Submitted by
Users who Dugg This
John Boitnott
15810 Followers
DIGG-WillNotFixMy-STATISTICS
12264 Followers
Standing My Ground
4858 Followers
jceezJan 26, 2012
Because sometimes I'd rather not download a 20GB file or however large next gen games will be.
HowIsBabbyFormedJan 27, 2012
I love Steam and digital distribution for small games, but having to wait almost 2 days to download a AAA 20GB+ game is not ideal.
tastypastryJan 27, 2012
True, but I would hope that if this goes that route that all game developers allow you to preload the game prior to release.
phazoniJan 28, 2012
Fine but there are plenty of us that don't rush out and buy the latest game the day it comes out. I usually go to the store a few weeks later and just pick up what I want. In this case, I'll have to wait for the download to finish and that will suck.
dandoniaJan 27, 2012
How slow is your internet connection?
HowIsBabbyFormedJan 27, 2012
1mbps cable. Try playing youtube videos, netflix, or just using the internet on that speed while downloading a massive game on the day of release...
btw I'm basing my comment on my recent experience w/ Skyrim. Love the game, but waiting for it to download sucked, as compared to buying a game at the store, plopping it in my gaming console, and just playing it.
dandoniaJan 28, 2012
Why is it so slow? My phones internet is faster than that.
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
Get over it, that's not that bad. A digital file will never degrade or scratch, a disc will.
visnikJan 27, 2012
You cannot lend, re-sell or give away a digital distributed copy. I am all for digital distribution, as I love my Netflix and I love the idea of only buying it once over my lifetime etc. but I got a little irritated when I could not lend a copy of my Limbo or Lost and damned to friends and family so they could check them out. Those are the only and last things i bought via DD. I like buying games used, as they are way over priced. I figure by the time my games are all scratched and don't work, I can usually get another copy for like 10 bucks anyway. I like lending my games to my family and friends so they can check them out. I take care of my games so they last for years.
My 2cents.
bahamut5098Jan 28, 2012
You know you can give them your Steam account info and they can load the game up on any computer.
dugglousFeb 1, 2012
You know if my friend wants to borrow a DVD/BD he doesn't have to take away my entire collection.
slmz00Jan 28, 2012
"and may incorporate some sort of technology that prevents users from playing used games."
They don't want you renting and lending. Digital locks or DMA or something will be put into the discs. Just keep paying attention to the Anti piracy bills and make sure none of them pass or we will lose all rights on ours, or I should say their media.
cybersaurJan 27, 2012
But the medium that contains said digital file can become corrupted...
bahamut5098Jan 28, 2012
And you just load the same game onto another medium from Steam's servers.
visnikJan 30, 2012
You keep talking about steam, Xbox does not use steam, this is a Xbox 360 article. Also to a reply to your comment above, yes I could give my steam account to a friend, I could also give them my credit card and my bank account number while I am at it. Shoot why stop there, I should give them my social security number also. Or i can just give them a dvd to borrow for a week and keep my financials contained.
nerysJan 27, 2012
I will never own a console where I can not own the games
without physical media that does NOT require an internet connection you "DO NOT OWN THE GAME" your renting it.
Possession is 9/10ths the law has more meaning than people think.
if its a download you "posses" NOTHING therefore you OWN nothing therefore you have ZERO RIGHTS.
this is why I do not "buy" downloadable music. this is why I do not "buy" digital movies and never will. because your not "buying" your renting and if I am renting I want to pay a RENTAL PRICE not a PURCHASE PRICE.
when mp3's are 5-10 cents a pop I won't mind "paying" for them. when TV/Movie downloads are DRM FREE in nice DIVX/XVID format unencumbered and are 25 cents a pop TV $1 a pop movies THEN I will buy digital versions.
When I can no longer buy physical media they "CEASE" to get any of my money. Period. No Negotiation.
I will not relinquish my ownership rights. I did not buy my first "dvd" or dvd player until I could bypass the encryption if I desired too.
Its why I can not own an ipod touch iphone (besides them just sucking) or an Ipad (does NOT suck but can't own so I don't want it)
Either I own it or I want nothing to do with it.
I don't mind renting. I pay for netflix. but they charge a fair RENTAL price.
kungfuspoonJan 27, 2012
Firstly the word you are looking for is "you're".
Secondly you have the same rights with digital meida as you do with physical media; none. Sure you might own the box, the plastic disc, the little sleeve inside the box, but what's on the disc is covered by the same myriad of copyright laws as digital media. And by all rights if whomever owned that copyright could and decided they wanted to they would be well within their right to wipe their copyrighted material from that disc.
All you 'buy' is a license to use that copyrighted material as the copyright holder sees fit and they can revoke that license if you breach the agreement (that mass of text and legal nonsense before the film) then they can revoke that license. And you probably have breached that license with all the loopholes etc.
Ownership of music, films, games is an illusion because we have something we can hold onto, reality is that it means as much as claiming ownership to the moon.
dandoniaJan 27, 2012
Nah, that's just what they want you to believe. The truth is, a shrink wrapped EULA has no baring on a persons rights. Why do you think GameStop aren't in legal bother about used games?
Sometimes things written in legal speak by companies will not stand up in court and this is one of those cases.
Take a look at this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First-sale_doctrine
kungfuspoonJan 27, 2012
All that governs is the right to sell on the license it doesn't grant ownership. If i buy a car i can break it down sell it's parts, rebuild it and sell it on, take people for rides and charge them. You can't strip the music out of a film and sell that on, reprogram a game and sell it on or charge people to listen to a cd you bought. That's the difference.
dandoniaJan 27, 2012
Oh I totally agree that there's a difference in what you can and can't do (although you can totally charge people to listen to the track you just bought.)
But you'd be surprised at how little that messy legal stuff at the bottom means in court.
ljseinfeldJan 27, 2012
You can't totally charge people to listen to the track you just bought... if BMI or ASCAP hear about it, they will come running and compel you to purchase a performance license.
Christ, the NFL even went after a church not to long ago for showing the Superbowl on a big screen so their congregation could enjoy it --they weren't even charging (well, not directly anyway).
nerysJan 27, 2012
There is no illusion. the right was "stripped" from us unlawfully in my book. I see rights in two ways. IPR and PPR
Intellectual Property Rights. This is the rights the rights holder owns (BMI Artists etc..)
PPR is Personal Property Rights.
This is the rights "WE" have in ownership of our property.
this quite literally is put in words via the phrase possession is 9/10ths the law.
when it comes to PPR I do not recognize "licenses" as even being valid and they are not binding to me in my book. They only come into play (to me) when you move from PPR to IPR (I am not saying the law recognizes this I am saying "I" recognize this and so should all of you)
Let me give you an example. I have windows XP pro on 4 machines. I have 4 lawful "copies" with COA and all that good stuff in my desk drawer.
Microsofts DRM/Activation etc.. infringes my PPR and I do not acknowledge their right to do this.
SO I use "hacked" copies of XP Pro that strips out this "stuff" including the license (not relevant but mentioned it anyway)
My moral compass is perfectly ok with this. Microsoft got its money I got my OS. I only use as many copies as I lawfully purchased.
I flat out do not recognize "licenses" in this regard. as far as I am concerned they do not apply to me. Period.
Now you might say well the courts will "apply" it to you whether you agree with it or not.
Yes and no. First I would resist (yes with force if need be)
Second no judge or jury is every going to convict.
Mr Taylor did you buy lawful copies of windows? yes your honor one for each computer and I would lay the lawful copies on the table.
Did you share it? No
Did you sell hacked copies? No
Did you give it to others? No
Did you put it on the internet? No
Did you install it on other machines over the number of copies you have? No
The judge would look at microsoft lopsided and say whats the problem here.?
There would never be a conviction. Period.
HAVING the physical media saves me. Possession is 9/10th's the law. its hard to argue your point when I am holing proper legal shrink wrapped copies in my hands.
My physical possession makes it extremely difficult and unlikely that MS could "EVER" enforce a license or a license "change" (more on that later) as long as I don't shift from PPR to IPR (ie sharing selling uploading etc..)
The only way for them to compel me would be to come to my house with police and take my copies from me by force and that is simply never going to happen under these conditions.
Let me tell you how this will work. you can quote me on this. you search the net long enough and you will find this exact same statement from me over 10 years ago.
The steps are thus.
you switch to digital. you apply DRM. (this part was thwarted a little) you make it DRM FREE
you eliminate physical media as people get "used" to digital downloads.
You make defeating DRM flat out illegal (I predicted this YEARS before the DMCA) and we did exactly that with the DMCA.
once you have eliminated physical media and precedent is "set" (with DMCA) you then start to undo the "drm free" aspect of music. little by little.
you start to alter licenses.
in a few years you have ZERO rights. when where and how you can listen to music is 100% restricted and controlled.
the last step is micro payment systems. once people are used to that the "noose" is set.
at that point you have lost 100% of PPR rights to music because you POSSESS nothing.
you have nothing left but "license to access" and nothing more.
I refuse to accept such a system. I will not participate in such a system.
Physical Media is the clincher. As long as we have physical media its VERY hard for them to enact this kind of stuff.
Its why I refuse to buy a blu ray player that has a mandatory internet connection.
its why I will likely never buy a blue ray player because I refuse to buy a player that requires HDCP in my cables and television.
DRM literally is tantamount to property theft. They are stealing my property rights from me of not only my media but now my HARDWARE as well.
I will not tolerate it and neither should any of you if you know whats good for you.
WE make the rules. WE set the terms. its not THEIR rights its OUR CASH.
if you want MY CASH. its MY WAY or the HIGHWAY. Period. No negotiation.
your choices are singular. MY way or go out of business. that is how it SHOULD be.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
kungfuspoonJan 27, 2012
The right you're talking about didn't exist in the first place when it comes to copyrighted or intellectually protected work. You didn't buy software or DVDs under one set of rules for them to be changed completely. The movie/music/software source code has always been the property of the copyright holder/creator and the license to use it yours. And the DMCA does not make it illegal to crack software as this would be covered in the reverse engineering safe harbour which allows software to be reverse engineered for person or education use, distributing that crack however is illegal as obviously giving it to someone else isn't personal use.
The bottom line is you bought into the agreement by buying the software, nobody made you do it. Movie studios, software companies etc. are protecting their own interests as everyone does, I'm not saying they don't over step the mark because they do and when they do a clear message needs to be sent to them that it's not on. But the way you're going about it is wrong, you should vote with your wallet, not buy their products in the first place, buy these products in ways that align with your own views and moral compass. All you're doing is fanning the flames, it looks like your cracked totally legitimate copy of windows is a pirated one regardless of whether that's the case or not and so you simply because one of many numbers that these companies use to further their cause and further over step the mark.
Digital distribution doesn't change any of this and it is inevitable that one day everything will be 100% digital, what is open to change is how that is implemented, if people show that they won't pay for restrictive, DRM laden products and they behave responsibly (ie. don't upload copies of it to every website they can find) with DRM free products then the digital future will be much brighter.
nerysJan 28, 2012
I disagree. The music is my property. I physically OWN this one particular copy of the music.
They own the INTELLECTUAL rights to the music but I OWN the "PROPERTY" rights to this copy.
They are trying (and succeeding) in REMOVING those property rights from us.
I bought into no agreement. I bought physical property. I don't recognize anything beyond that.
Digital Distributions REMOVES 100% of physical ownership. IE you have "NO" rights at all with digital distribution. you have a PURE license nothing more.
I could have just used the cracked copy without BUYING an actual physical copy.
I chose to take the morally correct path. I did it on MY terms. not theirs.
COPYRIGHT is actually a misnomer. there is no such thing as COPY RIGHT. its not a "right" its a PRIVILEGE granted by society.
RIGHT belongs to people. for the betterment of society all intellectual works are the property of the people.
Society recognized however that we would get "MORE" innovation if people could secure compensation for their hard work.
SO we CREATED the copyright and patent system to secure TEMPORARY MONOPOLY to the "rights holder"
a commercial copyright is at its core unconstitutional. your not allowed to have a monopoly. our laws recognize (used to) that monopolies are bad.
so we made an "EXCEPTION" to that rule with the privilege of temporary monopoly. IE patents and copyrights.
NOTE personal copyright is not the same thing as COMMERCIAL copyright.
if an artists makes a painting a writer writes a book he owns the copyright for that for the rest of his life.
but once he decides to do it "for profit" his copyright or patent become "limited" at least that is how the system was supposed to work.
sadly corporations have massively ABUSED this system to effectively turn it into a permanent monopoly and that is ILLEGAL and IMMORAL.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
visnikJan 27, 2012
@ kungfuspoon,
the majority of your statement is false and or failed logic.
"Secondly you have the same rights with digital meida as you do with physical media"
False, you can not resell your digital copy, you can not lend it, you can not trade it.
"And by all rights if whomever owned that copyright could and decided they wanted to they would be well within their right to wipe their copyrighted material from that disc."
False, unless they sell you a "burned" copy, they can not wipe the disc, as it is "stamped", they can't take it from you (unless they sue and win), and once they stop distributing it, you still have the disc and the media on it. digital distribution you do no, if they decide to stop offering it, they can remotely remove it and you can not re-download it.
"All you 'buy' is a license to use that copyrighted material as the copyright holder sees fit and they can revoke that license if you breach the agreement (that mass of text and legal nonsense before the film) then they can revoke that license. And you probably have breached that license with all the loopholes etc."
False again, they can not stop me from using the disc as I see fit as long as I do not copy and redistribute the copied work or show it to the general public (a non close nit group or family). I can break the disc, i can backup the disc (yes that is legal despite the what the licence says) I can lend it, i can even edit it, provided i do not distribute the edited version. I can to a lot of things, once i have the disc, they can not take it from me, they can revoke there licence all they want, but i can still watch, play or use that content.
'Ownership of music, films, games is an illusion because we have something we can hold onto,"
True, however you miss one little point, I can own the disc the IP is on. the actual IP might not be mine, but the disc gives me some form of ownership, a DD copy does not.
kungfuspoonJan 28, 2012
"False, you can not resell your digital copy, you can not lend it, you can not trade it."
There is nothing stopping me selling my Steam account, or giving my login details to a friend. Admittedly it would be the entire contents of my account but it is still my right to sell it on. The channels may not yet exist but the concept is new, Steam already has trading (which includes games) and the services will only evolve to meet demand.
"False, unless they sell you a "burned" copy, they can not wipe the disc, as it is "stamped", they can't take it from you (unless they sue and win), and once they stop distributing it, you still have the disc and the media on it. digital distribution you do no, if they decide to stop offering it, they can remotely remove it and you can not re-download it."
I was talking hypothetically 'if they could' obviously they can't magic the data off the disc, but they can still revoke the EULA for a serial number for instance Microsoft black list serial numbers for windows which have been widely distributed on the internet, using such a serial number will result in the WGA software hassling you and disabling the software until it is registered. It is rare but the idea of a remote kill switch exists for boxed software having the installation files on a physical disk doesn't make the software immune to this now most software is integrated into an online system.
"False again, they can not stop me from using the disc as I see fit as long as I do not copy and redistribute the copied work or show it to the general public (a non close nit group or family). I can break the disc, i can backup the disc (yes that is legal despite the what the licence says) I can lend it, i can even edit it, provided i do not distribute the edited version. I can to a lot of things, once i have the disc, they can not take it from me, they can revoke there licence all they want, but i can still watch, play or use that content."
I didn't say you couldn't modify your version in fact in my last post I out right stated you can, but you cannot redistribute it because you still do not own it. Again that license can be revoked from digital or boxed software the same, of course this can be circumvented for both.
"True, however you miss one little point, I can own the disc the IP is on. the actual IP might not be mine, but the disc gives me some form of ownership, a DD copy does not."
Of course nothing stops me burning my DD copy to a disc, backing up files is considered good practice and most DD companies encourage you to backup your purchases.
nerysJan 28, 2012
the TOS you agree to when you create a steam account says you may not so if you sell your steam account of give your login credentials away your in VIOLATION of the contract you agreed to and that account is subject to summary termination WITHOUT COMPENSATION.
there is no IP on the disc there is only content on the disc. IP is a meta term referring to the rights ATTRIBUTED to the content.
visnikJan 30, 2012
kungfuspoon You do realize Xbox does not use steam, that is a PC service and this is a Xbox 360 article.
slmz00Jan 28, 2012
Bless you and your ability to see through the bulls**t cloud of leasing that itunes has created. The so called poverty case record companies that we've been trained to feel sorry for are still capitalist greedy corporations. The only benefit to itunes is artists have a chance to sell to the users directly and profit of THEIR MUSIC. That does not mean itunes is ok as APPLE still takes a large margin of anyone's digital product that they sell on their monopolized website. Everybody has to get their head out of their ass and see that Apple is still just a fledgling s**thead proprietary company that abuses the planet and it's people for profits, just like any other capitalist corporation.
meribianJan 26, 2012
I want to be able to play all of my games with or without an internet connection. I can't have down internet f**king up my playing.
nickchopperJan 26, 2012
Agreed!!!!
StonnaJan 26, 2012
Thats why the internet should be available all over america all the time to all americans.
Perfect the internet
shingoexJan 26, 2012
It's not just availability...it also includes factors such as downtime and overall connection quality.
StonnaJan 26, 2012
exactly, why not grow the internet as much as possible until connection quality can no longer improve? Sorry if its just a wet dream of mine but WHY CANT WE? cause we dont want to spend the money?
shingoexJan 26, 2012
Because, like cloud storage, I don't want my gaming ability to be affected by outside sources, such as reliance on network upkeep.
stevanoskiJan 26, 2012
Good point Stonna
mtownJan 26, 2012
I wish we would turn unused radio frequency channels into internet bandwidth. You could have wireless wherever you go without having to deal with 3g/4g stuff.
dandoniaJan 27, 2012
They announced yesterday that they are moving ahead with that and they expect it to create 15mb broadband for pretty much everyone. (or something like that, I was skimming)
razorsfuryJan 27, 2012
actually that was the plan till bush took office.
StonnaJan 27, 2012
Did he have some buddys that owned ATnT or somthing? maaaaaan that suuuucks =/
dandoniaJan 27, 2012
How often is your internet connection down?
Maybe it's because I'm not American but I really don't understand all this talk of bad lines and low speeds. I'm on a 50mb package and I received a letter last week telling me it's about to double upto 100mb. I can't remember having any downtime with it what so ever and there's no capping.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ljseinfeldJan 27, 2012
Yes, that is the reason you don't understand all this talk.. DSL was finally turned on in my neighborhood 4 years ago. The best package I can buy from them currently is 7Mbit down and 786kbit up...
dandoniaJan 28, 2012
8mb is so 2005 for me, so allow me to describe how good your future is going to be.
OnLive is amazing! You pick your game and it's on. You want to try before you buy? You get a free trial and there's no crazy downloading, it's just on. Like flicking over the TV. You want to just rent it for a few days, you can for next to nothing and like I said, it's on.
You want to stream a movie in HD, boom! There's no juddering, there's no peak time stutter. It's on and it's top quality from beginning to end.
Hard drives are a thing of the past. After all, you can just redownload/stream anything in seconds so why bother storing anything?
Because the internet is so reliable, you don't mind having all of your files in the cloud. Sure, it's always best to keep a copy of important files native just incase a freak incident happens like the cloud storage company goes out of business but it's certainly not because you're scared that your internet is going down.
There are no caps.
------
shingoexJan 28, 2012
it goes down for days at a time. You're lucky in the sense you have good connection speeds and your cable lines aren't crap. Not all of us have this luxury.
simonjester666Jan 27, 2012
Disagree, however I am not just thinking of the internet, Disks suck, they scratch easy, they must rely on mechanical motion (spinning) and an ejection system, too many parts that can break easily. How about a USB Thumbdrive? or even better, If you cant get the internet you take your own thumb drive to a kiosk at the store and it puts a copy on there for you, movies too. All disk media needs to go!
simonjester666Jan 27, 2012
Micro SD would be fine too.
WVUrookJan 27, 2012
I have never had an issue with disks getting scratched or being otherwise unplayable... but I have had too much experience with losing the rights to digital media I purchased, causing me to lose my game and my money.
I prefer disks, but USB wouldn't bug me as long as I truly own (NO DRM) what I buy. If it is USB, I would demand the right to make a copy for back-up. Files are to easily deleted.
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
Steam is the only way to go IMO. Even with no internet, you can still play your games in Offline Mode, and load up your games on any computer. No discs ever again.
jeworldJan 26, 2012
I like the fact I can download old games, but you can't resell them. The bandwidth thing is a big issue too, especially with throttling.
ridgerunner5Jan 26, 2012
The infrastructure of the US's internet couldn't handle it. Can you imagine the disaster when the internet goes down nationwide when Modern Warfare 6 gets released and everybody has to download the whole thing??
Plus the users would revolt if they couldn't resell their 3 week old game for pennies on the dollar to gamestop
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
come on.. I hate GameStop as much as the next bloke, but pennies on the dollar? Not even a nickel? So your $60 game gets you less than $2.4?
barackalypseJan 26, 2012
Please be sure to let Valve know the Internet can't handle Steam, I'll let Blizzard know patching 10 million World of Warcraft users won't be possible, and someone should probably tell Netflix streaming movies to millions isn't possible.
Angry_MuppetJan 27, 2012
Big difference between a sporadic update and a continual onslaught.
debrinconcitaJan 27, 2012
Your SO right on that comment, so TRUE!!!
breadfredJan 27, 2012
Simple solution even with today's bandwidth. Pre-load the games on the customers' computers except for some critical files. On release date just distribute those files. Not rocket science...
Also, bandwidth is still doubling every 18 months or so (yup, Moore's law strikes again) if it is not, time to get some proper competition in place.
Angry_MuppetJan 29, 2012
Brilliant solution, just one problem, how do we pre-load a game that hasn't even been published?
ljseinfeldJan 27, 2012
@barry
Applying scope and scale to your thoughts: You're not good at it.
slmz00Jan 28, 2012
This comment is ignorant city-dweller. For those who live outside the urban centers, we have to consider bandwidth caps, sattelite connections and downtime. Streaming all media is not the answer.
flawedgamesJan 27, 2012
Exactly what I was thinking. As much as I love the idea of digital distribution, I know that physical distribution is still necessary. It would be stupid if the console couldn't except discs or memory sticks.
fakeironlungJan 27, 2012
USB Stick Drives would be an interesting medium for games as well, offering less problems from a spinning disc, but remaining "physical".
slmz00Jan 28, 2012
Did you not own a nintendo 8bit or Sega platform. This has been done and has its inherent flaws as well. Also, USB is too slow for 35gb games on Bluray.
ikorkyiJan 27, 2012
i didn't assume it would be through the internet - i envisioned walking into game stop, swapping out a used flash drive with a new one with the game on it.
myztryJan 27, 2012
There are a whole lot of issues.
1. Hard drives have jumped in price for the foreseeable future due to the Tawain floods.
2. Digital downloads provide nothing for the retailers to sell. They are powerful entities that may just decide it is no longer worth selling the console itself.
3. Digital downloads seeks to remove first sale rights (and equivalent) which grant ownership and protect the consumer from abuse.
4. Consoles die which can take out a whole software library in one hit unlike media based software which is only individually vulnerable.
5. Download speeds & caps are still a very real part of The Internet and inhibit both software and content based distribution. It is not uncommon for multi-GB downloads to incur substantial extra costs to the end-user.
r0g3rJan 27, 2012
If I can't collect physical games for a system, I don't want to own it. Period. I'd rather stick to my existing collection of games and consoles than buy something that's download only.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
I agree to a point. Though I much prefer physical media I'm ok with all digital downloads so long as the terms/ conditions / price is set accordingly.
For Example I'm a big fan of Steam Sales.
So long as it only uses Steam as it's DRM method and I get unlimited installs on any pc I register and an offline mode I'm ok with it. I must also admit, the most I ever spent on a single steam game was $10
I know that a "license = / = ownership" and I have no "right of first sale" with digital content, but under certain conditions I'm ok with that.
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
Steam Weekend Deals are sick, Dead Space 1 + 2 for $10 and no tax.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
During Quake con I got the "id + Bethesta pack" which had all 34 of their games (This was before Rage) for $70
Playing Fallout 3 on the PC and Rocking Quake 2 on my netbook. Good times.
r0g3rJan 27, 2012
I use Steam. However, I enjoy collecting physical games. It's a hobby.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
"I enjoy collecting physical games. It's a hobby."
I literally laughed out loud at this one, you don't know the half of it! One of my hobbies is collecting / restoring arcade machines. :-)
r0g3rJan 27, 2012
I wish I had the space....I'd love to own a couple of pinballs and arcade cabinets.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
Coctail tables are the "gateway drug"in this hobby.
You start off with "It'll be cool and it's functional as an end table" or something...
and then it begins ... :-)
nerysJan 27, 2012
but that is where your understanding is lacking.
when you buy a tetris gameboy cartridge. in 10 years the same terms apply. you own it you can play it. in 50 years the same terms apply you own it you can play it.
with a digital download the terms WILL be perfectly ok. right now. in 5 years they can decide to CHANGE those terms without notice or negotiation and there is flat out "NOTHING" You can do about it because legally you owned NOTHING. you only had a LICENSE and no physical property behind it.
THIS is the crux of the problem. there is no such thing as "so long as the terms/ conditions / price is set accordingly"
because they can CHANGE THEM any time they wish for any reason they wish and there is flat out NOTHING you can do about it.
but your tetris gameboy game will still work and there is nothing they can practically to do change your "terms" of use for that.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
THIS is the crux of the problem. there is no such thing as "so long as the terms/ conditions / price is set accordingly"
That's part of the "priced accordingly" argument and why I haven't paid more than $10 for a single game on steam.
Even if I buy a physical good and tire of it and want to flip it I'll generally lose $5-$10 on the transaction which is why that's my buy in point for digital games (honestly nearly all are below the $5 each mark with a few hitting between there and $10).
At those (low) rates I'm willing to assume the risk, but at higher prices I'm not.
nerysJan 27, 2012
but that would simply place you in the same boat as me. IE you would "STOP" buying games all together.
Once its digital there is no "clearance" or "sale" prices it will be $60 or more and ALWAYS be $60 or more so those folks who flat out can not or will not pay $60 for a game will simply cease to buy games.
ONLY the developers lose in that world.
at the prices your paying your paying disposable "rental" prices almost so of course your ok with such terms.
that will not last.
chadpyleJan 26, 2012
3 words, 1 acronym: D-R-M
barackalypseJan 26, 2012
You can lock content down on a hard drive just as easily as you can on a disk.
nerysJan 27, 2012
which is why I do not buy discs I can't crack. simple as that.
as long as you do not share it upload it etc.. you can NEVER practically be convicted for "cracked" a game you physically possess.
trdrstvJan 26, 2012
a) Because your largest Market (North America) doesn't have sufficient broadband infrastructure to make this happen wide spread.
b) Some people actually prefer the ability to loan / borrow / resell games that they no longer want.
c) Games are cheaper on physical mediums due to warehousing and carrying costs. Amazon/ Best Buy/ Walmart etc... has very real costs for a product sitting on a shelf which encourages discounting to move them, digital costs are so low they are practically zero.
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
"Some people actually prefer the ability to loan / borrow / resell games that they no longer want."
There's a word for people like that. Murderers. They are murdering the whole industry.
(Incidentally, Walmart has a s**tty record of discounting. I remember after the Wii came out, seeing a copy of Mario 64, yes for N64, on the shelf for $60 and thinking, wtf?)Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
neotechniJan 27, 2012
"There's a word for people like that. Murderers. "
You're exaggerating to the point of absurdity.
A friend lent me Dead Space, I loved the game so much I bought it, Dead Space 2 (collector's edition), Dead Space Mobile, Dead Space Martyr, 6 Dead Space comics, the Dead Space hacking minigame, Dead Space extraction
Yes, he is such a murderer
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"You're exaggerating to the point of absurdity."
Are you sure?
ognatovskiyJan 27, 2012
I bet he is 100% sure.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
Well now, your comment doesn't seem like an exaggeration at all.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
Didn't your parents teach you how to share ?
Some of my games I buy SOLEY for the multiplayer aspect so me and my buds can play together, but some we buy (independantly) with the expectation that when "the other guy is done" we pass it around.
Sometimes this leads to more sales for the publishers and sometimes it doesn't, but it does expand their receptive audience.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
Cool. Let me know when you get done f**king your gf tonight so I can take my turn.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
Seriously though, video games are just such a cheap form of entertainment to begin with, seems hard to imagine that you really need to discount them further.
On the other hand, for whatever reason, I don't see a problem with multiplaying a game. If the owner is playing the game with some friends, that doesn't bother me. What bothers me is buying/selling the game after you've completed it, or lending it to someone else and letting them complete it. It seems no better than if you bought a movie ticket, then once you got inside the theater you passed it to your friend (ie, through the exit door) and he used it to get in, and so on. I feel like buying one copy of the game entitles the buyer to play the game at any time he wants, with whomever he wants, but nothing more.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
So nobody has EVER once loaned you a book, movie, tv show on dvd or hell even a toy that captured your attention or imagination that ever got you interested into something else ? Hell I bought Starcraft because I got to play a spawned copy at a LAN part and though "Holy s**t this is cool."
Seriously some of my favorite works of literature / film / gaming came from "peer recommendation", and the ability to sample without cost or restriction. Granted I don't condone Piracy, but (for example) several of my favorite authors I was introduced by friends saying "I think you'd like this book, give it back to me when you are done."
Not EVERY 2nd hand user is a LOST sale, sometimes it's actually a WIN for the developer / artist / author as they gain an audiance who is ACTIVELY looking for their next project.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"So nobody has EVER once loaned you a book, movie, tv show on dvd or hell even a toy"
I don't think so, actually. But it's beside the point. My 'murderer' comment was a JOKE.
As I said elsewhere, I'd rather live in a world in which used game sales are illegal/impossible/shunned because I feel the $50 price point presumes one user, not a potentially-unlimited chain of users. That's not the world I live in, so I reserve the right to enjoy all the content I want without contributing to the creator of the content.
If everyone adopted the view that buying a used game is just the same as stealing the content (from the developer) then everyone would be better off, but if one person does it, it changes nothing.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
" I'd rather live in a world in which used game sales are illegal/impossible/shunned ... "
And to that end I vehemently disagree, if/ when THAT becomes the norm then sales will suffer and you'll truly see the gaming market atrophy.
Used sales are not "a sale lost", but an "audience gained."
"If everyone adopted the view that buying a used game is just the same as stealing the content (from the developer) then everyone... "
... would be delusional. There is no 'STEALING' involved in this transaction only transfer of ownership.
Do you feel that houses shouldn't be sold and that every person should bull doze the prior to erect a new one ? What of the builders of this fine house that has been sold to 5 different people through the course of it's life, shouldn't THEY be compensated every-time ?
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
I have to assume you're being intentionally dense. There's a big difference between a video game and a house.
One of them is a 50 cent piece of plastic onto which the product of millions of dollars worth of time and effort has been encoded.
The other is tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of materials put together according to a design that more or less matches every other house. There are even laypeople who design their own houses.
And understand that that's what we're talking about - not the crude construction of the disk, but the technical and artistic work of designing the original work. Frankly, a house doesn't take a great deal of design or artistic vision - just think of all the houses you've seen in your lifetime, and amalgamate.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superdrew0413Jan 27, 2012
"Frankly, a house doesn't take a great deal of design or artistic vision - just think of all the houses you've seen in your lifetime, and amalgamate."
Amaoican-was that a joke?
So designing a house takes no artistic talent or skill? You have got to be kidding me. Why is it then architects go to college, intern, and then have to pass all kinds of tests to become licensed?
I'm willing to bet that Frank Lloyd Wright, Philip Johnson, and Louis Sullivan would all disagree with you if they were alive.
Are there cookie cutter houses? Yes, just as there are cookie cutter games. How many generic FPS have you played? (Timeshift, Singularity, Redneck Rampage, etc) RTS's? (Halo Wars). On and on. I'm not going to say they have no talent and that anyone could design those games.
As far as a layman designing thier home...maybe the general look of the home. I doubt a layman can design thier own home including all electrical, plumbing, ducting plans as well as ensuring that the building has the proper materials and is up to code.
meribianJan 27, 2012
trdrstv, why are you feeding the troll?
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
@superdrew0413
What I said: "a house doesn't take a great deal of design or artistic vision"
What you said I said: "So designing a house takes no artistic talent or skill?"
And I submit to you, I know a guy, barely finished high school. He designed and built two of his own houses - the one his wife got to keep after the divorce and the one he lives in now. As you said, the hardest thing is the electrical, plumbing, and all that, and you hire someone to do those things, and it's pretty much done according a strict formula.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
nerysJan 27, 2012
The LUNACY in your world view is astonishing.
"If everyone adopted the view that buying a used game is just the same as stealing the content (from the developer) then everyone would be better off, but if one person does it, it changes nothing."
SO you own nothing used right? you never use public transport or ANY public services right?
Every car you have owned is brand new right?
I mean when you buy a used FORD your MURDERING FORD because they do not get any of that sale. you STOLE the price of a new car from them right?
People like you Disgust me.
When I buy a piece of property it is MY RIGHT to do anything I wish (inside PPR not IPR) with that property for as long as I wish and you the original seller have NO SAY in the matter.
Period.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
But the game is NOT your property - it is the property of the developer. You own a worthless piece of plastic and a license, and because you do not respect that license, you will soon lose the piece of plastic*. Thanks a lot assh**e.
* Okay, not the ones you already have, but the ones you might have bought in the future.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
nerysJan 28, 2012
I lose nothing. THEY lose my money. its that simple. its not an option its not a negotiation. there is nothing to debate dispute or discuss. My terms or the highway. NO NEGOTIATION.
If I have no physical property rights to my purchase I WILL NOT MAKE THE PURCHASE.
Period. End of Discussion no negotiation. EOL.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"I lose nothing."
Exactly, becase _YOU_ do not value gaming. So gtfo of here. This is a discussion for gamers.
nerysJan 28, 2012
Oh I value gaming. but its my money so its MY TERMS.
its really that simple.
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
amaoican, usually thumbs down on every one of your comments means people want you to go away. Now would be a good time to start.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
f**k 'em. They're the ones who are bringing about the no-disc consoles.
r0g3rJan 27, 2012
Really? I own several old games, for instance, M.U.S.H.A. that have accrued value due to their rarity (even though it's on the Wii Virtual Console). Why shouldn't I be able to take advantage of market conditions and sell my copy of M.U.S.H.A., just as I can with my collection of comics from my childhood or any other collectible item? This is a really big deal to a lot of people. Collecting games has become a huge hobby, and provides a lot of us with the ability to experience the nostalgia of playing games and hardware that we grew up with.
A download only system would ruin this entire hobby. I own a Wii, but also collect games for nearly every system on the virtual console. I don't want to own them on the V.C. because: 1. If your Wii fails, it's a PITA to get Nintendo to restore your stuff. 2. I like to play games with their original controllers and hardware, it's part of the nostalgia. The N64 has a particularly unique controller that is not well replicated by other controllers like the Wii Classic controller.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"Really?" You're asking me if I really think buying/selling used stuff is murder?
ljseinfeldJan 27, 2012
Holy f**k amaoican, you are a corporate tool.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
Don't worry - at the rate we're going there won't be any gaming corporations left in a generation or two.
nerysJan 28, 2012
if they can't survive under MY terms then so be it they go out of business.
There are however quite a few gaming companies who "get it" and they will survive and take up the slack left by the dinosaurs who do not "get it"
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
See 1983. assh**e.
nerysJan 28, 2012
no idea what 1983 is supposed to mean (1984??) but your getting annoying. you make no points just keep rambling on.shoo troll shooo
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"no idea what 1983 is supposed to mean"
Look it up. Jackass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_video_game_crash_of_1983
It happened before and it could happen again.
Now pay for you f**king habit.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ljseinfeldJan 28, 2012
OK amaoican't..... I read the article and saw several reasons listed for the crash... did you? ...Yeah, that's what I thought.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
@ljseinfeld Sorry I didn't feel the need to read it because I... LIVED... through it.
The point is not that those exact circumstances could come again and crash the industry. The point is the industry can crash.
nerysJan 28, 2012
My point stands. what is it supposed to mean?
ANY industry can crash. any industry can fail. Why should I care specifically as in relevant to this conversation.
My terms are fixed in stone. Either I buy property or I don't and if I don't I don't spend my money.
let me make this clear one more time. this is not a negotiation. there is no argument. there is no debate there is no negotiation.
its MY WAY or flat out absolutely NO WAY.
If I can not PURCHASE IT I will not PAY for it. Period End of discussion.
if the gaming industry can not "survive" in this kind of infrastructure then good riddance to them.
Find a better business model cause I will not be their little bitch to be anal raped whenever they please.
same applies to music. same applies to movies TV books and all other forms of media.
MY TERMS or NOTHING. no inbetween no negotiation No discussion no compromise. I MAKE THE RULES you get no say.
the reason is simple. ITS MY GOD DAMNED MONEY.
MY LIFE is not diminished if I can't play your video games. I can live without them.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"MY LIFE is not diminished if I can't play your video games. I can live without them." Exactly. Which is why I said, you do not value the games, so your opinion really doesn't matter.
nerysJan 28, 2012
Again I value them ON MY TERMS. its really that simple.
hibby76Jan 26, 2012
I just hope that they figure out that a $60 game that I CAN sell (lend, trade, etc) has a very different value than a game that I can never sell, trade, or lend. Downloadable content should follow Steam's model when it comes to pricing.
tastypastryJan 27, 2012
Just to correct you, it is Valve that has a great DLC model. Steam is the platform on which any developer can get their game on and do as they please. I know Steam was made by Valve but just to clarify. On the subject of downloading games, they option should be available on release date but at a discounted price.
hibby76Jan 27, 2012
Thanks for the correction.
mtownJan 26, 2012
Because not everybody has a stable internet connection?
HumanWikiJan 26, 2012
Because I'd rather not have to download everything from the internet if I have an HDD failure... Because plenty of US carriers are still little bitches about overall monthly data usage.... Because I want a physical copy of my games so I can resell them when I'm done..
You think iNet carriers are being bitchy now? Wait till everyone with an xBox has to download GB upon GB for each and every game sold.
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
"Because I want a physical copy of my games so I can resell them when I'm done.."
But why? You're already getting a multi-million dollar gaming experience, the product of hundreds of people working for dozens of months, for $50-60. Why do you feel the need to also get a rebate?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
HumanWikiJan 27, 2012
Guess you don't believe in ever selling a used car either..
Seriously? Because people worked hard on it and got paid, I'm supposed to never be able to sell it back? They already got their money from me.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
It's an interesting question. I know that selling a used car is not like selling a used game, but it's hard to explain why. Let me try one or two ways.
First, consider fixed costs versus marginal cost. For a video game, the fixed costs are the vast majority of the purchase - it costs the company, like I said above, millions upon millions of dollars to produce the content of the disc, but the disc itself costs under a buck, maybe a few bucks by the time it's packaged and shipped to your local shop. For a car, there are fixed costs of designing the car built into each car sold, but it's a much smaller part of the total price of the car.
Okay, don't like that? This one might work better.
Think about utility - usefulness. A used car that still runs is very useful to you - you could continue to drive it for as long as it continues to run. So, by selling it, you're actually losing something. Even if it doesn't run, the components are valuable - whatever parts inside the car are still good can be salvaged are valuable, and whatever parts are bad are still valuable as scrap metal.
A game that you've already played to completion and don't intend to play again is worthless to you. In fact, it's less than worthless because it's taking up space. So, in a sense, you've squeezed out every drop of value the game had to you. So by selling it, you're losing nothing.
But the most important thing is that when you buy/sell a used game, the developer doesn't get a dime from that sale. That's important because the profit signal is part of how developers decide what games to make next. That's why we get into 'crazes', like the fighting game craze and the FPS craze - developers see that gamers enjoy a style of game, then they try to make games like it.
Well, I know I'm not going to change your mind, but if I had to choose, I'd much rather live in the world in which there are _no_ used games. I'd much rather the best economic decision be to buy the game in such a way that the developers are benefitting. As I've said before, if you're planning on _buying_ a used game, you might as well just save your money and pirate it instead for all the good you're doing.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
HumanWikiJan 27, 2012
That is pretty much true of anything that someone sells used... My used car sale doesn't benefit all the people that made it. Selling my used computer/console doesn't benefit anyone that designed or built it. Games are no different at all.
Computers, Consoles, Cars, Trucks, etc. all take money, time, effort, people, manufacturing facilities, distributors, etc... I can tell you that making a new style car from scratch is very expensive and time consuming. Creating games from scratch isn't the only market done this way.
So, what you're really calling for is abolishing the entire used market which will create even more waste and demand on resources because now, everything has to be created new. Plus, you'd actually hurt the economy, because people that would buy used now can't, and, would be forced to just do something else, which could be to buy nothing at all. Now, you've taken away from the employees at places that sell used commodities, that transport used commodities, etc.
Just because the people that originally made the game aren't getting more profit from the sale of the used one doesn't mean that it's not benefiting someone else that in turn would end up buying something new they wouldn't have originally been able to had I not sold them my used product and kept them in a job.
and so on and so on.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"what you're really calling for is abolishing the entire used market which will create even more waste and demand on resources because now, everything has to be created new"
Actually, I would be fine with just stipulating that all used game sales require a $10-20 residual be sent to the developer. I've often wondered why GameStop doesn't work out some kind of deal like this, since they are the ones who have the most to lose if/when the industry abandons physical media.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
As an example, look at Zelda: Skyward Sword. You could buy it for $50, and by now you should have had plenty of time to complete the 50+ hours of gameplay.
You could now take it on half.com and sell it for ~$39 + shipping, and net yourself ~$33 in pocket, which means the game effectively cost you $17. $17 for 50+ hours. That's 34 cents per hour.
And that's ultimately what troubles me. If you can pay $50 for the game, get over 50 hours of gameplay out of it, and still not feel like you got your money's worth, then don't f**king buy the game to begin with, it's clearly not your style of game.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
HumanWikiJan 27, 2012
@amaoican -- You are operating under a false premise that someone buying a used game from me is some how detrimental to the people that created the game to begin with. There are plenty of people that wouldn't buy the game new, period. That money is never and was never going to the original company that made it. Maybe that's by choice, maybe they simply can't afford it. You know, not everyone can look at new games and think "It's only 50-60 dollars". That's a fairly arrogant method of thinking. There are many people that this kind of money is the difference between eating or not. Between having a roof over their head or not.
So, this money, like I said, was never going to be funneled in to the new game market. You can divide game cost by hours played all you want, but that doesn't make the math correct in any other terms than showing you know how to do basic division.
You seem to have a huge issue with the used game market (specifically), which makes me want to question what you do for a living.
Also, here's something else you're not thinking about or don't want to admit.
There have been several times where I've been looking around in my local game retailer of choice and have come across a used game that I thought I might enjoy and hadn't heard of... So, I buy it used... Your worshiped game coders and developers don't get a single penny from me for that.. But, what happened? I ended up loving the game so much, that I followed up with buying each of the sequels to it in advance and in their highest packaged set (Expanded, Collectors Ed, etc) and all of the DLC. So, right there, that used game market clued me in to a game that I wouldn't have otherwise known about and made me fall in love with it. Had that used game not been available to me, your buddies in the industry wouldn't have received anything from me. -- I'm sure I'm not the only one that's picked up a used game, gotten to know it, thought "man this is great" and then gone on to buy the others new.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"You are operating under a false premise that someone buying a used game from me is some how detrimental to the people that created the game to begin with. "
Am not! You're operating under the false pretense that I give a rat's ass about whether or not a poor person can play the game within a few days or weeks of release. I didn't want to pay $50 for Arkham Asylum, so did I steal a copy? No, I just waited until the cheaper Game of the Year edition was out and paid $20 for it.
"I ended up loving the game so much, that I followed up with buying each of the sequels"
So? That game was clearly _already successful_. The sequels have _already_ been made. It still doesn't feel right to me, but your economic signal is irrelevant if the game has already sequeled so I'd have to s**t out a completely different justification for my half-assed theory.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
superdrew0413Jan 27, 2012
What if I bought a reproduction of the painting for $20 for my office and someone offers to pay me $15 for it? Do I have to kick back $5 to the original painter. Think of all the costs associated with the reproduction. What with the camera used to take a picture of the original, the ink and paper in the press, the frame, the workers who had to run the press, etc? Plus all the hours of enjoyment that I spend looking at it.
Your arguement holds no water. I'm not selling the painting as mine, I'm selling the paper it was reproduced on.
Let's take this to a supremely stupid level. What if some idiot wants to by my game to use as a coaster and never play the game? Am I allowed to sell it to him under your rules? Would I have to kick back money to the game maker?
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"Let's take this to a supremely stupid level. What if some idiot wants to by my game to use as a coaster and never play the game? Am I allowed to sell it to him under your rules? Would I have to kick back money to the game maker?"
Why would you need to give any more money to the content maker? You already paid for your use of the content. It's the buyer who is getting the additional use of the content. You want to sell him a plastic disc and a fancy case? Fine, but if you charge more than a buck or two you have to seriously ask yourself if you are really selling just a physical object or also digital content.
Is it okay to sell the digital content? That depends on whether or not you already consumed it. If you already consumed the content, I don't see why you think you should be able to sell it.
So I suppose if you bought the game, played it for 5-10 minutes and realized it was a turd, under that situation you'd be free to sell the content, but I don't know who's going to buy it from you knowing that you think it's a turd.
In fact, that's my vision of used game sales in the online future: incorporate into games some metric of how much of the content you've finished. One example way of doing this would be in terms of number of hours of play time. So, for example, Zelda: Skyward Sword is supposed to be a 50-100 hour game. Let's call it 75 hours. After 37 hours, you either finish the game or quit and either way you are no longer interested in playing it. You visit an online marketplace, go through a process to indicate you want to sell the remaining portion of your ownership (50.6%) and the minimum price you're willing to accept for your partial ownership of the game - during this process, the game is removed from your console. Then someone else can come along and buy up individuals' partial shares until they have one whole "ownership" of the game, at which point they can play the game, and you get paid for the partial ownership you sold.
But critically, if you pay $50 for the game expecting to get 100 hours out of it, and you get your 100 hours out of it, you're done. You've gotten what you were promised. No refunds, no rebates. Be satisfied.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
ljseinfeldJan 27, 2012
Selling something you possess is a _sale_, not a rebate.
superdrew0413Jan 27, 2012
"You want to sell him a plastic disc and a fancy case? Fine, but if you charge more than a buck or two you have to seriously ask yourself if you are really selling just a physical object or also digital content."
It is not my job or duty to ask him what he is going to use the game for. If you buy my used car, I don't care if you are going to drive it, use it for a destruction derby, have it sit on your lawn, or tear it down into parts. It's yours now. The only arguement maybe that if you actually told me you were buying the car with the intention of committing a crime with it could you possible hold me liable in anyway.
"So I suppose if you bought the game, played it for 5-10 minutes and realized it was a turd, under that situation you'd be free to sell the content, but I don't know who's going to buy it from you knowing that you think it's a turd."
Either I have the right to sell the game used or I don't. You can't pick some arbitary amount of time. What if I expect to have at least 1,000 hours of gameplay out of each game I buy. If I only get 999 hours out of it do I then have the right to resell it?
Also, who decides the amount of time that is appropriate? The government? The customer or the game manufacturer? If that is the manufacturer then my guess is that they will choose the time of 1 second.
So if I am extremely good at videogames and beat a 75 hour game in 30 hours, I can resell it for some money back? If I suck and it takes me 100 hours that is just tough s**t?
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"What if I expect to have at least 1,000 hours of gameplay out of each game I buy. If I only get 999 hours out of it do I then have the right to resell it?"
If you honestly, legitimately feel that the game was going to give you 1000 hours of gameplay, and you only got 999 hours, then yes, you have a right to recoup 0.1% of your purchasing cost. But wouldn't you rather have a clean conscience?
In the case of Skyward Sword, it's very clear - Nintendo claimed it had 50+ hours of content. If the developer tells you that the game takes 50 hours to beat, your belief that it would yield you 1000 hours of play is, to say the least, suspicious.
"If that is the manufacturer then my guess is that they will choose the time of 1 second."
Would YOU buy a game that only has 1 second worth of content?
nerysJan 28, 2012
I have a "RIGHT" to recoup any amount of god damned money I can based on what the market for it will support.
PERIOD. its my property.
I "beat" C&C RA2 in one day.
I have THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS of hours of game play in it and I still play it to this day.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
@nerys: Really? You paid the millions upon millions of dollars of development cost associated with the game? Well, in that case, I suppose you can give the game to whoever you like.
nerysJan 28, 2012
You know how many millions takes to design a new car? guess you should shoot yourself now for buying a used car.
Know how many millions it takes to design busses trains and airplanes? shoot yourself you did not buy YOUR OWN you abused the designers and used something you did not buy new.
you filthy lecherous person you stealing from those designers.
grow up
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"Know how many millions it takes to design busses trains and airplanes?"
Yes, that's why after I get done with my ticket, I deposit in a trash bin rather than trying to sell it to the next guy to use.
superdrew0413Jan 28, 2012
Amaoican, you misunderstand my comment about the 1 second. I wasn't saying that the game had 1 second of content, I was saying that the company who made the game could say that I'm entitled to enjoy only 1 second and, therefore, even using the game once would say that I could not resell it.
By combining my earlier numbers with your example If I pay $60 for a game and expect 1,000 hours of game and only got 999 hours play I am only entitled to $0.06 resale. Fine, I expect 10,000 hours out of every game and I only got 1,000 hours out of it am entitled to $54? What if I got 10 can I sell it for $59.94?
My point is WHO decides the number of hours I am entitled to? You? Me? Game Publisher? Congress? The Tribunal for Hourly Game Play Requirements?
If Nintendo says I only get 50 hours of gameplay for Zelda and I get more am I ripping them off? If I get 100 hours do I have to give them more money?
There is no difference if I play a 100 hours or if two people play for 50.
superdrew0413Jan 28, 2012
Also, Amaoican, I have another thought for you to ponder.
I own shares of Activision-Blizzard (ATVI). I bought Modern Warefare 3. I own part of the company. Some of my money was used to create the game. Do I have the right to resell it?
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"I own shares of Activision-Blizzard (ATVI)." ... "I own part of the company." ... "Do I have the right to resell it?"
That doesn't make a difference unless you own a controlling interest in the company in which I suppose you could run the company into the ground if you wanted to (albeit I suppose you might be sued by the other shareholders).
But it's an interesting angle. Thanks.
Note: Obviously, I am not a lawyer.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"I wasn't saying that the game had 1 second of content, I was saying that the company who made the game could say that I'm entitled to enjoy only 1 second and, therefore, even using the game once would say that I could not resell it."
Yes, I understand that. But as I said, if the company is invited to post an estimate of the content, then they will want to exaggerate the number a bit to drum up sales, but if they exaggerate too much then they will be boosting used sales. If they lowball, then people will look at the estimate and skip the game.
I should also note that the hours system is not the one I originally envisioned when I contemplated the second-hand market that I described. My original vision was to use the percentage system that some games include (like Zelda and, I think, Grand Theft Auto) but this would work for some games (ie games that don't have a 'story mode').
"My point is WHO decides the number of hours I am entitled to? "
And my point is it _DOESN'T MATTER_ who decides the number of hours because it's a question or morality, not legality - the Supreme Court has already shown it is not going to allow limitations on the sale of physical objects, including objects with copyrighted content on them. So if you are being truly honest with yourself, and not tossing out a hyperbolic number just to make a point, then you can't go wrong.
And finally, the problem with all these shades of gray is allowing used game sales to begin with. If you just take the leap and say that buying/selling used games is 'bad', period, then that resolves all of these problems.
nerysJan 28, 2012
Except that is the entire FLAW in your argument. Buying and Selling used IS NOT BAD.
in fact forbidding buying and selling used IS BAD and IS IMMORAL because you are STRIPPING ME of my property rights.
the rights of the consumer supersede the privilege of the commercial entity.
100% of the time.
you keep trying to make this a MORAL discussion but your flaw is not recognizing that your on the wrong side of morality in this case.
what YOU desire is IMMORAL by definition.
so how many tickets can be sold before it becomes IMMORAL not to buy a NEW BUSS ?
and your logic is again flawed. THE BUS MAKER is not selling tickets the one who BOUGHT the buss is selling tickets and the bus maker gets NONE of that.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"in fact forbidding buying and selling used IS BAD and IS IMMORAL because you are STRIPPING ME of my property rights."
You only have that property right because the data is encoded onto a physical disc and we do not have an effective way of restricting the use of the contents of that physical disc to the original owner. If it was technically possible (ie using a DVD-R and having the first console burn its unique ID onto it) then the right would end.
I personally think that SC ruling was a mistake, but you do have that right. I'm asking you to forego it for the good of the industry.
If we continue the way we're going, one way or another, we will lose that property right. The industry is ALREADY lubricating our buttholes with DLC and game stores for every major console. With the PSP GO, they went all the way to offering full premium games for download, albeit while selling UMDs (for the PSP non-GO) alongside. They are lubricating the butthole for the massive c**k that is download-only.
And it's largely because of used sales - especially places like GameStop thinking it's just great for themselves to buy games for a couple bucks and then sell them for SLIGHTLY less than the new price.
nerysJan 28, 2012
the right would not end. it would be "taken away" and in my book unlawfully.
When I hear someone say used sales are killing me and then I hear they are going to sell 25 million copies of a game they only need to sell 4 million of to break even.
Excuse me if I ignore the little boys crying wolf.
and again. I do not care. MY RIGHTS supersede YOUR privilege.
I will not give up my property rights. if that means I can no longer play games then that it as it must be.
what part of "its my money" is unclear here?
the REASON people buy used is BECAUSE they charge INSANE prices for games $50 and $60
I have played exactly 2 games that I would deem "worthy" of a $60 price tag.
Command and Conquer RA2
and Hydro Thunder (never made available in full form for private sale the closest was N64 and it was "ok")
no other game I have ever played would i deem worth $50 or $60. its that simple.
its pure greed. nothing more.
the ULTIMATE power of the consumer is to decide where to spend their money.
I believe a significant number of consumer will elect to no longer spend their money if they have no property rights.
if that means the industry dies. OK then the industry is not viable. I feel for you but its not my problem. I will make sure to NOT get into the video game creation market. sounds like your saying its a bad bet.
superdrew0413Jan 28, 2012
Amaoican, you are trying to immorality as a reason I can not sell my used game. The problem is morality is a perspective.
What if I say that it is immoral to deny me the right to sell my property? What if I believe that it is immoral to deny someone enjoyment of something that I no longer need/want/use?
What if I were to purchase the Mona Lisa and stuff it in a box and put it in my basement? One could argue that I was immoral because I was being a douche and not allowing the world to see the art. One could, also, argue that it is now my property, so tough s**t.
As for my previous example, an easy end around by the company is as follows:
Up to 100 hours gameplay*
*only gaurantee 1 second of enjoyment.
Which sadly is more than any publisher guarantees now. I can't return an open game to any retailer except for the same game.
Also, what if I were to sell a used game to help purchase a new game from the same publisher that I would not be able to purchase at full price? Would that be okay in your mind? All my used game proceeds did go back to the game company.
As for the stock issue, no one person or entity has a controlling stake of 51% in ATVI so then, in theory, no one could tell me I could not sell it used.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"What if I say that it is immoral to deny me the right to sell my property?"
The copyrighted material is nor your property. Only the physical disc is your property. When you buy the game disc, the content creator grants you license to use the contents of the game disc. A license is also not property.
"What if I believe that it is immoral to deny someone enjoyment of something that I no longer need/want/use?"
Then you're wrong.
"What if I were to purchase the Mona Lisa and stuff it in a box and put it in my basement? One could argue that I was immoral because I was being a douche"
It is not immoral to displease others.
"Up to 100 hours gameplay*
*only gaurantee 1 second of enjoyment."
If they really don't want to sell any copies of the game they could just stamp 'Guaranteed to be the biggest pile of s**t you've ever played!' on the cover...
"Which sadly is more than any publisher guarantees now. I can't return an open game to any retailer except for the same game."
Hint: At many establishments, you can then turn around and return the unopened copy of the game you just got back ;)
"Also, what if I were to sell a used game to help purchase a new game from the same publisher that I would not be able to purchase at full price? Would that be okay in your mind?"
No. Those are two separate actions. If I were to accept a contract to murder the Pope for $10 billion, then I turned around and used the $10 billion for research that led to curing a deadly disease and saving millions of lives, does that make killing the Pope okay? No. Doing good doesn't nullify the bad inherent in the bad you have done.
"As for the stock issue, no one person or entity has a controlling stake of 51% in ATVI so then, in theory, no one could tell me I could not sell it used."
And no single person has a 51% share of the political power in the United States. Does that mean that you can legally kill the Pope if he vacations in the US? No, of course not. The US has collectively banned murder. And the game corporation's shareholders have collectively decided to issue you a _license_ to play the game you bought. They don't even need to make a subsequent decision to block you from selling the game because the _license_ is not property.
superdrew0413Jan 29, 2012
First, let me help you with a glaring error:
""Which sadly is more than any publisher guarantees now. I can't return an open game to any retailer except for the same game.""
"Hint: At many establishments, you can then turn around and return the unopened copy of the game you just got back ;)"
WRONG. I have worked for multiple retailers in the past and any exchange for a movie, cd, software, or game that came back opened was exchanged for the same title and the new copy was always opened before giving it to the customer. This was done to prevent the exact thing that you said. WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING above SCREWS the game company over because now I get TO PLAY THE GAME FOR FREE AND THEY GET NOTHING. So your "morals" are broken at best. I buy the game for $60, play it, beat it, return it open, get sealed copy, return for $60.
Second, are you honest comparing me selling a used game and using the proceeds to by a new game to a contract for murder on the Pope and curing cancer? That is a big f**king leap.
Third, you are still not getting the point that the game company does not guarantee my enjoyment of a game, even now. Activision can write on the box "2011's best game." That does not mean that I will think it is the best game of the year. They don't let me return the game if I don't feel that it is. They can write 50+ hours of gameplay on the box, but it doesn't mean I will enjoy all 50 hours. It could be a piece of crap.
I am not saying that I own the content of the disc, simply that I do own the disc and I can do with the physical disc (not the content) whatever I please including resell it. All new cars have computer chips on them which contain lines of code written by programmers. These lines of code are copywritten by the makers of the automobile. I CAN still resell my car. Under your rules I would not be able to. Soon no one would be able to sell refridgerators, tvs, stereo recievers, or anything with a chip according to you.
nerysJan 27, 2012
"It's an interesting question. I know that selling a used car is not like selling a used game, but it's hard to explain why. Let me try one or two ways."
you have a core logic failure.
There is flat out absolutely positively NO difference between selling a used car and selling a used video game.
"Think about utility - usefulness. "
Irrelevant. this is RELATIVE to each person. I REREAD books I have already read. I rewatch movie and tv I have already watched. I REPLAY videos games I have already played.
You have zero valid point here.
"But the most important thing is that when you buy/sell a used game, the developer doesn't get a dime from that sale."
When I sell a used book the publisher gets nothing
When I sell a used car the auto maker gets nothing
When I sell a used house the Builder/Architech gets nothing
When I sell a CD the label gets nothing
When I sell an old Bissel Vac Bissel gets nothing.
THAT IS THE POINT. "I" get a return on what I paid. YOU (seller developer etc..) deserve NOTHING. its MY PROPERTY NOW.
"developers see that gamers enjoy a style of game, then they try to make games like it."
you don't think this same thing happens in other mediums? popular styles of books. popular styles of clothing. popular styles of cars? you have zero point here. what are you trying to say? it applies to EVERYTHING equally.
"I'd much rather live in the world in which there are _no_ used games"
in your world the developers would go HUNGRY and the industry would DIE
the reason is simple. I am many others would CEASE to buy games. Period. no more games.
part of the "value" of buying a $60 game is the knowledge that if I do not like it I can RESELL IT and recoup at least some of my costs.
in your world I would never buy a game. its that simple. I will not relinquish my personal property rights under any conditions.
Developers (or anyone else) have NO RIGHT to profit or income. that is a PRIVILEGE granted by US in society.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
My world is coming. That's the point.
nerysJan 28, 2012
and I will NOT participate in your world. THAT is the point. ENOUGH of us will not "participate" in your world that those companies who move toward your world "WILL DIE"
its really that simple.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"When I sell a used house the Builder/Architech gets nothing"
This is a good example. The builder/architect charges you the entire cost of their work at the time the house is built - it's built into the cost of the house. $50 does not cover the entire cost of the game - a game costs millions, in some cases tens of millions, of dollars. $50 covers your share of the cost of the game. It does not cover the share of the person who buys the game from you.
Same goes for books, CDs, movies, and prostitutes - you do not get to resell any of them when you're done. Unless you hate them and don't want them to exist. In which case, I suppose it's a good idea.
nerysJan 28, 2012
If the game developer FAILS to charge me the full cost of their work that is "THEIR" problem not mine.
They sell a game based on if they can sell "enough copies" to recoup their total investment cost. That is how "media" Is sold.
if it cost $5 million to make the game then they need to sell 125,000 copies ($40 per $10 for the retailer) to "break even"
that means EVERY SINGLE COPY sold past 125,000 is PURE PROFIT.
even if it cost an astonishing $20 MILLION to make a game (NO game has cost that much yet) they only need to sell 500,000 copies to break even. How many copies did MW3 sell?
now got anything else to say smart ass?
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"$20 MILLION to make a game (NO game has cost that much yet)"
"GTA 4 Cost $100M To Make"
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/38395/GTA-4-Cost-100M-To-Make
"($40 per $10 for the retailer)"
You forgot a few things. <http://the-games-master.com/game-files/2010/02/Anatomy-60-dollar-video-game.jpg&amp;gt; Firstly, game discs tend to cost $60 rather than $50. Retailers do take a chunk, yes. Some get returned - unsold, broken, otherwise - and that works out to about $7 per disc. Distribution costs $4 per disc. And the console maker takes about $7. So, based on this, from a $60 game, the developer/publisher split $27.
So a $100 million game would need to sell 3.7 million copies _JUST_ to recoup its costs. It would need to take an additional $5 million or so for each year spent on development, just to recover lost income.
Further, according to <http://kotaku.com/5407981/how-much-did-it-cost-to-make-modern-warfare-2&amp;gt;, Modern Warfare 2 cost $40-50 million and Gran Turismo 2 cost over $60 million, and so on.
Now, of course, not every game costs dozens of millions of dollars to produce, and not ever game sells millions of copies. But it's beside the point. The game is _worth_ the aggregate amount that individuals are willing to pay for it, and that's how much the creators deserve to earn from it.
nerysJan 28, 2012
Cat got your tongue? I notice you have not replied to the above comment.
I wonder why.
in YOUR twisted moral world the moment they sold enough copies to fully pay for the cost of making the game they should be REQUIRED to now give it away for free or the cost of materials to print off a new copy.
nerysJan 28, 2012
The developers DESERVE nothing its a commercial venture. THEY EARN what the consumer base is willing to pay.
years of income is PART of the cost. can't extract that and count is separately.
so they need to sell 4 million copies to break even
SO its free after 4 million right?
Analysts are predicting they will sell TWENTY FIVE MILLION COPIES of GTA V.
I'd call that one hell of a profit. yet their GREED is never ending.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"in YOUR twisted moral world the moment they sold enough copies to fully pay for the cost of making the game they should be REQUIRED to now give it away for free or the cost of materials to print off a new copy."
I must be missing something, because I do not see how that is the case at all.
nerysJan 28, 2012
so your saying your ONE WAY? your saying this is a one way street then?
if its OK to prevent me selling MY PROPERTY if I got "FULL USE" out of it then its ALSO logical that once they reap FULL COMPENSATION for their costs that we now owe them NOTHING.
you can't have your cake and eat it too.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
But it's _not_ your property. The content is _their_ property. They are merely granting you a license to _use_ the content. _Your_ property is only the piece of plastic onto which the content has been encoded, which because of the dumbass precedent in this country, de facto grants you the right to sell the right to use the content.
Which is what's going to end.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
We basically can't hope to make any headway in settling this.
I see a copy of a game as a license from the creator to the breaker of the seal to use the creative content contained in the case in any non-commercial way they see fit. If you're not the one who broke the seal, you are not licensed to use the content.
You see a game disc as a license from the creator of the contents of the disc granting the bearer of the disc the right to use the content on the disc, which is why you feel it is legal and moral to buy and sell used games. Whoever holds the discs holds the licensed rights.
Download-only seeks to settle the matter, and frankly, I see the game companies pursuing this new business model as proof that they, the licensors, have always considered the license they were selling as being of this form.
Now, you're saying that you disagree with what the license means - that the game companies view the license as meaning one thing and you view it as meaning a different thing. But do you realize that nullifies the license? A license is a kind of contract, and for the contract to be legally formed, there must be a 'meeting of the minds', which in legal par lance means that the parties to the contract must understand and agree to what the contract means.
If you disagree with the licensor about what the license means, then the license is void and you have no right to play any of the games that you have bought.
Note: I am not a lawyer.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
Well, since I don't know when to quit, let's try another one.
Suppose that you and 9 friends went to Disney World. You bought 10 tickets at $50 each. You all get into the park, then you have a brilliant idea - you collect the 10 tickets and walk out of the park, to the ticket booth, and tell people that instead of paying $50 for a ticket from Disney, they can pay you $40 for one of our tickets. You sell 9 tickets, reducing the total per-person cost of your day at Disney to $14, then you walk back into the park on your own ticket, and all 19 of you enjoy a full day at Disney World.*
This is effectively what a used game is. Someone buy an experience (playing a video game or spending a day at Disney World), then they turn around and sell the same experience. They haven't lost anything by selling the experience because they get/got the full experience too. Obviously this doesn't work because your $50 does not cover the cost of running the park for a day. That $50 price point is designed from the premise that it permits ONE person to enjoy the park for ONE day. If they had to charge the FIRST person to come into the park the FULL cost of running the park, no one would attend.
In a quasi-socialist system you could imagine that the government would pay the costs of producing the experience, the private company would reimburse as much of that cost as they can, and would then be able to keep whatever profits are generated. This is practically the Chinese system - for example, the Shanghai government is effectively licensing the idea of Disneyworld from Disney. They are paying all the costs of building and running the upcoming Disney Shanghai park, and splitting the revenue with Disney. It remains to be seen whether this system will actually work.
But in OUR video game market, there is a de facto price cap on games (games over $60 are rare because a price over $60 is hard for some consumers to swallow) and the company has to make games that they think can sell enough copies to pay for their costs and provide a ROI to the investors (if the investors take their money out of the industry, game over).
* (To make this analogy truly work you have to assume the number of friends you brought is infinite since the second group of friends could then send one person outside and sell all but one ticket, and this could happen an unlimited number of times. If the original number of tickets is finite, there is a hard limit on the number of times this process can repeat. You also need to assume each iteration of the process takes an infinitesimal amount of time, so that everyone in the process can have the same amount of enjoyment from the experience. The 100th owner of a used game can play the entire game from beginning to end just as much as the original owner.)
donniehoward08Jan 26, 2012
Internet speeds won't ever be able to handle a large download like that. i don't want to download a game for 3 hours. furthermore, what happens to those that don't have HiSpeed access? they can't play games anymore? -these homes are still out there beleive it or not.
chadpyleJan 26, 2012
-"Internet speeds won't ever be able to handle a large download like that."
That reminds me of something a colleague said to me several years ago: "A forty gig hard drive! Who's ever going to use that much space!"
donniehoward08Jan 26, 2012
touche.. touche indeed.. I would love to see a broadband that could download a 5GB game (more like 15-20 at some point in the future) at a reasonable rate. .
barackalypseJan 26, 2012
5 Mbps Internet (which I had back in the late 1990's) can download 8 gigs in 4 hours. My current connection is 25 Mbps and 50 Mbps is available.
neotechniJan 27, 2012
"5 Mbps Internet (which I had back in the late 1990's) can download 8 gigs in 4 hours"
I can get a 50 GB PS3 game in 30 minutes by walking to the store and back
barackalypseJan 27, 2012
I got 3 games while I slept.
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
So, to make the point that internet speeds will outpace file size growth, you bring up the fact that file size growth has outpaced hard drive space growth?
Furthermore, assuming that the console came with a hard drive (for storing the games) that seemed 'big enough' when it was released, doesn't that mean that in a few years it will seem 'small'?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
breadfredJan 27, 2012
You are just trolling now. Terra byte drives are the norm for current spinning hard drives. Solid state hard drives are now available for under $150 for 120 gig and prices dropping fast and storage capacity is increasing steadily.
Bandwidth is increasing rapidly as well. In the summer I will get a 100% increase of bandwidth from 30mb to 60 mb at no additional cost.
Bandwidth will continue to increase over the next 10 years or so I would imagine, following Moore's Law.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
See elsewhere where I point out that you can get 2TB for $80ish. In this post I was acknowledging what looked like a flaw in his argument. You didn't really respond to the apparent flaw.
I personally think 2TB would be enough, but who knows...?
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
But now EVEN IF you're patient you have providers adding Bandwidth caps. When you have 100 - 250 gig caps every game is a HUGE chunk of that.
tastypastryJan 27, 2012
Haha, remember your first 120GB drive! Seemed like so much yet so little at the same time.
trdrstvJan 27, 2012
I remember my first 4 GB drive and I was Like Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn that's a lot of space.
Then again I also remember the 5.25" floppy drive
nerysJan 27, 2012
I still have my first 1gb drive. a quantum fireball. I remember being "GIDDY" as I plunked down the INCREDIBLE (at the time price) of $160 to upgrade my computer from 4mb ram to 8gb ram !!
breadfredJan 27, 2012
I upgraded my dad's pc from 20mb to 40mb. Yes, that was a while ago.
I also remember those large swappable hard drives f**king massive things at 20 mb. Used to swap them for back-ups.
nerysJan 28, 2012
I have one. the old MFM 20mb hard discs in the 286. I got windows 95 to run on one :-) hehe
had to put the install files (stripped) on one drive to "install" to the other drive :-)
asdafasdfafsadfafadafsasJan 26, 2012
"Internet speeds won't ever be able to handle a large download like that."
Yes it will, not now but... eventually. I remember 10 years ago I was lucky if I downloaded anything at 25 or 50kb/s, now I download full games up to 5mb/s on Steam.
Plus other alternatives are coming up like Onlive where you stream the games, no need to install anything. I tried it and the lag for the controls wasn't that bad, the image quality bugged me a lot more, but I imagine that some years from now there'll be bandwidth to make it a viable choice.
Anyway I doubt physical media will disappear any time soon.
donniehoward08Jan 26, 2012
right, so the immediate future would call for lower image quality and that would be annoying to me as well... most gamers are calling for a higher graphics meaning the download speeds would have to really improve to meet the needs/standard of the current market. so for now, i'll take my disc.
I do agree with you tho, the "never" was put in there out of reason.. I too can't wait for the extreme bandwidth speeds.
breadfredJan 27, 2012
It is all about distributed downloading - torrents. Technology is available now.
skellenerJan 27, 2012
Two words.... bandwidth caps.
zbeastJan 27, 2012
Sorry, internet connections are not everywhere and in most of the locations that do have internet. Slow bandwidth and data caps would make downloading your 4 to 20 gig game expensive and imposable.
Let's look at the ps3... every time I get a new game I have to spend 20 min's or more
downloading patches, updating my user account, patching the rom and god knows what else. Just to play a game that I just got from the store..
.
I don't need or want that same experience from the xbox.
also with games costing $70 it's nice to be able to sell them off when your done.
antobJan 26, 2012
I think the biggest difference is that you can stream a movie making it a great download option. Games (I am assuming) would need to be fully downloaded before playing.
I think having the option to purchase digital copies would be advantageous but there is too big a downside to not include physical media.
specimen7Jan 26, 2012
Backwards compatibility. I want to load up my fatal frame and elder scrolls from xbox 1.
Resale. Users should have the choice to sell old games.
ISP data caps. ISPs like comcast have monthly data caps and fickle download speeds.
It's not more "future-thinking " to trap gamers into an internet service which will inevitably have frustrating blackouts.
What happens if MS decides to ban you? Now you have an expensive box that can't play games.
justjohn025Jan 27, 2012
the only thing Microsoft needs to change for the next Xbox is to include a Blu-ray player and no more cd trays.
karmashockJan 27, 2012
because downloading 8 gigabytes over your parent's broadband will take forevah!
Discs have their uses especially for really content rich media.
A better question is why do we need consoles? Anyone tried OnLive recently? It's not as good as having the game locally but it's not bad.
I don't want to sound like I'm an ad for the company or something. But just consider the technology... You can play the latest games on a crap machine. Piracy is totally impossible because the games never are on the local machine. Its solves a lot of problems.
If we can get internet speeds up then resolution can improve and that will mean it makes more sense for people to have cheap disposable dumb terminal game systems that link into a game mainframe/cloud. Upgrades are pointless... everyone will have the same hardware and will always be the latest.
It kind of solves all the problems. Of course it won't work in places where they don't have solid internet but still... if we're asking the big questions... that's the question I'd ask.
casianbdaJan 27, 2012
I really hope this doesn't happen, living in Bermuda, a very tiny island, I need discs to play games!
Its hard enough to download a 15 MB update, let alone a 20 GB game.
Closed AccountJan 27, 2012
because not everyone wants to wait an hour for the game to downlaod and start.
vassoomJan 26, 2012
The "rumor" that Microsoft will attempt to implement some "as-of-yet-unspecified" technology to prevent used games from being played is a pretty outrageous assertion. There would be a major backlash if games purchased legally via the secondary market were prevented from working on the new Xbox console. I seriously doubt this "rumor" to be anything more than wild speculation.
Secondly, it is unrealistic to expect the average US gamer to have the type of high-speed internet connection (sans bandwidth caps) required to regularly download 25GB - 50GB games for their console.
I have no doubt that more and more titles will become available in electronic format since the industry has so much to gain from purely electronic distribution (albeit somewhat less so for the consumer/player), but to create a new console that REQUIRED that by omitting a disc player would be a foolish and most likely fatal strategic decision.
This article is more noise than substance.
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
I wouldn't be surprised if this upcoming (or the next) console cycle featured one console WITH disc drive and one withOUT, with the latter one being a little cheaper and/or including a hard drive in place of the disc drive.
Only problem is that I don't see why retailers would want to stock consoles if they can't sell the games, unless they somehow get to jack up the price considerably this time around. Traditionally retailers made little or no profit on consoles and made all their money on games.
shingoexJan 26, 2012
It will have to be an incredibly large HDD, considering the space these new games are going to require.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"Incredibly large"? I got a 2TB USB hard drive a year ago for like $80, retail. Even assuming they are 50GB per game, it could store 40 games at once. And sure, there will be games that are bigger. We call those outliers.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shingoexJan 27, 2012
There's $80 tacked on to the price of the console.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
And how much knocked off by not having an optical drive?
shingoexJan 27, 2012
Add to that the cost of high-speed internet, which isn't free, and not everyone has it.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
Subtract from it your face.
shingoexJan 28, 2012
And with that, you've completely nullified your argument. Good job.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
Luckily we won't really know for 5+ years :)
shingoexJan 28, 2012
2013 isn't 5 years from now.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
I said this upcoming generation or the next generation. The next generation after the upcoming one would be 5+ years away.
shingoexJan 28, 2012
Not necessarily. Remember, it was around 4 years difference between the launch of the Sega Saturn and Sega Dreamcast ('94/'98).
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
True. Do you consider Dreamcast to be its own generation, or is it part of the PS2/XBOX generation? Wiki considers it part of the PS2/XBOX generation. Nonetheless, 2013+4yr=2017, which is 5 years away :p
Anyway, I forget which one of us is saying there will be no optical drive in the generation after the next generation, so I'mma call it a night.
shingoexJan 28, 2012
I'm referring to DC in the sense it's a generation of Sega consoles. As far as the overall console generation, yes, it was the first of the sixth generation systems (which included PS2/GC/Xbox)
I'd stick with the optical drive.
mawdsJan 26, 2012
Sony were going to prevent second hand games from working on the PS3, then realised that would be f**king stupid and never did it.
They have found a way around losing money via second hand games by having an online pass.
What they might do is offer games earlier as a digital download, but be more expensive. "Here, you can have the game a week early but it will cost you 10 bucks more"
Try and grab the attention of people that just have to have the game before anyone else and are dumb enough to pay more.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
"grab the attention of people that just have to have the game before anyone else and are dumb enough to pay more"
So I assume you don't buy any games until they're $10-20 in the used bin?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
mawdsJan 27, 2012
In the UK the price of games are annoying, about £40.
In about 4 weeks, sometimes less, sometimes more, they start to reduce the price of games to around £25-£30.
Then a couple of weeks more, they can go down further. And these are for new games, not preowned.
Unless it's a game you really want, it's best to just wait.
If a game doesn't sell then they need to shift the stock.
I have been disappointed sometimes by buying a game new at full price and it's been s**t.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
Who gives a f**k about the UK?
paintballer747Jan 27, 2012
Perhaps people who live in the UK, blithering idiot.-_-
mawdsJan 27, 2012
Congratulations, you win this cookie.
Ingredients: AIDS
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
People live in the UK? Interesting. My question becomes, who gives a f**k about people who live in the UK? If they aren't sensible enough to live in a place I give a f**k about, f**k 'em. Wankers.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
I'm afraid I have cookies turned off.
mawdsJan 27, 2012
Dammit, foiled by a tick box.
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
Anyway, just kiddin' about f**king the UK. Love Hugh Laurie, Stephen Fry (especially their comedy duo show from, oh, all those years ago), Coupling, Monty Python... especially John Cleese... and the guy from Bean. Did you see this odd new show "Accused"? You assh**es need to start watching it so it doesn't get canceled.
I also liked your version of Big Brother for about 1.5 seasons, then it got a bit tiring.
But I will _NEVER_ understand your TV shows' little micro-seasons. 6 episodes (season one of Accused)? How is the show going to find an audience in 6 episodes?Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
neotechniJan 27, 2012
Why? Cause I don't want to spend 90% of my monthly quota or 90% of my month downloading 50 gigabyte games when I can walk to the store and back in 30 minutes. Nor do I want to pay a thousand dollars for microsoft brand terabyte harddrives.
myztryJan 27, 2012
I have the same issue with Steam.
When I need to re-install Windows, I need to make sure to copy of the Steam folder which is some 270GB rather than face downloading it all over again.
Only the last tier of my providers plans can accommodate that. Off-peak is a measly 8 hour period. Uploads and downloads go towards the quota.
http://www.transact.com.au/internet/plans
On the bright side, the connections are 30/60/100Mbs although I dropped back from 60Mbs as they had trouble supplying that level of bandwidth even on a cost premium.
StonnaJan 26, 2012
Couldnt they just be put on flash drives until an alternative is released?
shingoexJan 26, 2012
Have you seen the prices of flash drives? Hell, and *GB will run you the price fo a current gen title
$$$$$$$
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
8GB USB Flash Drive: $7.25 shipped on Pricewatch; $9 on newegg. That's the retail price, meaning it already comes with enough profit built-in to the price to pay for its way through the channel and the other $41-51 would be profit to the channel.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shingoexJan 26, 2012
Compare that to the price of pressing a BD-rom. We're talking FIFTY GB there. Do they even *have* 50GB flash drives? How much are those?
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
You know, just because the disc can hold 50GB (or w/e) doesn't mean the game actually has 50GB of content... FF XIII-2, for example, is under 15GB.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shingoexJan 26, 2012
We're talking a new-gen of games, which inevitably will require more data storage for both processing and texture rendering, ESPECIALLY if the new graphics card for 360 will natively support 1080p HD. 8GB on a flash drive won't cut it. 15GB won't cut it.
amaoicanJan 26, 2012
I chose FF XIII-2 as an example because I expect it to be on the high end of current-gen games. Yes, if you look at the high end of next-gen, it'll probably be significantly higher as well, but I'm thinking more along the lines of what will the average be.
Remember, Final Fantasy VII (PS1) was 2.1GB, and that doesn't mean that every PS2 game was 4+GB. Hell, many PS2 games shipped on CD.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
shingoexJan 26, 2012
Some first-0gen PS2 games shipped on CD until they realized the laser was crappy, thus forcing even small games to come out on DVD.
myztryJan 27, 2012
Please insert USB drive 4 of 7...
amaoicanJan 27, 2012
NO!
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
daemontools FTW!
myztryJan 27, 2012
On the Xbox?
breadfredJan 27, 2012
I remember loading doom with floppy's.... took a load of them....
VideoGamePrideJan 27, 2012
because the sellers of consoles make there money off the games/accessories. thats why games like GOW3 BF3 MW3 do not go to instant online market place. They need those people to sell there systems :)
wasimiqbalJan 27, 2012
http://bit.ly/zAfP7i Star Craft new Tools
craig1958Jan 27, 2012
Does anyone really think they will still be using stand alone gaming devices (let alone physical media) in 2020?
The "next xbox" will have a useful life of about 3-4 years until the new format comes along, as usual.
shingoexJan 27, 2012
What do you mean "as usual"? Placing the new system at the end of next year effectively gives the 360 an 8-year run, not counting the continued support after the next system comes out.
craig1958Jan 27, 2012
I believe there have been several versions of the xbox over that time, am I correct? My daughter has one from a few years ago, but I don't know if it's the latest. There are also other competing systems that leapfrog the MS system every few years (I think my kids have been through all of them). From what I've seen, staying up to date requirers replacing the entire system every few years. I'm I correct, or have I wasted a few $1000 on these toys?
My real point was, will these game system be incorporated into another device within the next decade? It seems like a no-brainer to incorporate these game boxes into a media server, or even into a TV monitor. I could do with less crap in my living room.
Also, I can't imagine that I will own any plastic discs by 2020. They are practically extinct for music and movies. My next computer certainly won't have a disc drive. If anything, new games (that are too large to download) should be distributed on usb drives or SD cards. I can't believe anyone is talking about using discs in 2020; they will belong in the museum next to the 8 track tapes.
shingoexJan 27, 2012
Those "versions" of the 360 are redesigned/reconfigurations of the same basic console.
craig1958Jan 27, 2012
OK. I was just curious. My youngest daughter is 16 and has almost outgrown gaming. Hopefully, I will never have to buy another one of these systems.
Closed AccountJan 30, 2012
"My youngest daughter is 16 and has almost outgrown gaming."
Times have changed quite a bit since this was true. The average age of a "gamer" is 32 and continues to rise. A decade or two ago it seemed as though gaming was limited to children since most of their parents simply missed or misunderstood the new medium. But what we've seen is that children tend to continue playing games into adulthood. You daughter is no more likely to outgrow gaming than she is to outgrow reading, listening to music or watching television.
http://goo.gl/UxpA8
craig1958Jan 30, 2012
Too late, she's already pretty much over it. From what I've seen, she has barely touched a game in about a year. She's just too busy doing other things and already spends too much time looking at a computer screen everyday. No offense guys, but I find that gaming gets very boring very quickly; by the time I hit 25 or 30, I had no more interested in playing on a computer.
bahamut5098Jan 27, 2012
You get so much more out of your PC than any console. The modding community alone is worth getting a PC for gaming.
shingoexJan 28, 2012
I know of no PC that runs God Of War 3 or Halo Reach. Enlighten me.
bahamut5098Jan 28, 2012
The Orange Box. You're welcome. And eventually, you can emulate these games on your computer, like you can with SNES games.
shingoexJan 28, 2012
"Eventually". When you put it that way, consoles will "eventually" be able to run most PC games with the homebrew emulation scene.
And what does the Orange Box have to do with God Of War 3 or Halo Reach?
Closed AccountJan 30, 2012
"And what does the Orange Box have to do with God Of War 3 or Halo Reach?"
You're missing the PC gamer logic. Who needs the best games that are out today when you can emulate old console games from 20 years ago and cling to the aging Half-Life franchise and some user created mods!
I know to those of us who actually love playing current games it seems ridiculous. But just imagine if all you had was one or two legitimate releases every five years or so... you'd have to create some fantasy like that to convince yourself that PC gaming was still relevant.
bahamut5098Feb 1, 2012
@jab1981
PC Gaming is still relevant. I can have the latest game and have better graphics than any console ever could. You don't see Sony or XBox releasing new graphics card every day.
And why would I ever want to play XBox and pay some extra b/s bill for XBox Live on top of my internet bill to play online? Ridiculous, I know.
Also, you can burn games onto a DVD so your friend can play online with you. So either way, digital downloads win.
shingoexFeb 1, 2012
"I can have the latest game and have better graphics than any console ever could."
Except for console exclusives.
"And why would I ever want to play XBox and pay some extra b/s bill for XBox Live on top of my internet bill to play online?"
You have no idea how many people use this excuse. They cry about paying $5/month for an entire library of online multiplayer, but will gladly shell out $15/month for a single game (WoW).
If you can't afford $5/month, you should find another hobby.
And please don't use the piracy excuse. It undermines your argument. BTW...you can pirate on consoles, though I don't condone it, so either way, that excuse is nullified.
dansstudio2011Feb 17, 2012
2/3 rd of the Development Built Free lol and share
dansstudio2011Feb 17, 2012
2/3 rd of the Development Built Free lol and share
BananateeJan 28, 2012
a flash drive with a USB port would be a great way to store games. You could put a few on it and it is harder to break than a disc.
linuxpersonJan 27, 2012
One of the big problems with downloadable games is that most platforms restrict their use to a single console at a time. On the Xbox for example, downloaded games are tied to your gamertag which can only be active on one console at a time.
If I want to go play it on my Xbox in a different room, I'm pretty much screwed unless I go through the process of restoring my gamertag and downloading the game.
Closed AccountJan 30, 2012
This isn't exactly true. On the 360 typically a DLC game is tied to the console you bought it on AND your gamertag. I believe this feature is used at least in part to make sure you can still play your games offline. Since the purchase is tied to the console it can be used when offline or by any user who wishes to play the game. There is no reason you wouldn't be able to play games in another room or on a second console.
My wife and I use this to play co-op games over Live together. I purchase the game on the main console. Then my wife can log in and play the game, meanwhile I take my gamertag to the second console log in and as long as I'm connected to Live I can play the game from the second console. Since the game is tied to the original console AND my gamertag we're able to play the game from both consoles and make use of any internet co-op features.
Oh and FWIW if you're "restoring" your gamertag on your second console, you might be better off buying a really cheap USB drive. Save your gamertag to that, then you just plug it into whatever console you want to use and you can begin playing. It's simple, easy and cheap. Plus, if you buy a big enough one you can probably fit the game you're trying to play onto it to avoid having to re-download that title on each console you want to play it on.
33percentgodJan 27, 2012
I recently got a new video card and tried to log in to Steam only to be told my account is "suspended." I submitted a help ticket to see what the f**k is going on, but in the meantime ALL my games are inaccessible because they are tied to Steam and bought via DL. Physical media is still something I want because of things like this.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
In that case you may want to convince your fellow gamers to STOP buying used games! It's just a big old fat excuse to END physical media.
quadraqJan 27, 2012
Well that would be one way to prevent selling used games.
Closed AccountJan 27, 2012
With HD Netflix streaming, HD Hulu streaming, internet radio, Steam downloads... let's not forget Comcast and most ISPs have bandwidth caps in place. My household manages to hit about half of my allotment already, downloading XBox games with any regularity would probably guarantee I'll be having my cable service shut off.
mazebotJan 27, 2012
Not everyone has even basic internet speeds (500Kbits +)
add with the increasing size of discs (20+GB)
people can't be expected to be connected 24h for 8-9 days straight, and in turn, has even slower browsing speeds then before.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
500 kilobits per second is BASIC internet speed?
Woo. I remember when 56 kilobits per second was "fast".
nerysJan 28, 2012
remember that is kilo bit or "50K" (NOT very fast)
your 56k modem connect was about 5K at a time when the average web page was 20-30K
I would NOT call a 500k connection broadband. that is not even enough for a single voip line. I have 1mb (100K) at work and its HORRIBLE for anything but the simplest of things. even web pages can take forever to load (minutes)
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
So? MP3s were just as big. I actually think they can be a bit smaller these days while being just as high-quality.
norman619Jan 27, 2012
Nothing beats install media. Anyone who bought a PC game that required Steam authentication and had internet issues prevent them from playing found the huge flaw in this plan. And let's not forget if you don't have a nice and fast internet connection having to download MULTIPLE GIGS is a pain. I made the mistake of buying a real game on Steam and had to wait hours for the damned thing to download. When I had to wipe my system I gave Steam the finger and went to my local Gamestop and bought a regular copy of the game I bought via Steam.
chrmehJan 27, 2012
Because I like to be able to sell my games after I am done with them. This is just another way for businesses to make more money off consumers!
adalseyJan 27, 2012
CD's for games and music might be obsolete sooner that we anticipated.
adalseyJan 27, 2012
CD's for games and music might be obsolete sooner that we anticipated.
mobberJan 27, 2012
if i could get a game instantly downloaded to my drive, XBOX keep a record of my games, I wouldn't buy a disc again. the games should be cheaper though.
we could preorder the game & wake up with it downloaded .
we already download content. maps.
shingoexJan 27, 2012
Then you'd be screwed if Xbox Live ever gets shut down.
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
So you're saying it's a win-win...
maxya123Jan 27, 2012
It needs disks so they would get protected by new DRM or just to have fun from kids, who scratched their disks and have to buy another copy.
mogwuyJan 27, 2012
Most household internet connections are probably around 10mb down and like 2-3mb up. Also most ISPs and cable companies advertise there speeds as "up to (insert speed here)". Which basically means you could get up to those speeds but you aren't garuanteed anything. It could potentially take 2-3 days to download a game at 50Gb plus on top of that, imagine millions of people trying to download a new game off the same server. Not good. Discs are good for instant play and also resale value for new games.
I can't see Microsoft stopping users from reused games
jaketyson85Jan 27, 2012
because BILL GATE is greedy and afraid of PIRATING. END OF STORY.
myztryJan 27, 2012
Bill Gates doesn't work for Microsoft.
He jumped ship when things starting going down hill.
Getting out while the going is good is a smart idea.
rabbitsinblackJan 26, 2012
If America can lower the cost of Internet and increase speeds then no problem. This also includes mobile phones.
bestenemyJan 27, 2012
Having an external HD-DVD was actually a smart design decision. With the format now obsolete, the console itself did not suffer. Had Sony, for instance, lost the battle, they'd have much harder time dealing with a console revolving around a built in drive system.
Next time around Xbox should do the same thing it did last time - have a drive, but not a permanent version. Maybe a port that will come with a disc drive by default, leaving the end user with an option to swap it for something else (like an internal hard drive). That'll obviously open a can of worms in terms of content protection as hackers will jump right into interface exploitation but hey... they'll do it anyway.
Media-less systems such as PSP Go have failed to capture the market, so there's no reason to abandon old distribution formats just yet.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
neotechniJan 27, 2012
Except bluray won because Sony built it in.
myztryJan 27, 2012
Bluray didn't exactly win. DVD is still by far the most popular and common format.
Our Australian Blockbusters put aside about 2 shelf racks out of the whole store for BluRay. It just doesn't give enough value. It's a relatively minor increment unlike VHS > DVD.
People just don't have the surround sound setups (etc) that would give BluRay value, or are they likely unless they build dedicated media rooms.Comment is buried, click here to see the rest.
niceguyvanJan 27, 2012
Bluray isn't competing with DVD.
shingoexJan 27, 2012
Currently, it most certainly is.
linuxpersonJan 27, 2012
Most of the places I shop Bluray has been exploding. DVD isles are shrinking and Bluray is expanding. This is entirely the result of cheap bluray players.
DVD isn't going to die over night but neither did VHS. Bluray did win in a very big way.
myztryJan 28, 2012
There is also the issue of the price of relative price of BluRay discs to be dealt with...
The greedsters inflate what is no doubt a trivial production cost difference while still singing the song of "the value is in the title - not the medium."
onlinehealth86Jan 26, 2012
X box is ona really really cool console!I will buy one next months and can't wait to loose a lot of ours in gaming :)
ognatovskiyJan 27, 2012
lol wut
amaoicanJan 28, 2012
"Xbox is one cold-hearted console! I will buy one in the next few months and my wife and I can't wait to loose a lot of our children to starvation while we wile away our time in gaming."