1: In the case of DR3, because Capcom said the game was never going to happen without Microsoft. In the case of SFV, Capcom said it would have taken a long time without Sony. Not to mention you're talking about a pretty small time franchise versus Street Fighter. One franchise Capcom was going to let die without Microsoft support, the other you'd have to be an apologist to actually believe would have never happened had Sony not gotten involved.

Personal taste also plays a part in this. You won't see me complaining about Shenmue 3 exclusive stuff because frankly I don't give a shit about the game.

2: Titanfall is different and I've said on this forum numerous times that I wish PS4 users could have played it. But in that games case Microsoft was already heavily invested and EA struck a deal. If they made Jedi whatever Xbone exclusive I would also say that's a bum deal and PS4 owners should get to play it.

3: Who are "you guys" exactly? I'm expressing my own opinion here.

Doesn't mean that it's good behavior just because the other one is doing it too.

I told you to do your own research. I was finishing lunch and looked up two games. And the results are surprising!

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2018/06/one_guy_got_crash_bandicoot_n_sane_trilogy_up_and_running_on_switch

"According to Nintendo World Report, sometime around the PlayStation 4 release of the N. Sane Trilogy, a lone engineer at Vicarious Visions spent his weekend trying to get the first level of the remaster up and running on Nintendo’s latest device. He managed to succeed, and it was at this point the company realised a port to the hybrid device was feasible."

They didn't even know the game was feasible for the switch by the time it release for the PS4.  Why would sony "money hat" a game from a system that it wasn't even going to release on in the first place. 

Moneyhats like usual, what a shame. If Sony's first party is as strong as people act like it is, moneyhatting 3rd parties wouldn't be necessary. 

MS buys 3rd party devs to hold their games as full exclusive, nobody bats an eye...

Sony invests in timed exclusive content, something that MS themselves pushed full swing with the 360, and everyone loses their minds!

MS buys 3rd party devs to hold their games as full exclusive, nobody bats an eye...

Sony invests in timed exclusive content, something that MS themselves pushed full swing with the 360, and everyone loses their minds!

The funny truth why no one bats an eye with MS buying 3rd party companies is because MS still release there games on Multiplatforms, heck they even allowed Banjo in Smash!

Who lost their mind?

I simply pointed out that it's anti-gamer, and that I intend to avoid rewarding anti-gamer behavior to the best of my ability.  MS, to the best of my knowledge, has no first-party exclusives anymore.  All games come to PC as well, and some even go to Switch and PS.  If they pay for timed exclusivity of games going forward, as I mentioned in another post, I'll hold it against them.  

I game on all systems - I've owned almost every major gaming console and handheld released in the US since the Atari 2600.  I'll very likely own everything next gen too.  But, I'll have to choose which new system to pick up next year, and which to push down the road a couple years.  Whichever I buy first will likely end up getting more money from me over the course of the generation.  If one of the two is being significantly better to gamers in general, shouldn't I weigh that in my decision?  Aren't I supposed to vote with my wallet?

Who lost their mind?

I simply pointed out that it's anti-gamer, and that I intend to avoid rewarding anti-gamer behavior to the best of my ability.  MS, to the best of my knowledge, has no first-party exclusives anymore.  All games come to PC as well, and some even go to Switch and PS.  If they pay for timed exclusivity of games going forward, as I mentioned in another post, I'll hold it against them.  

I game on all systems - I've owned almost every major gaming console and handheld released in the US since the Atari 2600.  I'll very likely own everything next gen too.  But, I'll have to choose which new system to pick up next year, and which to push down the road a couple years.  Whichever I buy first will likely end up getting more money from me over the course of the generation.  If one of the two is being significantly better to gamers in general, shouldn't I weigh that in my decision?  Aren't I supposed to vote with my wallet?