IF only gamers on the other side of the fence thought the same as well, but we're in this reality as is and they think differently like some PC gamers do.

I pointed out that someone had already come up with said idea like Steam, where they still make their own hardware a la MS, but also sell to PC the proper way (that being like a storefront, exactly like Valve's).

MS's crashed and burned because they locked it to Windows 10, they botched any and all features attached to it and lacking features that Steam has had for years (seriously, Steam is an open book, you don't ened to pay millions of dollars to open the client and see what it has, that you yourself could implement towards your own client). Also it's locked to Windows 10 only, which isn't doing so hot vs the Steam store which currently sells to:

Windows XP

Windows Vista

Windows 7

Windows 8

Windows `10

Linux

Mac OS

The windows store is incredibly limited in both it's reach and what it has to offer. If you looked into how it crashed and burned, you'd understand as to why others can make their store more ideal, than say going in blindly like MS and pulling the same stunt, then turning around and blaming the entire market, rather than what you did wrong vs what others did right. Also Steam doesn't take a 50-70% cut like we're trying to imagine here.

As for CoD sales, there are plenty of titles on all sorts of platforms that don't generate mega sales like CoD and we all clearly still celebrate said games selling at all, so I don't think every game needs to sell like CoD to be successful.

I feel that was a huge issue during the PS3 days, Dark Souls 1 dropped to 14 fps in some areas, most games ran like shit at the end of the gen.

Not so much now, it seems multiplats run much better and will probably remain like that till the end of the gen.

Origin did so well, too.

Origin is still alive

Sony knows that if they were to release a Storefront that people would only use it to purchase their exclusives, as most are already heavily invested in Steam. And if people aren't buying their games on Sony's storefront, than all that cheddar those games would have made being exclusive suddenly vanishes. I know many PC gamers find it "anti-consumer", but their demands would cost Sony, not make them money like they want to think it would.

You act as if you definitely know that there is only a single path in the future, as if everything is already predetermined. You forget that people choose all the other clients out there, but even then you'll set up the rest to being enxt to useless because they aren't magically churning out CoD sales (but I laugh at that since mobile sales dwarf CoD and the console market altogether, so we should use that instead if we're going to compare massive to small).

Their demands have made others money so far, rather than cause supposed massive failure rates of anyone daring to pander to that market.

And Call of Duty was simply an example of a AAA multiplatform that Sony wants people buying on their console. In reality, this extends to ALL games. Sony makes money from every title sold on their platform, and their exclusives exist only to bolster the population of the platform, not necessarily to make money on their own.

No, you're basing CoD as something of an ip that generates insane sales, rather than anything else out there. You are using a franchise that is multiplatform (not even exclusive at this point) and it's multiplat sales vs another market and asking said market to generate the numbers you think is needed for that market to be "viable".

Being alive doesn't mean it wants to live ;)

Except it's still alive and has been since it's inception. Either way, it's selling it's games and people are buying them, otherwise they wouldn't seek to improve their client (but it's clearly better to call them dead as a fact than to give them their merits).

Okay, so if Sony were to make a storefront, you would definitely make all future purchases on it, right?

Provided the store is actually good to use and doesn't seek to hamper the games in any way, yes, yes I would. I do so for Origin, Battle.net, GoG (Galaxy) and Steam. The only one out of that lot is Uplay and that client hasn't done much at all, especially when that client latches onto Steam to act as double layer DRM (while the others don't). If the store took all of Steam's good pages then I'd see myself using it more often (all of the good pages, not just oens that suit the company, because I know some like that idea).

To get people using your client, you need to actually do things that attract them in the first place. Not pull an MS and expect everyone to flock in an instant, jesus christ no. Nothing on their view on what makes a store was good at all (outside of the play anywhere, but that involves a console, so to non console owners it's not really a plus).