Good joke, man!

And you want to try to disregard any difference as small or insignificant.
Appeasing to the largest part of your userbase makes a lot more sense from a business perspective than doing the opposite. Try convincing shareholders that it's a "pointless" difference.
Also, pretending that there is no other alternative than to buy your console in order to play a game (for a year at least) is a pretty big deal, and a pretty big difference.

In essence, it is a similar deal, yes. But it's one that makes more sense for Capcom, for the fans, and they offer an alternative for those that don't have a PS4. (PC)

As for past generations don't matter to developers, it does if you follow the trends. Espcially if the console is called PlayStation, which historically does very well with every home console they've made, even when they screw up gigantically like they did with the PS3 launch. It's not like Capcom aren't seeing the current trends this generation. Sony had a great launch for PS4. PS3 owners have little to no reason to switch from PS3 to XBO, unlike last generation where there was a lot of reason to jump from PS2 to X360. At least initially.

As for Square and FF7, PlayStation 1 released 1,5 years before Nintendo 64. If they wanted to, they could have made FF7 for PlayStation, and then made another Final Fantasy for N64 if they like what they saw. But as they suspected, they didn't. They wanted to make games for the technology that they, and pretty much every other developer on the planet agreed was the future of the videogaming industry (CD's.)
In this case, it was Nintendo's gigantic blunder that alianated both developers as well as fans. (I love N64, but that's the truth.)

And that's one thing I was getting at earlier. Sony's home consoles have always done very well. Where's Nintendo and Microsoft are more uncertain, and can be hit or miss.

To make things short and simple.

Do you think Capcom would make SFV exclusive and lose potential sales if they did not get aditional incentives from Sony?

Do you think that would be smart?

Do you think they would lose money if they ported the game for the XOne?

It apears you have a double standard here, that it´s only good and smart for a developer to make exclusive games for the current lead platform.

Sorry, but that is not how developers and publishers think. They will port their game to the most possible install base unless costs are too high, they have limited time and workforce or THEY WERE PAID/FUNDED in a exclusivity agreement.

I actually had someone at my job today say something similar.

He said "It would matter if Street Fighter was actually good, like it was when it was still in the arcades. I doubt anyone really cares about Street Fighter these days."

What exactly are you trying to prove here? Everyone knows Sony paid something for this so what are you looking for?

I honestly wonder how could anyone say something like that with a straight face!

I understand that he thinks that it´s a smart decision only if it´s the "dominating" platform.

I understand that he thinks that it´s a smart decision only if it´s the "dominating" platform.