found this link at [H]ardocp.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/

Ok I’m editing this post to inject some of my thoughts. Words in quotes are from the article.

“the stakes are much higher, but so are the rewards.”
These people will always make lots of money.
“"We have been making our consumers work a lot without giving them enough in return,"”
Well at least they know it
“"You should at least have the same game experience even if you are not as good," he says.”
Is this an idiocy or maybe I’m dense (flame away)
“Ubisoft is working on ambient AI that watches what a player does and adapts the game and how the plot plays out to their skill levels, he says.”
This is cool. Only how new is it? Wasn’t the best way to beat Xan in UT to let him get the first 7 or so frags and then let him know your wrath? To improve on ambient AI is good.
“Many people playing now have been keen gamers since they were very young and crave new experiences rather than the same old ideas dressed up in prettier graphics.”
Wonder how the boys upstairs feel about this one?
This is a big point for me, I mean if it doesn’t run well on a half way decent PC and you lose content it’s one step forward and two steps back.
e.g.: Half-Life didn’t have the best graphics for its time. Is there a more acclaimed game?
System Shock II was built on an already very aged engine.
I truly doubt this will become the rule of thumb that it should.
“Instead of in-game events, such as explosions, being entirely scripted, they could be delayed to ensure a player sees them or re-sited so they occur within a player's line of sight.”
I hope they are careful with this.