They're not idiots if it's the difference between publishing on a console or not. They've spent boatloads of money developing this game. They have to make the money back, or else they'll go under. It won't matter how pure their ideals are, then.

What he's saying is that The Witcher 3 doesn't yet have a publisher, and that he doesn't know what CD Projekt Red will do to reinforce their anti-DRM stance if the eventual publisher of the game for XB1 decides that they want to impose the built-in anti-used games feature of the console.

One thing I wonder: being that both games come from Ubisoft, and seem to have similiar UI design aesthetics at work, is it possible that Watch Dogs and Assassin's Creed could take place in the same universe? I can't help but find this an intriguing premise, that both stories could be going on at the same time, and…

Isn't what Sony's saying more along the lines of: "We are, unlike Microsoft, not going to directly enable you to restrict used game sales, at the hardware level"?

Yes, because PC gamers, as we all know, are able to shift used copies of their games quite easily. It's one thing to have a secondary market artificially messed with, a la what appears to be happening (or at least possible) with the XB1. It's entirely another for there to simply be no secondary market at all, because…

You've got to be kidding me. There really is nothing to see here. I'm glad you guys have asked the question, but Sony's been pretty damned clear with their answers. There is no built-in feature of the PS4 that will allow publishers to restrict used games. Things will remain as they are now, where publishers are…

I'm not going to deny that a developer could do something interesting with this. All of this stuff is valid. But I can't help but feel that really, most of the time, we're only going to end up getting increasingly passive experiences from these sorts of mash-ups. Most AAA developers making huge games these days seem…

Apply what you're saying to almost anything else, and I believe you'd find the argument quite absurd. When I buy a book, is the publisher merely charging me for experiencing an author's work? When I buy a bed, is the manufacturer merely charging me for experiencing its comfort? A physical copy of a game is not the…

That XB1 is far from the most valuable thing in the room. Not when you could be following Michael Pachter around, writing down every word he says, and constructing an investment strategy based on following the exact opposite of his market predictions.

A physical copy of a game is a physical item that you own and can resell to anybody for any price you'd like. That's pretty well established, and I don't think any publisher could successfully argue otherwise in a court of law. The copy contains intellectual property. You aren't allowed to duplicate and sell the…

Well, the publishers can see it differently all they like. As long as they're selling copies on physical discs, that copy is mine to do with as I please. I can't sell the data off the thing (in other words, I cannot make a copies and sell them), but that original copy is a physical thing that I own and can transfer…

I believe the word-for-word translation from French looks something more like this: "We were gonna do that shit, but now we have to find an elegant way to make it look like we're not changing our plans."

I hope we're finally getting to the point where maybe people will realize that motion games are their own separate super-genre. Attempts at working it into standard games usually produces give-or-take results at best (i.e. only as good as a regular controller, not really better per se), or gimmicks at worst (well, I…

Or a PS4.

I agree with you that the tech seems (nay, is) amazing. But the thing is, I don't really get the impression that most XB1 players will be having these group-gaming situations on a regular basis. For those situations, of course, the motion-based games can be quite fun and amusing. But if Kinect is going to be this…

How would that be "fair"? I buy a game brand new. It belongs to me. I finish the game and sell it back to Gamestop. It now belongs to them. How could the publishers possibly argue that they are owed a piece of whatever revenue Gamestop generates through the reselling of that game? The publisher made their money the…

Because they're not entitled to earn profit twice or more on an item they no longer own.

Who needs a source? It's obvious, isn't it? Why would they make your console check in once a day if there were no purpose for it? They're just doing it for their own health?

Yeah, I'm not dismissing the XB1 entirely. For me, it's definitely a wait-and-see thing at this point. The thing is, as a big 360 fan, I wanted the XB1 to blow me away. I was sitting there, waiting to be impressed. And to my shock, basically everything Microsoft said felt completely tonedeaf, like they were making…

If they're trying to justify asking me to spend $100 over their competitor, then yeah, they need to show me implementations of meaningful motion control in games that are currently in development. So far I haven't seen anything terribly compelling. Given that the Kinect is bundled into the XB1, you'd think developers…