What sentiments do you believe will be brought about when Jason Schreier releases his article on Dra

I hope some of the story stuff will be revealed. Plot, protagonist, etc. It'd be nice to actually know rather than just educated guessing.

Maybe, but he did just reveal the setting of the next Assassin’s Creed game before Ubisoft announced it.

Yeah. Theres a poster at the Thomas Jefferson Building that shows a man holding an Piece of Eden, with the words Norway (or Viking - cant remember too well) in the background.

Quick poll though: Should journalists be 'announcing' things and essentially one upping Devs? Is that moral and right? For instance if their information is out of date and they announce 'this game will have the Inquisitor as a protagonist, and it will be 100 hours long, and it will have live service up the butt!' and then none of those things are true then it could put BioWare in a bad light.

Basically opinion people/ journalists should be reporting and anylizing the news, not making it.

I said "necessarily". According to Schreier's own article, this is a systemic issue at BioWare. If he is to be believed, the development of most/all BioWare games has been similarly plagued.

But regardless, I know my own taste, what DA4 says about itself will be far more useful in determining whether or not I want it than anything a journalist writes about development problems.

Journalists can publish whatever they want, but they have to accept the consequences of doing so. It's not about morality, it's about courtesy and respect towards people who you want to be able to uses as sources again, and about legality - whether published information was given on or off the record, and thus permissible to share.   

Even though I think he's a bit of a git Schreier seems like he has built up a lot of trust in the gaming community, and I doubt he'd want to compromise that by publishing info that he can't verify via reliable sources. He also might not want to sacrifice Kotaku to EA's lawyers by releasing information that is under NDA. The devs/personnel who are working at/for Bioware shouldn't be sharing stuff that is under NDA, and doing so can and will get them fired and/or sued. I suppose there is the potential that someone could mislead a journalist about what is being produced, but again, they shouldn't be sharing anything on the record about future products without company permission and any journalist worth their salt will know this. 

If the article says anything about the next iteration of Dragon Age, I doubt it's going to be anything to do with the specifics of the game other than that a potential game exists, unless someone is breaking NDA and risking their livelihood (or Schreier has been given some exclusive tidbits to share by Bioware). More likely it will be about when we can expect to hear more about it, current morale in the trenches, and its expected release window. He's going to have a lot of eyeballs on his follow-up, and he's definitely an opportunist - I'm cynical enough to think that he's probably just going to use the pretense of a DA article to plug his next book.

I would like you apply what you said to stuff outside of Gaming journalism and see how ridiculous you sound. A journalist can publish what ever they want and if its lies (hell even the truth) they can face legal ramification. You put any form of censorship on journalism bye-bye accountability for any group. As for making news instead of analyzing it's once again a subject for extreme abuse. Should a journalist not publish a expose on a company that will expose them doing horrible things? You would say yes publish it! but if they're not allowed to "make news" they wouldn't be able to. Basically I get what you're trying to say but there's a reason things are they way they are.

At the very least, I'm expecting to hear more details about DA4's reboot. I remember Schreier saying back in January last year that he didn't think it was the total "starting from scratch" one may have expected from the term:

I personally take "live service elements" as in "make game ending as open as possible, don't elaborate too much on topics fans want to hear about so we can add those as dlc and sell separately".
If that's the case- yeah, it stinks, but almost everyone does that.

Given "live services elements" have gotten more and more intrusive, I am not confident at all.

Have you ever seen a game that did it right? Seems like the only one that comes to mind, for me at least, is Monster Hunter World. It's first year, it got steady injections of new quests, monsters, difficulty ranks, gear, and costumes; with no microtransactions.