bah, there no "stealing" involved what soever. This is just bitter tears and whining. Sony started a new battle field by subsidizing game costs. It was a value of money that Sony had that Sega nor Nintendo could leverage to the same strength. PS fans became happy because it got them more games.

Come MS who can throw around shits loads more money and now the same fans are calling the tactic "unfair". Who cares.

I'll tell you what. This subsidising game companies is just gonna break the game industry. You can't have companies live on life support forever. Either the company is healthy and can function on their own or they are going to linger forever in the medical game hospital. It may seem like an odd anaology, but it's pretty darn accurate. wow I sound so darn heartless. Then again the employees of X company when goes under can go to another company, so game companies are in a better situation.

1. All consoles are monopolies, you can't put your program on them without the owners say so.

2. Nintendo built awesome studios, you can mention Sony but not in the same line.

3. Sony wrote the book on predatory business practices in the console business. The reason why they hardly made any money is that they were busy trying to drive Sega and Nintendo out of the business.

4. It doesn't matter that Microsoft charges for online, thats just their business strategy and you can take it or leave it.

i dont think its stealing on microsofts part, they dont have as many internal studios as sony, hence they have no choice to shop for games to have in thier porfolio.

had they had a similar sized studio set up like sonys they would clearly shop less.

so its all ok as far as im concerned.

sega maybe not, but nintendo also bought studios.

there is a differnet from paying and not doing something and helping developers but also taking part in the project aside being the publisher.

there is so small input in the games , that game like ninja gaiden 2 were published by microsoft and are being ported.

1. game can be ported, and they are.

2. whats naughty dog? polyphony? they are top rank.

3. sony invest millions in games, killzone 2 development was easily over 50 million and it shows, and thats form an "average" developer.

4. i  think i will leave, better a quality console that will ast me for years, that good online that i won't be able to play because the console it's broken.

A few more minor points

For those saying Microsoft has a bad strategy. I would say that the proof is in the results that you are very wrong. Funding exclusives is very cost effective. Bringing in strong short term gain. Buying a studio is a long term investment, and it can take five or six years to see a return on investment. Hell you might not see a return on investment at all.

Which brings me to my second point. All of the manufacturers have studios that have failed to perform, or are failing to perform. The reason your not aware of this is, because the titles they put out are beneath contemplation. In other words you do not even know the names of these failures. Being under a manufacturer does not equate to producing high quality games.

Let us try to avoid overly positive generalizations. Microsoft has funded shit exclusives, and the likes of Sony have had studios that churned out crap, or at least games that were less then well received by the gaming public.

You are wrong. Not everyone is a fanboy and the sooner you learn that, the better off you'll be in these forums. I'm a gamer and being so, I would NEVER want a gamer to be kept from a game because of fanbot bullshit. If Sony moneyhatted, I would be so fucking disappointed in them.  It would disgust me the same way that MS does. End of story.

Thankfully they don't and instead make their own games which I might add are fantastic. 

The bottom line is that I've been kept from games that I've wanted to play *BECAUSE* of MS. And I don't approve of those unethical practices *REGARDLESS* of which company is using them.

You need to get over yourself. So Microsoft doesn't make their own fantastic games? Right... If Microsoft wants to keep games off the PS3 to get more people to buy their product, more power to them. You wouldn't make it in the business world, because clearly, you don't understand that businesses compete with each other and do everything within their power to do so to beat their competitors. In the real world, businesses get this and don't follow your code of chivalry you think they should abide.

EDIT: So I take you will never buy any PS3 third party exclusive? (because we have no real proof that Microsoft is actually paying loads of money for this, it's just "wow the 360 has third party exlusives, Microsoft must've paid for them!") Right...

both sucks, nintendo pwns both company!!!

Firstly, MS Doesn't have anywhere near the amount of 1st party titles that Sony or Nintendo have so don't be suprised when people say Sony and Nintendo make fantastic games and Microsoft doesn't. MS just isn't known for making games. (although I do like what they have)

Secondly, what are you doing? Are you honestly defending MS for keeping games away from gamers? I hope your not because, well, then you're just a tool. I understand exactly what they're doing from a business standpoint. But just because it's profitable for MS does not mean that it's equitable for gamers.

The bottom line is that gamers have been kept from games that we would've been able to play simple because of MS and their check books. That's my only complaint and I think that's as simple as I can put it. If you support keeping games away from gamers that go right ahead. I don't care.