I have no issue with a company getting exclusivity of games when they fund them in some capacity like Microsoft with Sunset Overdrive or Quantum Break. What I have a problem with is when companies moneyhat features away from people so that when two people pay the same amount for a game one person gets less of a game than the other. That is bullshit. I don't care if Sony does it or if Microsoft does it. It is pure bullshit.
So they might be making it the place to play games, but in the case of Avengers they seriously doing in the worst possible way. Sony customers and loyalists might not be bothered by it, but Xbox and PC gamers will remember that for a long time. Look at how much work it took on Microsofts part before PC gamers started to let them out of the doghouse for Game for Windows Live.
I've seen people say this and I just can't agree with it. Unless X company helps fund a game that is dangerously close from not being made at all, helping fund a game to have exclusivity is just a nicer way of saying it. It's just as scummy, and IMO, more scummy than securing exclusive characters or relatively small features in a game. Unless Sony is actually paying to have Spider-Man / these features removed from the other platforms, then I see this as no worse than your examples... it's just to a s
maller degree IMO.
If they are in fact paying to have these things removed from the other platforms (sorry haven't kept up with the story), then as a Sony fan, I can agree that it's scummy. But I also understand it's a business. Spider-Man has been synonymous with Sony for a long time, and they are in a position of power to do this. Had rolls been reversed and MS had a very popular character synonymous with their platform, I wouldn't doubt that they'd do the same.