This is true. DRM will be key in that case... Someone will figure out fingerprint scanner for the controllers. If it isn't your fingerprint on the DPAD, game doesn't boot.

You want PC games type DRM and restrictions on console games than let them drop to $5-10 like they do on PC within 4-5 months. I don't buy used games but i want to share the game with my friend if i want to. Seriously Joel why are you sounding like Bobby Kotick. As someone said the industry is still growing in this crap of a world economy. 
As far as Nintendo goes there is a reason they are able to sell their games for full price for years and not drop it to 40 and subsequently 20 dollars within a year. Nintendo provides value to the customer and if they start restricting a game to 2 or even 5 consoles (even if no ones needs 5) that is just reducing the game's value. 
No need to take major steps as of yet. The digital distribution model is expanding and will take care of game sharing among friends. So please no more weird crap till than. 

I would be buying less games without the 2nd hand market.
And somebody who can only afford a couple of new games per year and borrows, rents or buys the rest used might not bother with a console at all anymore.

The best way for the industry to make more money is to undercut the 2nd hand market with digital distribution. Offer the game as a digital download for 30 dollars 1 month after release. They probably still make more money on that then on a 60 dollar retail release. That way they can leave the value of a boxed version in tact instead of taking more and more features away from it.

Bobby Kotick is not as dumb as people like to think, though his decision to milk all of Activisions franchises by releasing at least one new version a year is highly suicidal.

Its funny you mention games value yet support a digital distribution model, which in turn means the game really has absolutely no value to you at all. You don't even really own the game and most often it sells at say 75% of the cost of the retail version.

I of course agree as a consumer I would prefer no limit to how many consoles I play my games on, the restrictions are inconvenient. However they are increasingly becoming necessary as software development costs continue to climb with no end in sight and revenue doesn't keep up with dev costs.

The five use system I proposed could be meddled with to make it as convenient as possible for the consumer. Maybe after 5 uses you can purchase the license for the software for say 15$ like online passes can be bought. There are other methods the software manufacturer could put in place to make the move as convenient as possible.

The way the industry is going your games will have no value to anyone but yourself. Whether we go DD or not the days of us buying software and owning said software are coming to an end. Yes I am highly against this if you have read my threads about DD, however it is happening like it or not and their are reasons it is happening.

As for Nintendo, yah they are an exception. As is Call Of Duty, I can't really explain why so many people purchase these titles while ignoring much higher quality software or the same quality of software from other publishers and developers.

But there is something wrong with our current model, if big budget amazing games fail to break even the problem needs to be identified and remedied. I am not 100% what the problem is in all cases but used sales do contribute to the problem if they aren't one of the leading causes. Of course as I said as a consumer I do not like the way the industry is headed including my own proposition used in this thread. But I do not see how these things cannot be avoided, with the growth in the industry as you mention profit margins and sales are not reflecting that growth.

Also games won't be alone, movies and music are also going the route where we no longer own them. This is the DD model you don't own what you buy at any time the company can remove the music, movie or game from your system or cease giving you access regardless of whether you paid for the content or not.

Consumers need to realize that they will not own the content they buy in the future. Its impossible to keep the industry the way it is today its going to change!

Nobody thinks he's dumb. They think he's greedy. Trying to soak up as much profit as possible at the expense of the fans. Things only go so far until people just don't care anymore and quit altogether.

Nintendo is not an exception. They make games just like everyone else. The difference is that they managed to product top quality softwares and have kept the brands popular.

When you buy a Nintendo game, you know what you're getting. You know your money is likely well worth it. You can't say the same for majority of 3rd parties where they are more of a hit-or-miss.

Your game is hitting the used shelves is because it's not worth keeping. Why are Nintendo games stay full retail for years? Because they are a keeper. You elimiate used market by making the game really good that people don't sell it back. It's not rocket science.

You've heard 3rd parties whine and whine about how they can't compete against Nintendo. You also know the difference is quality and brand power. Do you see them admitting the put mostly, what we see as shovelwares, on the Wii?

When you forcefully elimiate used market, you devalue the game even faster and making it even harder to compete against Nintendo because people will not "try" your game for full price.

You can get away with it short term but in the long run, you ruin it for everyone.

And when you talk about how big budget failing to break even as if it's customers' fault. Have you tried standing back and see the bigger picture on the reasons why it failed to reach expectation? Maybe the game wouldn't have cost $100M to make but only $20 if they have better direction, etc. Businesses failed usually due to mismanagement. Gaming industry is not an exception.

What the hell? People have been doing this since the days of Atari LOL! I know I have... been sharing games with friends and family since I got my first console in 1987. Now all of a sudden, with game companies posting all time record sales in both the hardware and software front, this is some sort of a problem???

If this is an excuse for the big companies to limit the use of their games or certain components of them to one per console or something along those lines, the industry is in for a really rude awakening. Their sales will drop like a rock, and they can ill afford that at a time when costs continue to rise.

Honestly!?!  You just had to bring oil companies into it?

You do realize that a company such as Exxon Mobil is even making a profit margin of 10%, which isn't that high in the business world today.  Microsoft, for instance, had a profit margin of about 33% in their last fiscal year.  Apple also has a profit margin well over 20%.

The funniest thing about people bitching about oil companies such as Exxon Mobil is that it is a PUBLICLY OWNED COMPANY.  If you honestly think they are making absolutely insane amounts of money, then you have the option to invest in said company.  This investment will then pay out dividends to you, as a shareholder, as well as likely have increases in the stock price over time.

Just for shits and giggles, I decided to look up General Mills.  Their current profit margin is 11.4%.  This is even higher than Exxon Mobil.  Dam, the more companies I look at, the more I am seeing that other companies often run at a higher profit margin than Exxon Mobil.  Funny how Exxon Mobile is always the one people bitch out for being greedy, though.