They don't want to lose a lot of things that have nothing to do with the gaming market. That doesn't make the statement that they love PC gaming less valid.

I disagree. There are better exclusives this gen than there were last. Quantum Break, Project Spark, Sunset Overdrive, Forza, and Halo MCC are much better offerings than what the 360 offered in its first one or two years.

And this is coming from a primary PC gamer.

Every driver your PC uses for its gaming components has to be licensed for windows. Every game engine
that runs on windows has to be licensed. Every peripheral(keyboard, mouse, controller) that runs on Windows has to be licensed. That all pertains to gaiming. You might not see these fees but companies who produce these products do and they have to pay Microsoft for it.

Business doesn't stop after the transaction between consumer and producer. Behind the scene flows money directly into MS's pockets.

Money that wouldn't happen or would be less if there was no gaming on PC.

I also never said that they love their PC monopoly because of gaming. They just love their PC gaming monopoly and would be very sad to see it go by means of steam machines and mobile devices.

Quantum Break and Project Spark are going to PC. Spark is already confirmed for PC and Remedy always support PC so they'll get MS to publish it on PC. MS knows how Remedy feels about the PC community. 

there are two ways

direct and indirect. what u talk about would be direct.

so i really dont get ur point. "they already purchaes windows" is the perfect describe of the chicken egg problem.

but yeah it doesnt matter, if they buy just one, or 100 games on steam.

but as long as the play on windows, it benefits ms

Quantum Break has not been confirmed for PC, until it is this argument holds no merit.

Also, having quality exclusives on PC should be even more reason for PC owners not to completely hate Microsoft. I don't like the way Microsoft has treated PC customers that much either, but they have supported the platform a lot more than either Nintendo or Sony.

Aren't monopolies illegal, though. I thought they had competitors on the home computer market.

I was comparing it with the other "pc-like" products, namely Mac and Linux. Microsoft has the gaming monopoly among home computers.

Of course if you want to throw consoles and mobile into the mix, there is no monopoly anywhere.

I split up the gaming market at that point because for me PC, mobile and console gamers are completely different demographics and markets.

But you're right. I should've said home computer gaming monopoly.

I don't always need Remedy to confirm it. When I had the 360 (before I got a PS3) last gen and Remedy was developing Alan Wake I didnt believe it would go to PC because MS was claiming they were going to support their console more instead of porting games (foolish of me to believe them). Half of the Remedy games that i've played have been on PC. They always support PC and they've stated time and time again their loyalty to the PC community. The other portion I played on the Playstation. I've never actually played a Remedy game on the Xbox. I dont care how Sony or Nintendo treat PC gamers, even you at some point can admit that exclusivity for MS outside of a handful of games is questionable given their track record. Sony used to separate PC publishing from console publishing until this gen now that consoles are running on level with decent level PC's. They are bringing over the PC games they've published to consoles. Tomb Raider is a timed exclusive so that MS can compete with Sony and Uncharted during the holiday season next year. Weak. Spencer admited that there is a duration to the exclusivity. They should've worded it better instead of always sounding like assholes and pissing off the gaming community.