Microsoft certainly have the resources to produce third person games in addition to all of the first person games they're doing and they have studios creative enough to put their own spin on it.
They are..? Compulsion's new game is third person, Fable is third person, Gears is third person, Hellblade 2 is third person, Indiana Jones is likely third person. That's five games and we haven't even gotten into some games offering multiple perspectives.
Do they have as many has Sony? No. Just like Sony has no answer to Microsoft's western RPGs like Elder Scrolls or Starfield or FPS like Halo and Doom or RTS like Halo Wars 2 and Age of Empires.
No one is saying they shouldn't invest in third person games and they are. They could even be investing more and it would be great, but they need to define what makes Xbox unique. And as I said in my previous post, they are, by not doing everything the same way as the other guys.
This is a fair point I didn't consider because I still don't see Bethesda, the publisher, and all of their studios as part of Xbox proper when I'm talking about XGS. It's not ill-intended, just something that takes a little more time and something didn't have on my radar when I wrote that post.
They are however, even if they're a seperate entity and that's very important in helping defining what Xbox is. They need to get to the point where people ask, why aren't Sony doing the kind of games Microsoft is? They were there previously with Xbox Live, XBLA, titles like Halo, Gears, Bioshock and Mass Effect. Not everything done in-house, but with stuff associated with Xbox. This is what they need again, not necessarily the same type of titles or genres, but things that make people ask "hmm, why isn't that on Playstation?".
For now we still haven't felt the full weight of the Zenimax acquisition since titles like Deathloop, Quake, Ghostwire Tokyo aren't exclusive (well, timed to PS5 :)) and there still hasn't been an ID shooter or a Bethesda single player RPG or even a mindshare driver like an exclusive Arkane game. That'll take time, but it will happen eventually.
Voodoopeople put it better when he talked about a gap in their portfolio, which is a better description of what I meant to say.
There will always be gaps. I listed five third person games above and obviously they could have more. No one is saying otherwise and if they have more cash on top of the 10+ billion they spent since the Minecraft acquisition, sure, start filling out the gaps. The reality is, any first party has gaps, even more so if five games isn't enough to plug the hole, but this time they also have clear strengths in many areas, their competitors are leaving gaps.
You're also right to say that in the end, it's all about production values for me and that's what I'm missing the most from XGS. I assume most of the time, when people bring up Sony, it's because some of the games they publish tend to really show the budget and maybe that's why it's so easy to point to their 3rd person action adventures when it's actually about the money they put behind these games.
This I wholeheartedly agree with. Production value and polish is what some of those Xbox first party games lack.