W..w...w...wallet breaker!

Man, the talking points went out fast.

I'll grant you most do have reliable broadband, but in the current generation between 20% and 30% of units sold - depending on the console - have never been online, and there's a good chance their voice is not well represented in these arguments. That's a pretty big chunk of the install base. Microsoft clearly wants…

I'll take "Things will stay the same as they are now," with occasional online passes or preorder bonus locked items over "This content is locked to the user/console" with online requirements, restrictions on where and to whom I can trade/sell games, and the potential for online passes or fee locked content as well.

As long as there are single use codes for DLC, any publisher can put content behind that wall and restrict it to first time buyers/users of that code.

First of all, a process for doing something is a system. So you when say you don't need a system, then describe a process for how it could be done, you're admitting it needs a system.

They should have used targeted marketing for the specific location of this ad:

In defense of marketers everywhere, it was probably some suit's idea despite the protestations of savvy marketers who will no doubt be pulled in and screamed at to fix the shitstorm.

What flavor? I was strictly Pure Sport before Matterhorn.

So you don't literally use the same toothbrush as Kirk. Good to know.

I've been making this same argument for years. The kids and even young adults who are buying used and trading now are - when their incomes can support it - the new game buyers in five to ten years. Once they can scratch that instant gratification itch, they will, unless they are pushed out of the hobby but restrictive…

Not to mention that the people who make the starving developer argument against used games will also tell you that Steam is epic because games are cheaper. Which means less money for the developers (or lets be realistic...less money for publishers' executives, like US's top paid CEO, Bobby Kotick, and their majority…

Yes, most gamers are connected, but a not insignificant number of units sold have never been online - somewhere between 20% to 30%, depending on the console. That's a fairly big chunk of potential buyers to simply give the middle finger to at launch.

Weren't there rumors and whisperings with the current gen that SONY leaked a fake launch schedule to pressure Microsoft to push their development schedule up? Not only does it seem like something giant corporations would do, I want it to be something they do because the speculating makes fantastic reading.

- The Console looks old...80's OLD....BETAMAX OLD.

I won't, because like many people, I bought a Kinect and a Move and played them for a microsecond before going back to the controller and never looking back. It just wasn't for me, so I am glad I have the option of not buying it with one manufacturer.

"What Tretton neglected to mention is that Sony will apparently now be requiring gamers to pay for a PlayStation Plus subscription to enjoy online multiplayer..."

I thought he was gearing up for some Double Dream Hands.

My thought the entire duration of this game's presentation was how sad my future self would be when they were unable to deliver on this. I feel like we've been down this road too many times to buy into this.

It's really peer-to-peer sales. Gamestop will be a 'preferred vendor' who has the stamp of approval to buy and sell used. So yeah, by equating used games with Gamestop and hating on them for the last decade, they've come back more powerful than you can possibly imagine.