Overreaction much? I understand I'm on VGC, but even for a sales website people tend to overstate the importance of numbers when it suits their argument. Profit is what keeps companies afloat, not sales. Sales can be an indication of profit, but there have been several mismanaged games where the budget used to create them was not covered even with a good deal of sales. There are also games that have sold terribly compared to AAA counterparts, and yet with good budgeting have turned a decent profit for their publisher. It's not the only indicator of success and in certain cases isn't even an indication of quality.  In that sense, yes numbers do lie.

Here's the actual Metacritic scores, over here in that place I like to call "Reality"

BF: 72 

Watch Dogs: 80

Destiny:  76   (Taken King 86)

Rise of The Tomb Raider:  86

Sunset Overdrive: 81

Since the original PlayStation era PlayStation has always been savior of third party games. Let gen was a little different. We are back to normal gaming situation with PS4. Don't be surprised. This is normal gaming norm since 1995.

I think any base would be good with buying games that are new IPs, as long as they are good. Splatoon was a new IP, and that was rather successful. o:

Playstation and pc are your sure bets if you wanna launch a new game or revitalise an old one any other platform is far riskier.

You could argue that during this generation where the PS4 is on top. Last gen you could say the same thing about the Xbox 360. Bioshock, Dead Rising, Call of Duty, Gears of War, etc.

EDIT: I highly doubt "PlayStation" is the reason BO3 is doing so well. Activision's partnership with Sony is the exact same as their past partnership with Microsoft. 

I hope my sarcasm detector is broken...