nowadays it's normally that third-party games are made not only for one platform but for more, but there were times where nindento, microsoft or sony paid for exclusivity...and that was not a bad thing, as developers could put the max effort all for one system, what at the end means the best results and quality for a game, and maybe even shorter devolpement time...as making one game for three or even more different systems...

Systems are becoming more and more similair and development engines and tools are becoming more plentiful, varied and compatible.

So the situation you describe doesn't really apply.

There is no good reason to make 3rd party games exclusive to one platform when the consoles are so similar hardware-wise

I don't like seeing exclusives unless there is a valid reason behind it. FF7 being exclusive was due to circumstances, so that's fine.

The way some Japanese publishers like to sprinkle exclusives around has always annoyed me. It's good that some of them seem to be changing that, at least somewhat.

This.

The idea that everything should go back to bought out exclusivity is frankly disgusting.

Also, to entertain the OP, if you wanted it that way, then what about all the games that are built for PC first or made PC exclusive?. 

There are plenty of exclusive third-party games and exclusives in general. I think a mix of multi-platform and exclusives are good.

i know it's not only on playstation anymore, but at first when it was made, it was only made for playstation, so SE could concentrate all the effort in one system

3rd parties should be multi-platform to all consoles and have no loyalty. 1st and 2nd party titles are the only titles that should be exclusive.

Arent enought exclusives around here already ? I mean, every year got at least 10+ games, who will play all of that ?
Also is the fact that for example Dissidia FF or Ori are a big deal? Not really imo.