From a consumer perspective, obviously getting rid of exclusivity would be the best.
From a manufacturer POV tho, exclusives are the biggest hook. And youre gonna decide according to what best benefits your business. 

TBH hearing Sony and XBOX come out confessing that they’re prioritizing exclusivity moving forward gives me a lot of hope for future first-party releases. No longer will we see Sony be so quick to lean on risky live-service projects (which only really work as a multiplatform experience), but revolutionary single player experiences will be valued again.

What games need to be is profitable. That's the reason they're made in the first place. Neither MSoft, Sony or all the third party developers that ditched PC`prts years ago to focus on consoles have come(back) to the PC ecosystem out of charity, but rather because of necessity. 

Console sales have stagnated around the 200 million cap at best, at least when it comes to the Sony/MSoft machines, since the PS2 era with no signs of improvement, but rather the opposite. And with game development costs having kept rising non-stop since then, there is a point where you have to either cut the budget of the games or find new costumers. That's why they brought their games to PC.

Nintendo had the insight, or luck, of realizing that a long time ago, and it has worked well for them, with reasonably budgeted games that can be "easily" profitable, but the other two console manufacturers still seem oblivious to this reality, producing mamooth games with ridiculous budgets.

With that in mind, if Sony and MSoft were able sell their consoles for a profit and keeping their games exclusive made them sell more consoles to the point of making an overall profit, bringing back exclusivity can make sense. But if they'll keep selling their consoles at a lot or at break even, the situation will become unsustainable in the long term.

So it's a matter of choice. You know, like that old cheap-fast-good rule, where you can only have two of those things, only in this case it would be something like big budget-profitable-exclusive. You can have two, but not three, and it's up to the console manufacturers to decide which route they'll go and up to us to decide what we're willing to accept.

I'm going to ignore the business side of things for now, because it's more complicated. PC has become my main platform even more strongly than before due to my increasing distrust and disrespect of console manufacturers, the change itself being mostly in relation to Sony. I've 'always' had PlayStation consoles, but with Sony's increasingly poor pricing, poor backwards compatibility, and heavy monetization of even fairly basic features (mainly cloud saves and occasional online play for me), PlayStation has become a platform I have absolutely no wish to invest in.

And to be clear, I've never had any interest in getting into Xbox, because there's been little reason for me personally and my distrust in Microsoft is even longer-standing. I don't have a history with Nintendo, but I feel like with Nintendo I at least roughly know what I'd be getting into, and I might be getting into Nintendo once I work through more of my backlog.

Speaking as a primarily PC gamer, sure, it would be nice to have consoles exclusives on Steam, but that doesn't really makes much sense for platform holders, especially since Steam on ARM is just about to happen officially, thus giving Valve even more devices they can dominate on. So, platform holders should focus on their consoles, making their IPs exclusive to them.

Helix can, potentially, be in unique position to cater to both - MS games being exclusive to XBOX part of it, while having access to your Steam library, since it will behave as PC as well.

It depends. I do like the fact that systems with exclusives are more interesting than systems without. Actually the whole industry is more interesting with exclusives. Also, you don't need to play all the games there is. Them there's the fact that "PC" may also be an exclusive to a certain digital platform, although there's no barrier to purhase new hardware if you just create an account to another digital platfom.

And, to be honest, most games are crap and multiplatform releases just flood the market with shovelware on all the systems.

I don't see PC ports the same way I see console ports. I mean, PC was getting console ports back in the 90's (Madden, FF7 etc.), so it's definitely not a new thing. But when games like Halo come out on PS5, and The Show comes out on Xbox? That's always going to be weird for me. I prefer each console to have their own identities in both hardware and software. I feel like it spices things up and makes the industry more interesting, gives it more variety.