It honestly amazes me that it's discussed at all, and especially in the way that it is. I was just watching Bonus Round on GameTrailers, and Jason Rubin was bellyaching about how "money was leaking out of the ecosystem" because publishers don't get a cut of used games. But why should they? How on Earth can someone think it is unfair to publishers that they sold a copy of a game at whatever price they asked for it, and now they have no more right to expect even more money for that same copy if it should change hands again in the future? This doesn't happen in any other industry under the sun, and no one expects it to. Something tells me that if Cliffy is forced to sell his Lambo in a few years because, I don't know, no one wants to hire his troll ass, he's not going to feel compelled to give Volkswagen a cut.

This guy needs to shut up; and just let it go.

You are correct, considering Sony have already implemented SOME form of DRM in this gen with PSN Pass.

This coming gen is like saying "I might as well go for the lesser of two evils", but that still means that third parties have made SOME progress at screwing over the consumer.

EDIT: I need to add that anyone who IS for sending a clear message to third parties should get a WiiU. Ever since the days of the playstation, the market has changed from one where consumers have the say in the matter, to third parties dictating what consumers should have. The industry needs a reboot back to 16bit times, when third parties were forced to play ball, because of consumer demand, not consumers being forced to play ball because of third party supply....

Why?  If that announcement comes several months to a year after you've bought your PS4, they've got you locked into their product.

As much as you may not like it, Cliff is right.  Sony is going to have to develop a solution, if it doesn't, and it puts that responsibility on third-party publishers other then what happens when the solution is one which is a more bitter pill than the one Microsoft had created?  In fact, what happens if third-party publishers become a poison pill for the PS4 because Sony has put it upon the publishers to come up with their own solution and in doing so they make the PS4 noxious for third-party developers publishers?  I don't mean intentionally, but imagine the SimCity debacle on the PS4, but imagine every third-party developer using a third-party publisher having their own solution.

You don't have a common, uniform way of doing things.  You don't have eco-system wide features that ensure all games work the same way.  You have everyone going their own way because they can't afford to sit around and wait for Sony to announce it's plans and they can't afford to lose money for a feature you think is important but is driving developers out of business.

People want cheaper AAA games, but they don't want the technology that enables them to have cheaper AAA games.  They praise Valve for Steam, but when Microsoft tries to do something similar, they breakout the pitchforks and torches. 

Microsoft at least put it all out there on the table.  Yes, you're going to have an active DRM, but it isn't going to be active the entire time you play the game, or use your console.  Not only that, but you can share the game and all of the DLC with up to 10 people in a group, and with anyone on your console or a console you're logged onto.  In addition, you'll be able to take your game collection and all of your DLC with you anywhere you go.

So, right now the only certainty that you have is that Sony published games won't require an Internet connection, that you can play a game on up to 2 (or is it 3) consoles, and that EA won't be using Online Passes any longer.  Yet you and many others seem safe with that, yet there are a lot of "What Ifs" left open.

then it's up to Cliff to prove us wrong, why not create a huge budget AAA project and relese it soley for the XB1, if he makes up the cost and then some he has proven is point, if not then he will have hit by something called reality. not every game need some high budget to succeed; this game has been and will always stand in the face of this "high budget= great success" theory, just look at Uncharted 2; game cost only 20 mil and went to to be the most rewarded game this gen(and maybe in history)

This is honestly pathetic as this point. His response to Sony not implementing draconian DRM policy is to come out and call them a liar. Most likely he just does not like the PS4 getting a leg up on the Xbox One because of this issue

CliffyB seems to not understand that the games market will just shrink without used games.

Not all used game sales would have been new game sales, people buy new games with trade in credit, if games are better people are more likely to hold onto them, second hand games and big budget games have been around for years side by side and he has the gall to say the numbers don't add up?

Given how much the gears of war franchise relies on it's big budget to get by without genuine creativity, i can see why he's afraid of not having millions of dollars to waste.

Gran Turismo 5 did pretty well without DRM. And if Cliff needs a more recent example, how about The Last of Us? What a dumb ass.

And what exactly would stop someone from never going on PSN again (and never buying a Playstation product again) and simply playing their games offline forever? Because that's sure as shit what I'd do.

Cliffy is not right about anything. The closest he comes to being right is when he says that the AAA model is not sustainable, but then he gets even that all wrong by qualifying it with "while also having used and rental games existing".

There is no need for a solution to a problem that does not exist. Why is it that everyone else can accept that second hand sales exist, but not the precious video game industry which is apparently entitled to spend absolutely ridiculous amounts of money making the games they want? And if their increasingly narrow target demographic can't support their bloated budgets anymore, they must be allowed to trample all ownership rights into the dirt chasing phantom foes like "used games" before all going belly-up anyway.

Because Microsoft is not Valve. Valve offered a service and said, "This is what it is." Some people accepted it, and some didn't, but over the past decade they have made Steam ever more enticing, turning countless doubters into loyal customers. They have earned every bit of praise they receive and all the trust that people place in them.

Microsoft, in trying to serve too many masters at once, is creating anger and confusion by keeping a presence for retail games (which gives the appearance of being the same as past generations) while harshly restricting what you can do with your disc because they want to now use it as a mere vehicle for what they will essentially treat as DLC (see: the outrage over on disc DLC this gen). If they'd just made a digital only console with optional offline play, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

And there's every reason to doubt that consoles will achieve Steam-like pricing by eliminating used games. Steam is just one walled garden on an open platform and has to compete with myriad similar services. Consoles are walled gardens unto themselves, and if they aren't lowering prices on digital downloads already to compete with used game sales, why are they suddenly going to lower prices when the pressure from used games is removed? Hint: they won't.

The DRM measures on the Xbox One may lead to a higher percentage of new game sales but you are forgetting the install base.

110% of 1,000,000 is 1,100,000 but 100% of 2,000,000 is 2,200,000.

Developers are not stupid, if they make multiplatform games exclusive then they will simply lose sales in the long run.

Developers just don't have enough option's to ignore the PS4, especially if it outperforms the Xbox One.

It just amazes me how much of a better understanding some of you have of the video game industry than someone that has worked in it.

And I don't think he is just sticking up for Microsoft. Was he not praising Sony for their stance on Indie developers?