Not really, at least not in this case.  Those calling Microsoft "pro-consumer" over this are generally Xbox fans looking for a new weapon to replace an exclusives list.  Many PC gamers know better because Microsoft is still doing the "exclusive" thing with Windows 10, UWP, and their own Store.  They're pushing an agenda really freaking hard.

I disagree.
You wan't Sony's competitors to be competitive with Sony.
Sony is at it's best when it doesn't become complacent. (Re: PS3 Launch.)

Besides, having people gaming together irrespective of platform would just be awesome, no longer will you have a real-life friend that you will never be able to game with because they have a different device, game servers will have higher populations due to consolidation so you as a consumer can get more of your money's worth before the games multiplayer population implodes.
There will likely be more game servers available to a player overall resulting in a better experience.

I've been talking from a business standpoint, not what would be best for consumers.

Why is MS being anti consumer and not releasing all exclusives on ps4, wii u and mac? Why is it that a MS platform should be the one to get all excluisves versus the others?? makes no sense

How has crowdfunding anything to do whith what i was saying? Or BC?

Just because they use x86 doesnt make them PCs, or do you think Apple Macs are also PCs? How does that make sense?

Also the original Xbox had an Intel processor. And going further consoles like the Megadrive and Neo Geo used Motorrola 6800 CPUs but so did the Amiga, Atari ST and Macintoshs which all of them are Computers. 

Did you also called the Sega Megadrive a Homecomputer or PC?

Samee goes for console gamers. You see "anti-consumer" every time we find out a game is exclusive. A game published by Sony and developed by Insomniac was decried as "anti-consumer".....even though Sony has had a relationship with Insomniac and has been getting exclusives from them since Spyro. That game is Spider-Man. And, it's only "anti-consumer" because it's Spider-Man. If it was Resistance 4, nobody would care. If the game was exactly the same, but was about some other superhero (either made up by Insomniac or an established, but less popular superhero), nobody would care. But because it's Spider-Man, Xbox owner feel entitled to the game, "because the IP has always been multi-platform". They act as though Activision can't make their own Spider-Man game (they do still own the rights). They act like anybody else couldn't license the IP and make a game for XBOne. If Naughty Dog decides to make a Batman game, is it "anti-consumer"....by virtue of it being Batman and exclusive? This is tantamount to saying that studios are only allowed to make the games you want, and not the games they want. 

How exactly is online gaming open across all platforms going to mean less incentive to buy consoles?

PC gaming has had huge advantages for years and years, and yet every gen hundreds of millions of people buy consoles and billions of games. It's hilarious how suddenly MS is going to get large masses of people to buy expensive gaming PC's or build their own PC's when most people couldn't give a rats ass about either.

Opening up online gaming across all platforms would only be a good thing for gamers. MS stood in front of it before, now Sony does. Maybe next gen we'll get it.

Sony made the PS3 hard to develop to and launched it for 600US$ (the console was actually more expensive) Those are silly mistakes and I don't understand what this have to do with the actual generation or their future mistakes. Microsoft already make 2 big mistakes and now are going for the third one, the Aways online on the launch, the Kinect Mandatory even after the launch and now all their exclusives will be playable on the PC.

This is anti-consumer for who first purchased the Xbox. I don't think that Microsoft should be able to compete directly with Sony unless they have fixed their problems. I think that would be more interesting to see the NX competing  directly with the PS4.

People purchase consoles because of their games and Exclusives, something that Microsoft will no longer have. And there is no way that Microsoft can compete against PC gaming with the Xbox One, because PC gaming will be cheaper and will play  the same and even more games than the Xbox One. The way to compete is with exclusives, and with we have more than 1 Console company selling their games for the PC it will be the end of the console market. (Something that Microsoft want since they can't compete there.)

 And I don't think that opening online cross-play will affect the sales but it will of course benefit Microsoft more than Sony.

What is this nonsense? Why do you want McDonald's to be anti-consumer and not allow Burger King to make Big Macs. Why do you want Best Buy to be anti-consumer and not allow Wal-Mart to carry Insignia products. Why do you want Microsoft to be anti-consumer and not let Apple stores sell Windows devices? Why do you want Netflix to be anti-consumer and not let Hulu play Orange is the New Black?

If you think exclusive content content is "anti-consumer", then you don't know how capitalism works. Which is funny, because aren't you the guy who got into a brouhaha not too long ago because you thought that you being a business owner made your opinions more valid to whatever discussion you were having (and people, subsequently, called you out on it because owning a business doesn't automatically make you a savant at any and all operations at various companies)? I don't know what your line of business is, but I guess you're "anti-consumer" because you provide some service or product that allows you to stand out from your competition.....but you don't let your competition provide those same benefits. Those products/services are "exclusive" to your business. 

Just as someone pointed out, "pro-consumer" is just a new buzzword, now that you can't give out an exclusives list to defend whatever pro-MS arguments you have.