What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
32 Comments
- WackyT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You really ought to read what you're submitting before submitting it. The 45-day window is not theater to DVD. It's DVD to High Definition Pay-Per-View.
- TimmyK., on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nothing beats seeing a film in the theater. No granted I am not really talking about garbage summer blockbusters or anything. I mean seeing something like that is a terrible experience. Having to deal with the talking, cell phone using, seat kicking, chewing with their mouths open idiots that fill the theater to see a movie like The Island is about as much fun as a Tabassco enema. But if you like really good films, so called "arthouse" films, and you live near any of these "arthouse" theaters nothing can replace the experience of seeing a film in the theater. Even with a full theater it is extremely rare to run into any of those obnoxious loudmouth seat kicking a-holes that you get at the local megaplex. Honestly when it comes down to it all you need is a comfortable seat, a nice size screen, and some okay sound that you can hear. I'd rather go to the beautiful 100 year old theaters that I frequent than the 5 year old multiplex nearby with the 30 foot screen and super duper surround sound. Surround sound is the most overrated thing in the world anyway. To me there is nothing that can take me out of the movie faster than having all kinds of sounds coming from behind me. All the visual information is directed from straight ahead, so why is it important to hear sounds from behind you? It's not immersive, it's just a bunch of flashy technology that isn't important. Good films with good characters, and good stories are immersive.
- rifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You people are retarded. This whole thing has to do with this guy wanting to make money on the investment he put into all his different companies.
"Enter Mark Cuban. Along with his longtime business partner Todd Wagner, Cuban became a multibillionaire selling his Internet company, Broadcast.com, to Yahoo for $5.7 billion. Cuban and Wagner then created an entertainment conglomerate that includes controlling interests in a movie production company (HDNet Films), a distributor (Magnolia Pictures), an art-house chain (Landmark Theaters), a television and video library (Rysher Entertainment), and a high-definition television network (HDNet)."
He wants his investment to grow and the only way to do that is to get the movie companies behind him so if Wal-Mart comes after him he's got some help. He's got all the companies to make big bucks if this all goes through. Sure he *might* care about consumer choice, but I'm willing to bet he's much more worried about his ROI than your choice of movie you watch next week, whether it be on dvd, paper-view or at the theater. And honestly closing that window could mean a whole lot of things that we can't possibly foresee happening.
When you talk about releasing a movie on multiple mediums you better start talking about where the income loss is going to go. I can guarantee that movie theater food would eventually increase to recoup costs. What would/will happen is that people with home theater setups will order the movie and stay at home to watch; this list of people is only going to grow with time as the equipment is becoming increasingly more affordable. What about lost revenue from the people who go over to said home theater owner and watch the movie for free? That is another seat that would *possibly* have been filled at the theater.
Don't get me wrong, I like the idea, but just don't believe that this guy is doing it to better the consumer; he's got his own financial stake in this. ;) - alt3r360, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This post is BS
WalMart did what? Says who? unnamed source huh? ok sure, must be true.
Mark Cuban is gonna do what? LOL How?
The dude is not a visionary, he's a media whore. - onimusha115, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I dont want in home delivery of movies to replace dvds. If my paying for somthing I want the physical product. I dont like paying for a viewing when I can pay a little extra and own it to view as many times as I like. Thats why I usually opt to wait for a movie to come out on dvd instead of going to a theater.
- serpentor, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0That makes sense, I have little interest in DVD ownership (I'm probably the minority) but 1 or 2 viewings is fine for me. I don't know who the hell runs out and buys Paycheck on DVD or most the crap coming out these days. But with DVD sales eclipsing theatre revenues, it makes sense that Hollywood would want to protect their crown from better alternatives (HD rentals). Can you blame them? Makes perfect business sense to me.
- aplardi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hate when submissions have misinformation.
- FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's an interesting experiment, and I hope Cuban succeeds. I like the idea of choosing where I see a new release. If it's a Star Wars type movie, or a LOTR, I would want to see it in a big, new theatre surrounded by hundreds of like-minded appreciative fans.
Then there are the small movies, such as Good Night & Good Luck. Maybe I'd just as soon watch that one at home on High Def instead of heading out to the theatre to be coughed on all night (as actually happened to me when I saw GN&GL). I would pay to see a movie I look forward to seeing, and maybe just wait a few months for HBO if I didn't feel like paying other than through my HBO sub fees.
But make it my choice. I like that. - TheStooge1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Quote by onimusha115:
"I dont want in home delivery of movies to replace dvds."
According to this article, this is not Cuban's intention... he just wants to give the option to the consumer... You would still be able to buy the DVD. You would just ALSO have the option of getting it via pay per view at the same time as the DVD release. - swaxhog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0All that I got out of this article was that Cuban sold broadcast.com for $5.6 Billion to Yahoo. Sweet Jebus, there was too much money floating around back then.
- Wolfman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0^^^^ Oh, forgot, MythTV = $300, but you recoupe from the savings on the DVDs
- nymphetamine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0walmart? dvd's? mark cuban? wtf?
- WarPirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a Great article. Mark Cuban is brilliant. WackyT this isn't just about HD content there was a major portion of that article that directly related to DVD realeses and how Wal-Mart is keeping that wall up by threats of lost shelf space.
- Tech_Paradox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Y'know, movie studios could make a killing on DVDs if they'd make the DVD of the movie available for purchase in the theaters on the day of the movie's release. Sure, you could argue that it would cut repeat viewing, but in the long run they would rake it in on DVD sales (provided the movie was worth buying)...
- matsiescruff, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i think with all the crap films that the companies are putting out, this would be a good thing. perhaps it would really shake up hollywood to make a decent film for once. i'd buy a dvd for a good movie. i'd watch that all day long. HOWEVER, i have friends that work at blockbuster and i don't want them to lose their jobs.
- X_cell_er_8, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0You Need A New Title.
- Wolfman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0$2.99 PPV - $24.95 DVD..... I know what the majority of the consumers would choose.... But how can the Media Companies turn down that thick a wad of cash?
- icupg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"HOWEVER, i have friends that work at blockbuster and i don't want them to lose their jobs."
I'm sure if they are working at blockbuster they could find another job that pays just as much. Perhaps walmart, muuhahaha. - raven4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0good read
@timmyk i totally agree - pkscout, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If I could get an HD pay-per-view of a movie simultaneous with the theatre release I would do that in a second. In fact, I'd probably see *more* movies that way. Even if it was $15 for a first run pay-per-view that's still cheaper than the wife and I going to a movie, and we avoid the sticky theatre floors and all the kids with cell phones (or all the parents with kids). Hmmm, I might even pay $20 to see it first run sans screaming kid...
- imtigger2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1yup... ***** WalMart. I'm a vendor of theirs and I get sooo frickin' tired of the same 'ol "we really need to bring our costs down on these items" *****. They're squeezing the last drop of blood from all these American manufacturers who are constantly threatened with over-seas inventory. WalMart is a very un-American company.
They want me to cut my price to them by 2¢ this week? I lose my house ($800,000 a year in business, lost). They call me up for another reduction? Kids don't go to college. But that's ok, I feel good that most of America can get their goods for next to ***** nothing on the shelves. Makes me feel reeeel good.
Do I sound a little bitter?? ;) - FunHeadlines, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Buy Wal-Mart -- Buy Chinese!
Oh, wait... - etandrib, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hope that the windows collapse. Hollywood can make a lot of money selling directly to homes rather than middlemen but they just need the guts to do it.
I just worry about the DRM issues that will be created by the big studios. Where is DVD Jon when I need him? Oh, he's just down the street now. Nice. - Ultima2003, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"When you talk about releasing a movie on multiple mediums you better start talking about where the income loss is going to go. I can guarantee that movie theater food would eventually increase to recoup costs. "
Movie theaters are already charging WAY TOO MUCH in a drowning market. They keep raising ticket and food prices as ticket sales go down. With prices so high, people choose to watch at home for much less than going to the theater. To fight this $$ loss, theaters raise prices again and therefore even fewer people buy tickets.
It's a cycle theaters don't seem to understand. If they want to sell more seats....LOWER the D@mn prices. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0First of all, it's a bluff by Wal-Mart. If all the studios kill this window which they will if one major one does it, Wal-Mart can't take all the DVDs off their shelves. And if they start hiking the prices, they'll probably get hit with gouging suits. Wal-Mart can't stop this and they only said that to try and prolong it. Besides, HD-DVD rolls out next year so DVD sales won't go down. If you can go out and buy the DVD for $30(not sure what the pricing will be on HDDVD) and have it "forever" why would you record the HD version on your DVR/PVR? Yes most of us will be smart enough to take those and make our own HD-DVDs for a lot cheaper, but most people still will not know how to take the videos off their DVR and put them onto HD-DVDs. So they'll only be able to keep the movie till they run out of space on the drive.
- B111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@ArcaneDevice
Time Warner sells some older movies with their Video On Demand. I'd imagine they could expand that. - matcrawf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0mark cuban is an IU grad. i love him
- ArcaneDevice, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0it's pretty simple. All the studio profits are not made from newly released DVDs. If studios go direct to PPV then Walmart will take all their stock off the shelves thereby robbing the studios of sales for old movies, collections, TV seasons and less recent sales.
Studios may make a larger profit going to PPV with newly released product but at the expense of sales of their huge back cataloges when Walmart stop selling them. - B111, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0No Digg, articles doesn't make sense (although I'm tempted because Wal-mart is evil after all).
First it says that Movies studios would make more money via electronic delivery than DVD and that they would release it in all formats at the same time save for Wal-mart, who says they'll stop selling DVDs (and that they are the largest retailer of DVDs).
So what's stopping them of askewing Wal-mart? If it is indeed more profitable to release in all formats at the time, and people will choose to consume via the more profitable non-media delivery, who cares if Wal-mart stops selling the DVD? Under Cuban's senario, the market for DVDs would shrink (the author doesn't clearly imply that people buy the DVD only because they simply can't wait, buy there must be some reason other than having a physical copy).
The author is arguing both sides. - redpoint73, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"HOWEVER, i have friends that work at blockbuster and i don't want them to lose their jobs."
I think your friends are screwed either way. Blockbuster's days are numbered. - xsecretfiles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Ladies and Gentleladies
Today's Lesson is:
WALMART is EVIL - Nerd_Greg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Walmart is by far the most evil company in the world its more evil than Microsoft, Apple, Google, and combined why because they are going after mom and pop stores by buying huge amount of stuff and under cutting the family stores that have been the backbone of America and putting them out of business. Then offering them a crappy wadges when they are forced to work for walmart because it's the only place that is hiring. I say ***** walmart, I'm going to K-mart. =P
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is