Then you misundertsood the persons point by taking it as a 100% literal blanket statement that microsoft make zero 1st party games.

His post is a reponse to the people saying "As if sony don't buy third party exlcusives too!" which is the irrelevant point as the issue the thread raises is that Microsoft are putting money into keeping games off other systems while not having a strong 1st party that they should be putting money into instead.

Literally the 1st reply (by ka-pi) ignores half of turkish's point and others posted similair. The post you quoted was directed at them.

To argue against his point would require arguing that Microsoft does indeed have a strong enough 1st party to warrant spending that money elsewhere on 3rd party content. Hence my other reponse.

It's OK if Sony does it though. Because i have a Playstation and I get those exclusive titles. Also I like Sony.

What you are saying doesn't counter my argument. They are not bringing anything into the industry. They do 3 games series. Forza is on 10 with spin-offs and filled with loot box micro-transactions, Halo is on what 8 if you count the spin offs? Gears is in like 5? 

How are they adding anything positive by just repacking the same 3 games over and over? They aren't funding games development, they aren't funding new projects. All they do is send some more forza with more vile micro transactions every year. Yeah, they aren't adding anything positive. Sony can have Nintendo's competitiveness. It would be better for the market as the focus would be probably placed more in games than a pointless pursuit of hardware. 

What? When was Halo and Gears of War yearly franchises? lol pathetic comment.

So what it isn't like Sony didn't buy certain titles for their platform like Bloodborne, Street fighter V, Exclusive content for dozens of games, Crash nSane trilogy etc. Nintendo isn't free of guilt either of moneyhatting games Monster from PSP suddenly towards 3DS. All console makers do this it is common practice.

Bloodborne it's a Sony IP and it's co-developed by From software and Sony Japan Studio.
The other are console exclusive and ok, but Sony didn't stop to produce big games and new IP while MS is quitting, so is the point of the thread. Why MS did not produce themselves some exclusives instead of this waste a lots of money in these agreement for games that will arrive elsewhere (or are just available elsewhere).

They killed there 1st party?
They keeping PUBG off PS4 after working on improving the visusls of it themselves? Shame on them there.
Thank gawd i can play Street Fighter 5 on XB1.... oh wait.

Sony funded the development. Capcom couldn't/wouldn't afford to make it on their own.

Its one thing to invest into and support a new IP, or just leeching off of the already existing success, solely relying on the work and ingenuity of others to keep business afloat. This is what MS does since the first xbox.

You can only go that route for so long before interested parties start to complain.  I believe its not that MS are satisfied with their current offering, it's that they need to be fiscally responsible.  In other words, taking the same risk they did during the 360 is probably gone.  They are looking more to invest in known properties that will sell and maybe have one or 2 risky projects.  So PUBG was a given that MS would try to get them on their system as it seems they have pushed for more PC only games to come over.