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.

I wont argue with your decision, I simply don't agree with it.

games published by them as well. or exlusives secured. beyonetta, gears arent owned by nintend and MS but they are included in this. out of Forza and halo microsofts first party lineup is pretty much a joke, but they secure 3rd party exlusives like gears to make things better

Then we agree to disagree. But publishing strategy =/= first party (it is a subset of it though). I think that's why there's a '/' dividing both above.

To be honest, I was a little confused by the title.  I read it as (party/publishing) being one thing and I thought it meant first party or first publishing strategy.  

The question asks what is best for gamers. Microsoft paying for games to be exclusives isn't. They are spending money on negative games rather than making their own exclusives.

Sony can advertise the hell out of their big budget games, but let many of their small franchises die out (Example : The Last of Us and Sly Cooper). 

Nintendo has shown that they can take one of their smaller or dead series and boost its popularity a shit ton (Fire Emblem Awakening, and Kid Icarus Uprising).  But they also have failed in showing general consumers the benefits of the Wii U, and they can only seem to market towards kids.

I'll have to see how Nintendo handles marketing Wonderful 101 though since Hideki Kamiya said that Nintendo were barely advertising it at all and thought the game would fail.

Im not too knowledgeable about Microsoft's marketing though but they do have a lot of sales from Kinect games and Halo, so they must be doing something right.

LOL yeah sorry about that, i kind of had a hard time making a thread tittle that would explain the point of the tittle properly. its simple, im having a massive brain fart if you could give me a better tittle i would put it up