They are supply constraint,
Aren't Microsoft also supply-constrained with Series X?
their games can be played on PC,
Some of them, not all of them. And none of them Day 1. These are...kind of specific things that need to be understood.
3rd part games can be played on PC or XB,
For the ones available on both platforms. Quite a few still aren't.
sales of the sequels of their PS4 smash hits indicate that those games aren't as much of a system sellers,
I guess you missed that Miles Morales has done over 10 million with the lions share of those being on PS5? HFW and GT7 adding ~ 6.4 million in 1P software sales Q2 that's in addition to what they already brought in Q1?
their cross-play policy actually goes againt OP arguments,
Not really. They still allow cross-play, but since they aren't Microsoft and therefore are more dependent on their gaming revenue (somewhere between Microsoft and Nintendo, leaning a bit closer to Nintendo but not in that territory fully), they're going to leverage monetization policies where they can particularly for sales and revenue of games on other platforms that are probably mainly earning them due to crossplay enabled for PS platforms.
At least Sony actually allow crossplay; Nintendo's still shutting that out for games like Fortnite of all things.
their refund policy is just bad,
One of the few things you've mentioned that's agreeable. They do need to revamp this.
70$ price tag on everything,
How is this any worst than keeping your games priced near MSRP for several years like other publishers such as Nintendo? At least in the case of $70 games, if you don't want to pay that price you can wait until a price cut or a sale a few months later.
$70 games only hurts penny-pinching gamers who fear FOMO. As if those two things don't end up creating an oxymoron.
no regional pricing, the list goes on.
This could be something else they look into addressing, but come countries would be more negatively affected than you think. For example, the yen is weaker than the dollar at present. To generate the same amount of revenue on a sold game copy in Japan as in America, Sony would have to raise the Japanese MSRP price of said game.
There are other countries where their currencies are just completely screwed up, where prices could theoretically be raised to ridiculous levels pursuing a true regional pricing strategy.
I'm personally really interested to see how much the players' good will and brand royalty will carry the PS5, because from my perspective Ryan is turning PS5 into an arrogant, hermetic environment a'la Apple while everyone else wants to open up as much as possible, be available on every platform, and allow all those players to play together, this is what F2P/GAAS model is mostly all about, the community, and again, Sony seems to not to understand that, they'll most likely make 70$ MP-only PS5-exclusive games with seasons, MTX, all the ordinary stuff, and wonder why a couple of months later there's no community and the money doesn't flow from thise games... One thong is sure - Bungie will have a ton of work to do to teach Sony and all its 1P studios what it's all about, and persuade Ryan that it's really is about long term strategy rather than the next fiscal quarter.
"Everyone else", so remind how is Nintendo opening up as much as possible? I don't see them bringing their 1P games to PC, I don't see them enabling cross-play on what one'd assume are obvious picks, I don't see them offering actual sales or pricing discounts for most of their 1P software, etc.
And guess what? That's perfectly fine for them to do. It's their business model and it's what works. But please don't say "everyone else" is doing something when very easily I can pull up massive companies that aren't. If you want to continue that line of thought, Rockstar/Take Two could be another such major exception. Or with Microsoft, if the real goal is "open up as much as possible", why are they locking FH5 Hot Wheels DLC behind a paywall? If you buy the DLC but don't have the base game, don't you need to either buy the game or buy a GamePass subscription? What if there are gamers who can't afford that?
This whole concept of "liberating content", opening things up to "everyone", is just corporate BS. It's a marketing angle, because at the end of the day these companies all still want one thing:
your money. And they still want you in their ecosystem over anyone else's. Just because that ecosystem becomes less defined through hardware over time, doesn't mean it loses any of the power it may've had before. Not when digital collections, social networks, currencies etc. are tied to these more hardware-agnostic ecosystems. You're also conveniently ignoring some of the shortcomings of the things you big up, like cross-play (some games have actually died in terms of MP due to inability to filter out console and PC players), or somehow thinking this idea of bringing players together is what F2P/GaaS is mostly about (if anything, it is the most egregious model for monetization practices, the one thing all of these companies want because it means more $$$), etc.
It's almost comical you think the company that's managed to have the largest marketshare in the industry for almost every generation so far, has helped push along industry-defining or industry-leading games practically every generation more than any other platform holder aside maybe Nintendo (which at the very least would tie them with Sega, if not put them a bit ahead especially depending on what specific metrics you're looking at), and managed to salvage their brand during its weakest period in a way no other platform holder has shown...is suddenly "short-sighted" or needs to be taught how to think about the long-term.
Buddy, your post is Grade-A delusion.