I find it funny that the defense is "THE USUAL VGCHARTZ...not even understanding what xxx person is saying"

Frankily, the context of him not liking exclusive content based on platform doesn't matter. It doesn't matter in the grand scheme whether he's talking about DLC or not, people have a right to call him a hypocrite for running a brand with timed exclusive content that microsoft paid for. Sure, he's not saying "Timed exclusive GAMES" are bad. But of course he wouldn't say something so blatantly obvious, and just because he's talking about downloadable dlc specifical doesn't make it any less hypocritical.

However...I'll hold judgement since proof has been provided that most of Xbox's deals have at least been done by Don Matrick. As far as we know, all of them have. But for me personally...I would know that even if those deals weren't made by me, people still have them fresh in their mind and most people don't realize I didn't make those deals( as Phil obviously). He should have said this like a year from now, 2017 already has a lot of Microsoft funded exclusives, and Dead Rising 4 is ported to ps4 next year, say that NEXT YEAR.

Wow that's crazy. DLC exclusivity announced 3 years before release. 

Whats more crazy is that the game got announced 3 years before release lol.

In case that was intended for me - i'm not trolling or even trying to start a war lol. Just a genuine discussion.

Hopefully both consoles stop with the paid for content.

No

I think the gist of it is that we don't know what deals Phil made and what was made under Don. 

It is a bit hypocritical for Phil to act like exclusive 3rd party DLC deals are bad and exclusive games are fine.

The real test going forward is if MS will buy DLC exclusivity under Phil. If they don't this will mean Sony can pick up exclusive deals easier and cheaper.

Ok, good, I thought i was in trouble for a second :p

I feel like Spencer made the deal for Dead Rising 4, as Dead rising 3 hadnt even been released by the time Mattrick had stepped down. And even then Spencer had the power to stopped timed DLC and as well as the timed exclusive games.

This is Hypocricy at its finest. And to the anyone that complains that these exclusive deals are bad, you really dont know anything about competition in the buisness sense. 3rd party exclusives be it DLC, games or time exclusive content is great, otherwise there would be almost no incentive to buy a console over another (though i could understand Timed stuff as it is annoying). This just fuels the fire for competition and that is good, If you want street fighter or King of Fighters you best get a PS4, or if you want Scalebound or to play Dead rising (right now) then Get an XBOX.

Thanks for the one word answer with no explanation.

Yea will be interesting to see if Phill keeps his word by them not buying DLC or timed exclusives. But idk if it will make it easier because MS still buys marketing like Witcher 3, Fallout, and FIFA.

I didn't want to bring that up because it could be a deal for a series of games or sequels. I.E. we could see a timed exclusive trilogy, or maybe the deal was for two sequels. Microsoft did it with Bungie ... that's why they made the Campaign DLC Halo 3 Reckon in to Halo 3 ODST, so they could fulfill their quota for their Microsoft contract and leave(well.....most likely.)

But I don't agree with the rest of what you're saying. I don't think it's that unfair to expect console manufacturers to use studios they own, or to make new ips with third parties, or to only make a third party game exclusive when they're funding the development and the company desperately needs help(I.E. Bayonetta 2, and the rumored Beyond Good and Evil 2...and maybe Nier 2?). Microsoft realizes that they have a lack of studios for multiple diverse exclusives, and so they just buy out third party content. That's not right. Playstation 4 is perhaps even more guilty of this and it's one of the reasons I'm glad both consoles are getting tons of real exclusives.