I should know not to doubt your perfect choice of words in almost every situation. Well played sir.

Ah, I thought you were being serious. My internet sarcasm detector sucks.

No it doesn't, not for PSN at least. If I sell my PS3 and don't mind losing my PSN account then the person buying my PS3 also buys all my PSN games off me. In fact I could list my PSN account on e-bay and list all the games purchased on that account and sell to the highest bidder. I deactivate my PSN account from my PS3, give them the password and bam, instant game collection for them. I used a fake name and address for my PSN account, and used a "disposable" gmail account and made all purchases using the pre-paid PSN cards. There's none of my personal identity associated with my PSN account...actually none of that's true because I wasn't smart enough to do that when I fisrt signed up for PSN, but it's all doable.

Digital distribution does not provide you with a physical commodity uniquely associated with a single game (i.e. a disc), so you can't trade used games in the same way as you trade discs. But they are still tradeable. Everyone chooses not to sell their PSN accounts when they sell their old PS3's, and trophies have incentivised people to retain their accounts.

There is no natural way for digitally distributed games to be traded singly without breeching copyright laws (i.e. creating another copy of the game). I can't send you a game as an attachment to an e-mail and have it disappear from my PCs HDD the instant I create the e-mail attachment. Thus I would be in breech of copyright.  Therefore in the digital environment for trading individual games publishers would have to make a deliberate decision to provide consumers with a means by which trading can happen without games being copied. No business is under any moral, ethical or legal obligation to create a digital trading mechanism. But with discs the means of trade already exists and publishers choose to distribute games via a tradeable object.

See the difference?

I think a lot of the hubbub is actually because they were trying to find a middle ground. They know that people still like discs and not everyone is ready to download 50 GB games. They don't want to tell retailers to go piss up a rope... yet. They have one foot in the past, and one foot in what they suppose is the future. If they had just gone full bore with a 100% digital distribution console, I think there would be as much excitement about it being a potential "Steambox" as there would be negativity. But by keeping discs around and only making the retail experience a worse and more complicated one than in previous generations, they are creating unnecessary confusion. And this confusion is greatly exacerbated by their inability to come up with any sort of coherent message for their console, which just makes the whole thing look like a cynical attempt to exercise more control over consumers rather than an actual step towards some bright digital future.

This is the best analysis of X1's problems I've read so far. Bravo.

does not work like that... cars are a material product, you can't pay less than what it cost to manufacture... you can only sell that car once, and not several copies of that one car...
games on the other hand, is not a palpable material, its like music, movies, tv shows, books etc and those are not priced based on production cost. movie makers, musicians, book writers, game devs, etc... do the product and define the production cost on the expectation of the several copies they will sell based on the work already done. We are not forcing devs to make $100 million  games, so why should we have to pay more? they do the $100 million games based on the expectation to sell millions of copies. they take that chance, they have to live with the risk their job has. like all others in business.

PlayStation 3 games have DRM.  Disc-based games do not use an active DRM, but digital copy protection is a form of DRM.  Nevertheless, any DLC or games you've downloaded use DRM.

The Xbox One's DRM is active DRM, not because it is draconian, but because you can create groups of friends, assign games and DLC to those groups from your library, and they have instant access to the library you opened up to them.  To ensure you still want them to have access to it, when they're accessing your library or when you're accessing theirs, it checks to see whether or you or them still have access to the games you had access to an hour ago.  It checks those lists every 24 hours to ensure no changes have and to update any game library additions or deletions. 

If I buy a game on a disc, with the Xbox One I can play that game AND I can share it with a friend and they can play it too.  In single campaign, in co-op, or multi-player.  They have full access to the game.  If I go to a friends house, my entire library is available on his/her console.  If I have a game that's four-player, split-screen co-op, all four of us can play the game, the same way you can with the Xbox 360, the PS3, and the PS4.

If I want to trade in that Xbox One game, I can.  If I want to give it to a friend, I can.  They can be my next door neighbor, or they can be half-way around the world.  As long as my game is also available in their country, they can access a region specific copy of it.  So, what is draconian about it?

An Internet connection?  My Xbox 360 was connected to the Internet 24/7, 365.  As long as the console isn't doing a massive download while I'm playing a game online, I don't really care if it's phoning home to Microsoft.  In fact, if it does it after midnight, I'd be hippy skippy.  But I don't see how updates, be it software, or access/control lists are draconian.  Your average Anti-virus/Malware utility checks multiple times throughout the day to see if an update for the software or database is available.  Frequently these are large lists, often into the MBs, yet we persist in allowing them.  They're not considered draconian.  Windows Update requires a check-in every week, and once it downloads the updates forces you to wait before you can shutdown your computer.  Especially, if you haven't installed them before attempting to shutdown.  Yet, we don't consider this draconian.  

Sony installs a rootkit, that's not draconian DRM.  Microsoft requires an Internet connection and to use that connection to phone home at least once, every 24 hours, and that's draconian. 

When you start pointing a finger at people, just remember, you have three pointing back at you.  

I wonder if he left Epic or was booted.. cause it seems by his tweet, he would have wanted the next to be xbone exclusive, which i guess epic was against..

I've always thought this guy a douche and almost every time he opens his mouth my belief is heightened. He's ever XBOX fanboys' hero and mouthpiece.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=159898&page=1#1