My experience is limited, but the little experience I had with EA and Ubi, both auto started when my PC launched, both took resources.  It was super annoying.  

As for passwords, I still take a different view.  Why do I need to login?  So, developers can sell my personal information?  If there was a reason to justify logins for games, I would not push back.  But there is ZERO benefit to me.  Zero.  Developers are going to need to justify the extra instead of forcing it with zero tangible benefit.    

RE9 success is multi reasons.  No launcher, no stupid login, well optimized and a great game.  I think it all plays a role.  

Why not separate launchers?  Because it takes additional system resources for no reason.  It takes up HDD space.  It takes up RAM.  It adds yet more DRM, which reduces fps.  And if servers are down, it can prevent me from playing games.  Also, what happens if Ubi goes under?  Will my games stop working?  Will someone else buy their IP and still support their launcher?  There is no benefit for gamers.  Zero, none, zilch.  

The world has moved to convenience.  Amazing, Netflix, Spotify, etc.  The gaming industry can start realizing people want convenience or they will fall behind.  I still think the Switch's success is largely convenience; it is way more adaptable than a standard home console.  

My experience is limited, but the little experience I had with EA and Ubi, both auto started when my PC launched, both took resources.  It was super annoying.  

As for passwords, I still take a different view.  Why do I need to login?  So, developers can sell my personal information?  If there was a reason to justify logins for games, I would not push back.  But there is ZERO benefit to me.  Zero.  Developers are going to need to justify the extra instead of forcing it with zero tangible benefit.    

RE9 success is multi reasons.  No launcher, no stupid login, well optimized and a great game.  I think it all plays a role.  

Why not separate launchers?  Because it takes additional system resources for no reason.  It takes up HDD space.  It takes up RAM.  It adds yet more DRM, which reduces fps.  And if servers are down, it can prevent me from playing games.  Also, what happens if Ubi goes under?  Will my games stop working?  Will someone else buy their IP and still support their launcher?  There is no benefit for gamers.  Zero, none, zilch.  

The world has moved to convenience.  Amazing, Netflix, Spotify, etc.  The gaming industry can start realizing people want convenience or they will fall behind.  I still think the Switch's success is largely convenience; it is way more adaptable than a standard home console.  

It's not at all unreasonable to deduce that a 5%+ loss was caused by lack of true exclusives, in addition to other percentages caused by other factors. You were talking as if a "negligible" increase of software sales caused by PC translates to a negligible decrease on the console side, which isn't necessarily true. Sony has access to more data than we do, and the data is helping them arrive at different conclusions that may or may not be misguided.

And while we're at it, why aren't Valve putting their most popular games on consoles and other PC storefronts? Why are paid exclusives still a thing? Exclusives do obviously matter, even smaller ones to an extent. The longer and truer they are, the more value added to the platform.

In my mind, the primary reason Xbox collapsed was its complete lack of exclusives which over time virtually everyone knew about.

I think was only part of the reason Xbox failed.

Xbox was only once ever able to compete with Playstation, its not like that should be the expected outcome to begin with.

But even so, it all started to go bad with the announcement of the Xbox One, the brand was definitely damaged then, and at the same time the Playstation brand had gotten up completely, just like what allowed the 360 to compete with the PS3, and just like the PS3 the XBO did course correct during the generation, the problem is, the Playstation brand is simply a lot more powerful and worldwide spread than the Xbox brand, so it gotten way better results out of this too.

After that, the Xbox Series actually released in a way better position than the Xbox One, so why even then I expected the XBS to sell less than the XBO regardless? Mostly 2 things.

1. being that Playstation would simply keep growing the lead as its naturally expected as history had already proved by then, if they don't screw up they are simply the most appealing option to begin with.

2. even as the XBO was able to course correct, it was abundantly clear Xbox Studios were not being able to release games that even came close to Playstation during the whole generation, Playstation Studios quality and reception was sky high and Xbox was having a lot of trouble having a single hit like they had during the 360 era, I can't remember a single time a Xbox Studios game was an actual GOTY contender with any chance of being the winner, ever since the XBO started and up until now.

Microsoft diluting their exclusives because of them existing on PC didn't even come to mind compared to those 2 things above, actually the drop in perceived quality and reception on their exclusives, aside from Forza, specially Horizon, probably meant it was even less relevant because people just weren't showing enough interest in those games to begin with. I think Gamepass being on PC was a bigger reason to be honest. The interest on Xbox was already failing for multiple reason aside from their games not being 100% exclusive to the Xbox. Over time it surely became a reason too, but I think it was just one of them, and not the biggest one to be hone

So, you're telling me that the sharp decline in console sales that we have seen in the last two years was due to the Xbox One reveal..  in 2013..

I mean, sure, why not?

I urge you to read the rest of the post, XBO course correcting was addressed immediatly after what you are asking about was written.

It's a long process, and that was there the brand was first damaged, yes.

Funny how Sony decides to drop Kena on Switch 2 for April right after the report came out lol

If Sony don't own Kena the logical conclusion is it was not Sony who decided to release on Switch 2, in fact I believe Sony has no say at all about the NSW2 release 

Kena is already on Xbox for many years. It was a Day 1 PC release. The Switch delay was just a matter of technical limitation I believe 

Yeah, but you are implying that what happened 13 years ago has more weight than they giving up exclusivity now.

I would argue that they were in a position to at least retain the same market share that they had with the Xbox One, but as it stands, they will have lost around 20 million customers by the end of this generation.

If there is little reason for people to chose your product over your competitor's, eliminating those few reasons is not the way to go.