BUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's inaccurate....

but wat does that matter?..there is a large portion of the company dedicated to gaming..wether its in internal or exteral( ur PS corp example) it doessnt matter

The reason as to why people think that MS and SONY doesn't have any first party is because their games really just look like ANY OTHER 3RD PARTY GAME. They have nothing that give them an identity like Sega or Capcom or Nintendo.

Trust me, if MS or SONY could make a kart racer or some other game starring recogniced characters, they WOULD DO IT. Sony and MS are not above milking franchises, or making all stars games, they just CAN'T because their games have not been mega hits that will always be remembered such as Super Mario Brothers or Sonic.

Every game that is put out by Sonys and MSs studios just follow the latest trends, they are our time's equivalent of the Sonic clones of the 90's. They will be remembered just the same way all the mascot platformers were (excluding Sonic). Sony though, has made one exception, LittleBigPlanet might be remembered as a game that gave the PS3 an Identity, maybe the ICO games too, but that is like 2-5 against all of the games in the classic franchises  that Sega or Capcom has.

Games with generic themes can become legends too because of quality, just look at Blizzard's games, but MS and Sony doesn't have any games of Blizzard caliber either.

That's why the PS1 and 2, and the Xboxes never really interrested me, it felt like they had no identity the way Nintendo or Sega or Blizzard or Capcom has.

I agree with much in the OP. The structure that Sony and Microsoft has isn't really suited for gaming either. Both Nintendo and Sega desinged their hardware from the software they want to make. Nintnedo and Sega are very integrated companies. Microsoft and Sony doesn't have that integration between software makers and hardware makers. When they got into the industry, they made the hardware first, moneyhatted third parties, and bought some studios later. Sony and MS should really start uniting their console divisions with their game divisions, for the good of gaming.

It matters because they don't have as much of an incentive to put make games products that people will want.

It matters because they don't have as much of an incentive to put make games products that people will want.

Your entire OP is based on the premise that Microsoft and Sony are messing up the industry.

Even what you call Nintendo's laziness is brought on by Sony and Microsoft.

You compare the gaming industry to the music industry, while saying gaming is no good in its current form, so either:

a) Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo need to step up the first party development, or

b) There are many different brands of console, all of which can play every game, giving us a situation like the MP3 player.

To be honest, I think the industry is fine as it is. Within the next couple of quarters, all three companies will be profiting, sales for all consoles are strong, and there is a diverse and quality range of games on every platform. The last thing we need is a company like Apple having complete domination over the industry.