Why is this the go-to response whenever someone doesn't prefer that console manufacturers fund games? Why can't we prefer funding from a third-party so everyone can play it instead?
But no, of course not, that guy must just want the game to not exist instead.
The idea that console manufacturers shouldn't fund games is absurd.
Console Manufacturers fund games, and create exclusives, to differentiate themselves from their competition. Right there, without going any further, that's enough.
But going further -- the console market is incredibly important to gaming. Not everyone - in fact, a huge number of people, have no interest in PC gaming. I'm included in that, even though I used to be a PC gamer, have hundreds of games on Steam/gog/etc, and have a pc capable of running many recent games.
The gaming industry wants and needs exclusives, because exclusives help push console sales [or else they wouldn't exist]. People can complain and port beg all they want about it, but exclusives are part and parcel of the industry ... they're an important, integral part of the console economy/ecosystem. There is no gaming nirvana where there are no exclusives, because a lack of exclusives hurts console sales and could domino into a console failure and even industry collapse.
Sure, it's terrible when the [consolenotofyourchoice] scoops a game or dlc and the [consoleofyourchoice] doesn't get it. But that anger/disdain/whatever we feel is just a different form of the energy others feel that, when it reaches a certain point, moves them to buy the console.
There is no dream world where 'everyone gets to play'. It can't be, not when there are multiple architectures, multiple OSs, and multiple devices that cost money to develop for. Ultimately, some devices will get some games, others will get other games, and there will be some amount that go multi.