Over the past few weeks, the rumor mill has churned out many variations of its latest tidbit: that Microsoft's next console will require a constant Internet connection. Central to the debate over this possibility is whether console gamers and the Internet infrastructure they use is ready for such a requirement. In answer to that crucial question, Ubisoft Montreal CEO Yannis Mallat has offered a qualified "yes."

When asked about the prospect of an always-online console by The Guardian recently, Mallat said the final call would have to come from Sony and Microsoft. But he then went on to offer his own thoughts on the issue, saying, "I would say a lot of people are already always online through other devices—I would suspect that the audience is ready."

Ubisoft has of course taken heat in the past for using DRM that required some sort of Internet connection check to confirm the authenticity of players' PC games. More recently, Microsoft Studios Creative Director Adam Orth suggested customers complaining about always-online rumors should learn to "deal with it," a sentiment that garnered support from Gears of War designer Cliff Bleszinski (but Orth might have lost his job in the process).

Still, Mallat qualified his support for potential "always online" consoles by noting that the feature has to be both unobtrusive and actually beneficial for the end user. "As soon as players don't have to worry [about their online connection], they will only take into account the benefits that those services bring," he said. "And I agree, these services need to provide clear benefits. It's important to be able to provide direct connections between us and our consumers. Whether that's extra content or online services, a lot of successful games have that."

The extent that most gamers would actually have to "worry" about a stable Internet connection is a hotly debated topic. A 2010 study found that 27 percent of Xbox 360 owners in the US didn't connect their systems to the Internet, but that proportion has likely come down in the years since. Still, many gamers have concerns about the stability of those Internet connections or access to reliable broadband in certain geographic or practical circumstances.

Regardless, it's hard to see any kind of "clear benefits" to players from the prospect of a strict online requirement for an entire console. Remember, the system that's being described in current leaks and rumors wouldn't just require an online connection for features like online multiplayer or streaming video or leaderboards. This system would extend the online requirement to traditionally single-player games that don't currently need any online connection at all.

We suppose we could envision some sort of ad-subsidized console that requires an Internet connection to show marketing messages in exchange for free or cheap hardware and software. Perhaps having a guarantee that every player is always online could let some games provide handy, aggregate gameplay data to other players, even in single-player mode. Other than these limited examples, though, it's hard to envision any sort of online requirement that is actually an improvement over the kind of online options that are currently available in countless games, at least from the player's perspective.

Of course, from the publisher's point of view, an always-online console brings plenty of benefits, from anti-piracy authentication to player monitoring and data collection to simple marketing opportunities. But "clear benefits" to the player? Maybe we're just not being imaginative enough...