I agree, that would be a great idea. I also think it would be smart to get Epic to make a definitive version of their UE3 engine on the PS3 platform, for the ease of use of 3rd party developers. It's hard to tell if the lag in UE3 engine development on the PS3 is entirely due to the obtuse/complex nature of the PS3's design or if they're upgrading the engine in some manner for the PS3 in particular.

But I don't think it's fair to suggest that Microsoft is, in some way, spending their money in a crude, dishonorable fashion. Sony has done a lot of the same things in the past (paying for publishing/advertisement, or simply buying up developers, such as Psygnosis), they just haven't done it as lavishly as Microsoft has.

I guess we will find out when UT3 is released. ;)

I think we need a better definition of exclusive.

There is no reason a developer could not chose to make a game an exclusive. If Squareenix want to release Dragon Quest only on the big sellers I see no problem here. I do not care if it is Snes, PS2 or DS.

Helping a company with development costs is ok. Nintendo paid for the translations costs of Tales of Symphonia, so I think it is alright with they tell Sony to make their own translation for a NA release.

If a company makes the game for just one console and release it on others due to good sales there is no problem also.
Sony told Capcom that Viewtiful Joe was shit when they first offered it for PS2, Nintendo gladly accepted their offer. Capcom made a PS2 version With extras later when Sony asked for it. I do not see any problem here.

If a company have an agreement on a exclusive - like the console has some features that makes the game unique - I think it is ok. That was not the case with RE4, Capcom back stabbed Nintendo. It is the case with games that focus a lot on online play kinda like some Xbox games.

Paying for the game exclusive as whole is wrong. If the company paying is not involved into the development, then it sucks. It sounds like an insurance policy against the competition.

Playing for exclusive content or extras would be alright if:
1) there is a good reason for it, like Wii control scheme, Xbox Live or PS3 interaction with Home or extra space on BR.
2) the price paid is the price the extras are worth.
Of course that is not the truth for GTA4 content. I know that there is a lot of subjective value in it, and the game being a major hit may justify it. Even so, I think everyone knows that the real reason is "do everything humanly possible to stop Sony from getting the better version".

Here's a great article on what Sony has lost to date: 

Sony's Lost Exclusives: A Timeline - http://blog.wired.com/games/2007/07/sonys-lost-excl.html

Metal Gear Solid
Tomb Raider
Tekken 5
Soul Calibur

I guess the've had a change of heart. Those old tactics only won them the previous gen, which isn' important, right?

I apologize in advance:

"Exclusives are so last gen."

:D

Or you could spend 5 minutes trying to find out yourself before insinuating that he's just making stuff up.

If you paid attention to video gaming in the PS1/Sat/N64 era, you'd remember.  For everything else, there's Google.

I swear, if Sony's PR becomes any more transparent, it will be invisible.  "We don't buy exclusives, we earn them."  There isn't a single part of that statement approaching something believable.

 they did.. remember its part of the dev kit and UT3 was announced in 2005 for the PS3 and is the primary console for the Unreal Engine 3. Its completely optimised for the cell and rsx. Its up to devs to actually know wtf they are doing. Thats the major problem with 3rd party right now, they suck at programming. They had problems with the PS2 when it was new. Only devs that could use the console well was 1st and 2nd parties for the first 2 game generations.

Where did you hear that PS3 is the "primary console" for the UE3 engine? o_O

For one, I know that the BASE of development was the PC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unreal_engine_3#Unreal_Engine_3_2

But that's all the information I can find, and I assume you're splitting hairs (you said primary console, which I suppose the PC doesn't qualify as). Obviously I think it's possible that the UE3 engine could be optimized for the PS3 -- as I just speculated about it -- I'm just saying it's not apparent yet. Do you have evidence otherwise?

 Indeed a good article. Especially shocking is how they didn't say yes to Assassin's Creed and GTA IV...