The problem is that console makers can answer that the console is theirs and if they don't want to develop for their console they can go to... where?

-The competing console? Developing for only one console will hurt them as much as the piracy as they will halve their potential market.

-PC which they always whine about piracy?

-Smartphones and tablets? ...Good luck with those 1 dollar games around.

Let's face it, console makers need third party games to sell their consoles as much a third partys need consoles to sell their games.

And that's why I'm starting to believe these rumours, as crazy/suicidal as they sound. I mean, the rumours are getting very damaging for MS, all it would take is an official 'It ain't happening' statement from MS, but there's nothing but silence. I get the usual 'we don't comment on speculation' from companies, but at some point the reputation damage can get bad enough that a company has to step in to kill it. 

Sony suffered similar issues with the blocked second hand games rumour, all it took was for them stating in interviews that wasn't happening and the rumour died, MS silence is baffling. 

The good thing is as long as we make enough fuss about it Microsoft will probably change it's mind and not implement this.

I don't know what Sony and MS discussed with devs but if EA wants an always-on-strategy both surely don't want to lose this partner! Sony would never say EA "ok, we can go without you". Question is, if EA would do this, too... But that's highly speculative.

In my opinion, MS and Sony did a lot of talking to publishers (especially the major ones) as they will use the platforms to make money off them. There is no way that MS or Sony decide anything without asking them, more than this I think the publishers told them what they expect nextgen.

Exactly! And this is why I think it is short-sighted to blame MS now (if rumors are true) as the platform is highly influenced by 3rd-party. 3rd party will never support a platform which they think will not make a lot of money for them. Do you think that EA doesn't see that always-on is perhaps a bad idea?

"all I can say is, be sure to pay your ISP bill".
All I can say is, be prepared to finish a very distant last place and most likely lose a bunch money.

If EA thought it is a bad idea they wouldn't go with it for SimCity.

And third partys make mistakes constantly like everyone else, usually because they are short-sighted. And with this they only see "always online = no piracy" and "always online = no used games" and inmediatly think "we'll sell a sh!tload more!" when in reality they will sell more or less the same.

Except Sony have said that it's up to the developers if they want to impose some form of online registration/control scheme. This is not the same as MS, which is imposing such a feature on the console itself. 

Well, Sim City is a bad example as it is PC-only and probably was also a test-balloon...

And yes, of course they make mistakes :) As does Sony, as does MS, as do we. I just want to say that neither Sony nor MS implement anything on their own, in my opinion. How this will turn out for us will be seen.

Sony said a lot of things in the past that came out not true but more important: If all publishers go that way (except Sony) than it is the same with NextBox. Of course you are free to only play Sony's games in this case. And don't come up with "but not all will do this!" the whole discussion is speculative and *every* comment is speculative until we know the truth from Sony and MS.