Add in the context of Phil and Microsoft proactively trying to position Xbox as pro-consumer. I find it hard to believe that you, surely an intelligent person, would hear Phil say that a) exclusive content for marketing purpose is bad and we don't like it and b) locking content off of other platforms is wrong, and then come to the conclusion that you will be pedantic about the argument that XSX unveiling a handful of timed exclusive games is entirely hypocritical and antithetical to the pro-consumer image that Phil and Microsoft are trying to portray and that some in the gaming community are buying into.
I think "making pro-consumer moves" and "literally always doing the pro-consumer thing" are very different. Yeah if Spencer was truly and honestly committed to a completely holistic approach to being pro-consumer, he wouldn't have any timed exclusives. He also wouldn't have paid multiplayer. And he'd add support for PlayStation accessories on Xbox. And he'd put all of their first-party games on PlayStation too. It doesn't get much more pro-consumer than that. Or pedantic, as a point of argument.
Positioning Xbox as a more pro-consumer brand doesn't mean he's going to pursue that strategy to the exclusion of any and all other business considerations in all cases. I mean, if that means the big reveal here is that this is part of a business plan to rehabilitate their brand image, and not pure corporate altruism, then I'll try to make my best shocked face, haha.
Spencer has made several pro-consumer moves with the Xbox brand. He's also shown that he's willing to embrace more standard expectations of the business, if he thinks he needs to. That's clearly the case with third-party exclusives.
What annoys me, is when people treat that like "A-ha! Where was the "pro-consumer" there, Phil? Huh Good Guy Phil? Doncha just wanna go get a beer with Good Guy Phil? The mask has slipped, and now we see him for the anti-consumer fraud he is! ". No - you see him for the corporate executive he is, who has also chosen to do a lot of business in pro-consumer ways where he thinks he can, while still being cognizant of the realities of the business. Timed third-party exclusives are a massive reality of the business, that he can't just pretend aren't a thing no matter what he might personally think of them.
As I said in another post, do
some people treat Spencer too much like he's their friend who wants to heal the world, and not a savvy business executive who knows how to cultivate an image? Absolutely. But I'll also go a step further and say there's a subsect of people who are utterly obsessed with trying to prove the man is a disingenuous fraud for some baffling reason.
