New IP do not shift consoles.  Actually it takes a while for a new IP to become a AAA that sells a system.  Spinning off a universe is now considered desperate without actually knowing what these games will be.  You sure have a very strong opinon about very limited information.  Would we see the same opinion if Sony also spin off the uncharted or Last of us Universe.

No it doesn't.  The first Halo sold a boatload of Xbox consoles through review scores and word of mouth of how good it was.  It was an instant AAA classic.

If Sony made any of their main franchises annual I would be equally critical, it is never a good thing in terms of quality, only money

I don't understand why games have to be 1st party... are non 1st party games any good?

Also, forum posters seem to glorify new IPs but the reality is that they cost a lot and contrary to some belief they don't sell that much hence why they need existing franchises.

Why is "moneyhatting" used when investing in  a developer to create a game for your system.  Games are a business and developers face a lot of risk when funding their games on their own.  Not all 3rd party developers have big bank accounts and can afford a miss on a project.  Most I would say live game by game and if a game does not sell very well put them at considerable risk.

As a business, its probably a lot easier for a lot of these companies to use the mony from a console maker to fund projects because it reduces the risk of the project.  I would say that those companies actually go to the console maker and pitch their game for funding not the console maker actually going to them to make their games exclusive.  Sunset Overdrive is a good example.  The developer stated they pitched that game to MS and MS invested into it.  Quantum Break would also be a good example.  Hell on the other side of the table would be The Order and Quatic Dream games.  They are pitched to Sony and Sony invest in those games.  Neither company are Sony studios.

The whole moneyhatted thing is a concept I have to say is fanboy related.  It totally does not look at the situation for the developer but instead is used to demean a perfectly good development strategy.  

As a console maker you do not need originality, you need to understand where to invest your resources.  Whether its first, 2nd or 3rd, if the company invest their money into a project then they are providing that original content for their system.  If you want to take a look at how having to many first party devs under your belt being risky and detrimental, Sony would be a good example.  In the last 2 years they closed 5 studios I believe.  

There is more to making games then what gamers want.  its a business with a lot of risk.  Decisions are made because of risk and developers have to be very mindful about such risk or risk closure.

How many new IPs have replicated Halo.  Hell, Sony tried with 3 different IPS and have not replicated Halo and neither have MS.  One anomaly out of hundreds of games does not prove your point.  

So you are saying it would not be smart for Sony to take a Universe like Uncharted or The Last of Us and spin off different games within that universe, thats fine but calling it desperate is on another level.

I think Ford should stop annualizing Mustang because it shows their lack of confidence in producing new models.

Anyway, Halo universe is vast chronologically and physically; another character to recount the saga in a different point of view is welcomed.

@Bolded:  I totally agree with this point.  I would definitely put money down that we would not have seen "The last of US" if Uncharted was not successful.  Because of the success of the Uncharted games, is the reason that ND have expanded and I believe will be producing more games and can also explore new ideals and IP.

I don't get this logic. As if game a being 1st party makes it more enjoyable.

Its just nonsense.

Not in disagree with you but...

CoD dropping from 30m to 25m or even 20m in sales won't make it stop to be a yearly release because 20m is yet a crazy number even if the quality dropped.

Now Halo dropping from 10m to 8m or 6m is sales will be a big hit for a yearly release if the quality dropped.

Just saying they will hold CoD yearly even it sells only 15 million... I don't see that happening if Halo sells only 3 miillion.

A side Halo game selling 3m is great tho? Halo Wars and Anniversary did like half of that.