

Its a pro gamer practice from what I see......depends on the console you play.

Destiny DLC benefits the PS gamer. Titan FPS benefits the Xbox gamer.

Let's say that Steam / Intel / Apple (doesn't really matter who) released a new dedicated gaming console every 5 years.  It would be based on the best PC technology at the time available for $500.  All developers would have a fixed target to ease development.  Potentially a consortium of developers would set the requirements for the next console.

I think the industry could regulate itself.  Competition could come from mobile devices / phones or general PC gaming.