The difference I'd say is that MS has a system in place for blocking used games whereas Sony does not.  Thus the null state of the developers is different.  On XBone developers would have to decide whether or not they would block used games, and on PS4 they'd have to figure out how to.  They could totally set up their own network just like MS and make the game online only even though it isn't really necessary (Diablo 3 and Sim City), but it wouldn't be something simple like it would be on XBone.  

Umm they have something similar low pass drm Which is what the ps3 has with current online games As in you can play all games offline and u dont ever have to sign in or check in watever but some games online could be drm free too but some online games or the majority will have this pass thing! Tho i feel psplus is the way to go by that u never know but just to let yall kno the drm is most likely gonna be like ps3 but the money developers make would be greater!

We're being played like a used copy of Gears

Sony said that initially (Since February), which is basically the same way things are with the PS3. Microsoft implemented a system to lock out gamers and control resale and profit off of second hand sales, which is grounds to a huge public suit in the United States. When the backlash occured MS changed their tone and said exactly what Sony said to calm people down, but system still stands. Everyone then turned to EA and EA backed off because MS was supposed to be fucking over gamers for them.

In the beginning the system MS had in place with the azure system. They were going to fuck over gamers and Gamestop in one fell swoop. This is why Gamestops stock dropped after this was announced.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2013/05/24/microsoft-and-game-publishers-will-reportedly-take-a-cut-of-xbox-one-used-game-sales/

@stage cause 60 bucks is what goes back to the dev studio of course.... and even if it does.... 330 000 000/4 years of dev= 82 500 000

then let say you have 400 people related to the game from dev team, acting, video, sound, test etc, marketing teams (just look at the credit of an AAA game it makes any star wars movie credit look small you have 82 500 000/400= 206250 and it does even take into account overhead, like the material you need, electricity, rent of studios etc and like said before 60 bucks is nothing close to what the dev studio gets.... you have the distributor, shipper, retailer cut to remove in that and you have tax on top of it....

333,000,000 (not including digital downloads) only accounts for the game, publisher and developer profit which is nearly full since retailers barely get much out of it, Microsoft gets a cut for having it on their console. Epic is the Publisher/Developer so its almost full profit coming back to them.  That and Microsoft pays them to keep exclusivity, so basically they paid for development cost of the game itself just to keep it exclusive to the Xbox 360. I know this because MS tried the same tactic with Ninja Gaiden 2 and Tecmo used the money to fund a superior version for the PS3. They have to supplement the lost sales of a second console to keep the game exclusive and that could be anywhere from fifty million to hundreds of millions, which I am guessing is the latter. Gears in its entirety has given Epic games multibillion dollar profit when you add up merch, DLC (online pass bundles).

Games like Gears generally cost around the 60 to 80 million dollar region to create, which was what AAA title prices started out at in the beginning of the generation. Halo 4 is the most expensive videogame of the generation and it was over 100 million to make. The majority of that profit went back to MS being that the game is self published the only payments are to shippers, retailers and more but that cut doesn't stop the company themselves from gaining major profit.

It was one franchise that retired Cliff Bleszinski as young as he is in the industry. There is no excuse to defend this. If the director can retire...you know they made their money back with an exclaimation mark.

This is exactly what is happening.

But then we also have games that sold in the millions and still did not make the expected target. Resident Evil 6 & Tomb Raider to name a few. I think the right expectation can help with a more balance budget. We also do not know if all the expenses that they are trying to recoup is from the games development and punlishing. Who knows where they are investing their money and losing it.

Granted trying to cash in on the 2nd hand market is an easier option than trying not to be the next big thing.

I don't. He admits to saying shit just to get a rise out of people (or at least he claims to whenever he gets called out on it, perhaps as a sort of Jon Stewart style "clown nose on, clown nose off" bullshit defense) so he shouldn't be surprised if some people think he sounds like a fucking dumb, unemployed troll.

Funny thing...

If this is as big a problem as Cliffy B. says...why haven't some games like Uncharted, God of War III, Final Fantasy XIII or even the Gears of War series been considered failures? How come these developers are thriving instead of sinking due to used game sales? Why isn't Naughty Dog going under, as a game like Uncharted has such a big budget that needs covering?
Why hasn't Sony Santa Monica been known to hurt for money after the huge budget that God of War III had? I just looked up GoW 3 on my local site for impromptu trading and found only 2 copies available O.o...one of which is an import, not a used game copy.

It kind of amazes me that the used game polemics are so discussed, and the idea that gaming will die because of it...but throughout this generation I've seen companies thrive in spite of it. And, arguably, these are some of the most expensive games to make out there and yet...I don't see ND crying for their lost revenues, Epic games, Sony Santa Monica and same could be said for a lot of developers.

Great games will be bought, enjoyed, and kept if they are worth keeping. I would never dream of selling my copy of Red Dead Redemption, or inFamous, or Mass Effect 2 or so many others. Long as the game is good, it will sell bananas and fans will want to hold on to it. I really can't see how anyone can attest to the opposite when they are a freaking walking counter point to everything they say.