It seems the cost of obtaining exclusive contents are becoming more expensive. I am kinda shocked that its not lifetime exclusive. What microsoft is doing is smart and affordable.

i can see why ms and sony do it, competitive advantage.  i can see why activision and ea does it, money.    ..but yeah i agree.

i have a ton of respect for CD Projekt Red right now for this statement:

"We are treating all gamers equally," said Iwinsky. "We'll not deliver exclusive content to any of the platforms, nor will we artificially delay release of the game on any of the platforms because somebody's paying us money for that. It's definitely against our values. We are not doing that."

that is just downright respectable of them and it makes me want to buy their game all the more.

i'm just really, really glad we haven't seen any retailer specific content yet this gen.  that was even more annoying.

A whole year is a long time. Sony played this well, but still, I hate these kind of practices.

Yeah, I have a lot of respect for CD Projekt Red. 

Wow, so Nintendo is behind the curve in third party relations...shocker. Also while not DLC, I think you might wanna remember Resident Evil 4...

Though I don't see how this is at all related to the topic at hand.

ok, pls explain this.

• How is it that every single sony first party studio is making a game for the PS4 as we speak? Thats not investing in their first party?
• So its bad that sony does not just completely abandon one generation of gamers when starting with the next? And if its bad, how is it that that very same business practice has always paid off for them so far.
• Incentive to upgrade? As it stands sony still has problems meeting global demand. The PS is still the best selling next gen hardware by a large margin, all in its transiton year. No, this is not the time to give anyone heavy incentives to upgrade. And sales clearly shows that that is not a problem the PS4 is having.
• And yes you are ignorant... factually so. This is not an insult to you, its the equivalent of me pointing out that you are white or black in complexion or slim or fat. You are ignorant cause to push your opinion and argue its facts... you are simply ignoring the facts that are right in front of you. 
• And it doesn't matter if MS has the better games coming out this year..... not one bit. MS had the better games on the market in 2006 when the PS3 launched. What happens next year though? And the year after...... as they keep saying... its not a sprint. Besids, this claim of yours is purely subjective.
• I don't like that sony is doing this timed DLC nonsense, but i fear that as it stands, if sony doesn't, every single major third party out teher will have timed dlc for MS. Cause i can't bet my kidneys that if sony doesn't do these things.... MS would. They started it after all right?

Sony is investing money in timed DLC while it should in my opinion invest in their own game line-up... Which isn't all that great. 

I'm glad Nintendo is behind the curve in third-party relations if you accept BS like this. 

Does Wii U even have a trophy/Achievemnent system? 

Watch Dogs  PS4 - 1.79M

Watch Dogs  PS3 - 0.62M

It's a new generation, people having been playing their PS3's and Xbox 360's for 8 and 9 years already. Unlike others, their respective fans are actually buying the new console(s).

Also, if I want to see those great games I am missing out on I'm sure my girlfriend will show me..

People buy PS based on hype, not based on the games that are currently available. I never said Sony didn't invest in first-party games, I said they should invest MORE, so they can release their games sooner. 

Just because MS did it as well doesn't make it a good thing. They're both wrong, timed DLC sucks.

Yes, because Nintendo games are only for kids and girls, right? ;)

Your GF must be lucky to have someone like you! 

Who cares about throphies/achievement system by the way? I play for fun, not to brag.