Originally Posted by Chakravant
It is great for the end consumer as well. The fact that developers are even having the meetings you are referring to shows how out of touch they are and how close they are to causing the next Video Game Dark Age. In the end their greed will be their downfall, and consumers will turn away from their products in response.
If my choice is between new restrictions in the wake of a digital first sale doctrine (assuming they were legal as a result of such a ruling) or games by the present developers simply not being made, I'll choose the latter. I can wait for the next generation of developers who can provide AAA titles without DRM to arrive. Rest assured if it comes to that, they will.
You're mistaking what games won't be made.
The CODs, Battlefields, Civilizations, and Starcrafts will still be made. It's the high end of the small games and the low end of AAA games that will stop being made. The Mirror's Edge, Borderlands (1), BioShock (1), Sleeping Dogs, Watchdogs, Dishonored, ect. It's that range that will be lost, and that's the range where most of the great games find themselves.
The low budget games will be fine. The massive budget games will be fine. The massive budget games will stop funding the medium budget games, and that's where it's bad for everybody.
It's not greed or being out of touch. It's the reality that no matter how hard you try, you can't make 2+2=5. Game budgets are increasing at a rate faster than sales because prices haven't kept in line with inflation and gamers are demanding more from each game. I'll repeat that in simpler terms. Gamers are expecting more for less, and that's just not viable without shoring up profit sinks that were previously acceptable.
Alternative incomes like in-game advertising were shouted down with blind reasoning, and the alternatives are far worse. There's one big thing that you and a few others don't see: The status quo isn't sustainable.