The setting is not important really. Whether it's set in the movie universe or the Old Republic, a developer can still make a good Star Wars game. Both KOTORs 1 and 2 were enjoyable, but KOTOR 2 (original release version) seemed to be a bit choppy, since it was rushed. Starting the game off with that design model would definately peak my interest. They can improve on that model by offering more character choices and expanding the exporable worlds (both in size and number). They can add replayability by creating different story lines based upon user choices.

@Dogborn You understand little about economics. No used games = higher priced new games for longer periods of time. If you console needs replaced, you may need to replace your entire physical game collection. If a developer goes bankrupt, you may no longer be able to play your favorite games from their company. Further, used game sales promote new game sales. There's only so much money to go around, and when game prices are high, people buy fewer overall games. Having used games hedges the risk when trying something new or allows early purchasers to get some extra cash to support thier habit of buying new games at premium prices.

I'd recommend PSP over the VITA to anyone who wants a portable gaming system. The PSP is cheaper and most of the best games are available for around $10-$15. The VITA has a slim gaming catalog, and in addition to the hardware being 3 times more for the VITA, the games are all $40/ea. Plus you don't need the enhanced graphics capabilities of the VITA to relieve your favorite PS1 games.

EA, they ruined Bioware. I rarely buought anything from Gamestop.

Ha! I predicted this in the earlier thread today!

You are assuming that there are going to be good Kinect games or one of the Fruit Ninja fans.

When 5M plus people buy Halo 5 or GoW 4 at $75/game they won't miss you.

Big Bisness will not care if they lose 10-20% of their base population if they increase profits by 20% or more. MS and Sony already have a good idea how to have their server's run to implement this DRM as 70-80% of XBOX users already have an online connection.

MS and Sony aren't looking to reduce game costs, in fact they hope to increase them and minimize the cost erosion of the current generation. Many AAA games are $20 or less, within 1 year of release. Without used games, prices can be kept higher indefinately (as most DLC rarely sees a price drop). MS and Sony are eyeballing a $75 price point for new games, which they will justify by saying BS about the cost to implement new technology/higher end graphics, blah, blah, blah.

While I thought OUYA was DOA, they have actually come to the market at the right time. Gamers are tired of the Big 3. If OUYA can deliver good games for $20 or less from some high quality publishers they can potentially become a major player in the console market. People will still buy MS and Sony for the AAA games, but they will have less money for games due to the high price point. At $99 for an OUYA, many gamers will supplement their primary system with the OUYA (provided it has some good games to play). This way gamers can purchase many lower cost games to fill in the dead times between their favorite AAA releases.

I believe Sony's proposed policy is to put in place a system for preventing used game sales, but Sony plans to leave the implementation up to the publishers. Further, Sonys patent does not appear to require an online connection to implement thier anti-used game policy. From all the rumours, MS will prohibit all used game sales regardless of a publishers feelings and their method of implementation requires a constant online connection.