"along with a four stage greenlight process that would not let games through until they met key competitive technological and gameplay feature benchmarks."

This one I actually don't understand. Does not almost all publishers push their development studios to finish their games, deliver the gold version and sell it as soon as possible to produce some revenue?
So if it seems to be the common solution in the branch, why would it help THQ to get out of a financial crisis?

Don’t be a “last gen” thinker here. Firstly, publishers don’t only put to street (that is to release) content developed by internal studios, in “some” cases content published comes from independent studios either as original/new IP or work for hire capacity, so regulating through a better green light process structure is in my opinion a good thing in the long run! God knows there is far too much crap being green lit these days, and far too often good, original content is being laid to rest as a result of money centric or sequel driven eval processes, which in most cases end up being BS titles anyway. How many times have we seen content refused by publisher A because the P&L or ROI says “NO” only to be published by publisher B and the title is a cracker! I say, if more stringent well formulated green light processes end up regulating the amount of crap being released then in the long run it is better for the industry as a whole from the top down!

So in a nutshell, it means that currently there are 4 titles that drive the fiscal year and offset the losses incurred by the crap that magically made the grade, so the big idea is to have less crap titles in the release lineup for those 4 winners to offset. Note better evaluation and green light processes don’t imply that the number of fiscal year winners will increase, but the aim most likely is to reduce the number of losers?