Rubbish if the Witcher was only a million seller and they had an opportunity to rank up revenue via loot boxes they would do

I wouldn't say that the goal of profit is necessary to make a good game, there have been freeware games made by indie developers.

Easy way to generate a positiv perception in the gaming community.

To be fair, treating customers with respect has been with them for a long time (at least since 2008, when GOG started). This is just highlighting it. Blaming them for it is like blaming someone for saying something good about themself. I'd agree with you if this was some major publisher doing the same, but this is CD Projekt Red that has been on this path pretty consistently. We're talking about the company that basically apologized shipping the first Witcher game with DRM (because of publisher demands), then removing it later.

I'm not justifying EA in any way, but it's worth noting the average wage in California, where EA is based, is about 4 to 5 time larger compared to Poland, where CD Red is based. The cost of game development is quite different.

Even if it was a company with a flawless track record who have never done anything bad for consumers, I would still not like the way it looks honestly. I just don't like the idea of "oh, this other company fucked up/did some shit that people didn't like, let's use this to turn attention to us and say how much better we are for not doing that so hopefully people can praise us for it". Like I said, I get it's sort of a part of business, but it just comes off as them acting like their on a high horse or having a holier than thou attitude in my opinion. It feels like if they truly cared about that stuff they wouldn't feel the need to proclaim themselves like that.

Not saying that they can't ever say anything good about themselves, but when it's only because some other company fucked up and they use it to gain some quick good will/potential praise out of the situation then it just sort of feels cheap, at least imo. 

"We're better than EA." That isn't much of an achievement though.

I agree it's not the greatest thing to do, but for business, this is perfectly normal and acceptable. Capitalism is great, eh? Anyway, it seems we disagree, so it's probably best if we leave it at this.

In theory, profit does not have to be present for one to make a good game.  In practice, freeware games are not even remotely comparable to for-profit games.  

Literally every major video game ever made - ones that were played widely enough to become culturally significant - were made, at least in part, with a goal of turning a profit.  

Hmm. Well, when you think about the art vs. money debate in video games, you really have to separate all the branches that help make it possible. As a publisher, it's almost entirely based on profits. They want to maximize their dollar as much as possible. As developers? That is totally different.

Let's think about Super Mario Bros and use it as an example. Do you think Miyamoto was only motivated by profit? Do you think he was motivated by profits at all? If you listen to his interviews then and now, it's clear that all this guy ever cared about was art and how best to convey it in video game form. His boss, on the other hand, Mr. Yamauchi, funded the project with the confidence that it would make a return on his investment. It was all about business and profit for the people who financed the games Miyamoto and his team made. 

So, really, it's not black and white. Even games like COD and Madden have a lot of people working on them that bleed for their work and do it because they just love doing it. There's a lot of cogs in this video game industry and they don't all have the same motives.