Mainstream gamers are used to the AppStore like stuff with their phones. Cheap games, click it and it appears, and when you're done you're just done with it and move on. They've been grooming the entire youngest generation of gamers to think of solid copies as a stupid overpriced waste of space and it's working.
Mainstream gamers are used to the AppStore like stuff with their phones. Cheap games, click it and it appears, and when you're done you're just done with it and move on. They've been grooming the entire youngest generation of gamers to think of solid copies as a stupid overpriced waste of space and it's working.
They're also grooming the handheld "click, buy, play" market to $1 games that they don't care if they get wiped or not... however, they can redownload the app when they upgrade their phone of the same platform (at least for Apple and Blackberry, unsure about droid, though I'd imagine they could), so they can always play it later on, on newer hardware. Sony is killing all backward compatibility with the PS 4/Orbitus. And the fact you HAVE to have an internet connection to your console may also kill it for those that don't have internet. They're really pushing many types of gamers out of this upcoming generation:
- Those that have no access to the internet
- Those that don't want to have their games tied to an account/console
- Those that don't want to buy a preowned game and get paid for a licensing fee
- Those that know how much shoveware was out there in this generation will be very skeptical for buying new games that they get little to none returns on since it locks the game to their console
- Collectors
And I'm sure even more could be added to that list. We have a very wide range of gamers here, and 63% voted "no" based on what Sony and Microsoft are about to pull. Granted we aren't the world say, but that's a pretty big percentage.
at this point it is rumor but I totally.agree if fiction becomes fact. At a friends forum we are discussing this too. Basically if the rumor goes fat as much as I don't like it I will give up on playstation as much as I'd truly miss stuff like uncharted.
I bet the new systems will have something like the kindle's cell data where it can register the games without you having to connect it to anything. or they may use some kind of NFC (RFID like but on a different frequency and encoding so end users won't be able to hack it easily) imbedded in the hub on the disk that writes the consoles serial to it and when another orbus or whatever tries to read that code it will just refuse to play the disk.
I think not having a physical media option will be absolute suicide for the next consoles. I wouldn't dare buy something without physical media I can actually own. But even then, with all those codes to access multiplayer and the full game basically, even then you still down own much. You don't even own the DLC on disk unless you pay more. You don't have any right to do as you please with your systems either. I hate gaming all around today.
I think not having a physical media option will bu absolute suicide for the next consoles. I wouldn't dare buy something without physical media I can actually own.
This makes a lot of sense to most of us. You also have to think outside yourself, and realize how many casual gamers there are, that buy everything that comes out, regardless of price or functionality, but simply because it's new. Apple products are a fine example of this. 75% of people that must have the new release of Apple items, are dumb as fuck and only use 25% of the product's capability. If lockouts or download only games should happen...these products would be more sucessful than you would think. A lot of gamers play and move on to the next game, collecting nothing.
Absolutely! I've had something if not all consoles from the past generations and current.
However ...
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country and plus, help put an end (at least in terms of a date) of my hobby. I know I can count on Nintendo to not do this, so you can damn bet I'll be there for the Wii U. I just hope they take another step forward in the world of online and has a large quantity of quality games.
It wouldn't break my heart if I no longer support Microsoft or Sony. I could only dream that Sega would get back in the game, though. That would be just awesome to be back to them and the Big N.
IDK, if I can't OWN a game I don't like it. I like the idea of having the option, tangible or intangible. Maybe a download for X price, and a download for a slightly low/higher price. Maybe I'm just stuck in my ways, I like having a physical copy of crap, it maybe be just paranoia but I'm always afraid my HDD will crash and I'll loose everything.
Things are getting worse and worse. We've gone from no backwards compatibility to having downloaded games locked to your system or account, and now this lock-out BS. I don't mind digital downloads, but I do mind not being able to transfer the data I paid money for. I paid extra to have the install file of a game versus relying on Steam. I've sided with Sony for a long time, but I seriously don't know if I could get their next system if these rumors are true.
I really hated Nintendo for binding my digital downloads to one console, so I'd like to boycott the Wii-U if it's going to be the same, but I'll probably end up buying it because of Pikmin 3. Good job, Nintendo!
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worthwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
I think we can all agree that digital download is bad for people who want to collect future generations of games.
But it is good for gamers, as evidenced by the many, many interesting digital-only releases (there are good examples on every platform) that would have never seen the light of day in the traditional physical media retail model.
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worhwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
You mean saturating the already over saturated industry is a good thing? The rest of your post I agree with 100%, but not with this High tech jobs, while expanding, aren't expanding fast enough to meet the wants of people who are trying to get into them, plus all the "paper techs" out there that truly can't do the job, but don't get fired/repositioned/etc because they meet the qualifications of the position. Besides, do we really need another Color Dreams/Wisdom Tree esque company?
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worhwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
You mean saturating the already over saturated industry is a good thing? The rest of your post I agree with 100%, but not with this High tech jobs, while expanding, aren't expanding fast enough to meet the wants of people who are trying to get into them, plus all the "paper techs" out there that truly can't do the job, but don't get fired/repositioned/etc because they meet the qualifications of the position. Besides, do we really need another Color Dreams/Wisdom Tree esque company?
Useless people get fired all the time. The only qualification I know of that really protects some incompetent is a top secret clearance where the contract organization gets money for filling a seat with a warm body. And that is changing pretty quickly as wars spool down.
I don't see how "paper techs" would survive in a deliverables-oriented job like dev work. It's too easy to weed out the useless and move on. This isn't about useless people being able to hide behind layers and layers of middle management, to eventually be swept up in mass layoffs.
Also, I'd challenge that the game industry is not a saturated market, when it comes to making good games that are actually worth playing.
The point of my post is that it is better to have the market support a greater variety of innovative content from small developers, than to have it consolidated in the hands of a few mega-studios. It's better for gamers and it's almost certainly better for the individual devs, since with small studios they see a greater share of the profits, rather than having it watered down by the corporation.
That said, I could easily imagine an implosion of at least one console maker, given the massive fiasco Sony suffered with the PS3 and bad cost vs attach rate predictions.
Fewer platforms probably wouldn't be a bad thing, either, though, for anyone other than factory workers in China.
If we went purely digital, small/independent developers would strive much easier to a wider audience than now, I do agree with that. But yes, lots of paper techs retain their positions because of their qualifications. I've seen it in the last 4 places I've worked, granted it's not the game dev industry, but the high tech field covers the whole spectrum from PC support, to application developer, to PC/Server maintenance.
The gaming industry isn't saturated with great titles, but it is saturated with sub par games and shovelware. From what I've seen in the last 2 generations is that developers focus on 2 things as top priority: anti-piracy measures, and graphics. Games shouldn't cost Hollywood budgets since we're playing a video game, not an interactive movie, so if this whole thing shifts to better quality games, I'm definitely down for it. If it goes all digital though, prices would need to be slashed significantly from the $60 price tag and the console would need to be less than they currently are now with higher reliability for me to consider it (this is just my opinion/feelings).
^^^ I would think the other advantage of all-digital, especially in a sea of mediocrity, is that the guys who know they have a good title will start offering playable demos, or episodic content, so the initial buy-in to test the waters is less severe.
"digital distribution" itself doesn't exactly provide those advantages, it just gives the console makers the option. It gives more control to the console makers and they could easily still only allow the big companies or only the proven to publish the digital content if they wanted to and only make exceptions when they think it's beneficial, or to allow or not allow game publishers to provide free playable demos or episodic content or anything else.
Download only doesn't mean anything for indies, the console makers are the ones who won't give them the tools to make software on par with the 1st party companies. They need to give more people full access to the systems tools and then license games, not control who the development kits go to. Look at PC gaming, great indie games made on it because it's open for everyone to make stuff for.
If we went purely digital, small/independent developers would strive much easier to a wider audience than now, I do agree with that. But yes, lots of paper techs retain their positions because of their qualifications. I've seen it in the last 4 places I've worked, granted it's not the game dev industry, but the high tech field covers the whole spectrum from PC support, to application developer, to PC/Server maintenance.
The gaming industry isn't saturated with great titles, but it is saturated with sub par games and shovelware. From what I've seen in the last 2 generations is that developers focus on 2 things as top priority: anti-piracy measures, and graphics. Games shouldn't cost Hollywood budgets since we're playing a video game, not an interactive movie, so if this whole thing shifts to better quality games, I'm definitely down for it. If it goes all digital though, prices would need to be slashed significantly from the $60 price tag and the console would need to be less than they currently are now with higher reliability for me to consider it (this is just my opinion/feelings).
This. I don't see a justifiable reason for companies to keep charging $60 per game if there is no physical media to manufacture. If there is a good reason, I am all ears and will stand corrected if needed.
Regarding the digital-only rumor, I hope it isn't true. I just can't see having any pride in a digital-only collection of anything. As I'm sure most of us would be, I would gladly pay a bit more for physical media.
Digital games are worth less since they are temporary
This is not a true statement. Stuff from Steam, for instance, or GoG, is no more temporary than any of the physical media you own.
There is no reason the console makers can't subscribe to a similar business model where content is tied to a login with a checkout/unlock system in place.
If the games are linked to your account, and a few years down the road they abandon the database or network you are SOL. This is why they are temporary. You are depending on the company to continue wanting to give you access to the games, or even remaining around to do so.
Also PCs are a bit different, as they have been backwards compatible for decades. I can still play a DOS game from forever ago on my Windows 7 system. I can upgrade my PC or buy a new one. The way consoles companies have been operating their digital business so far, is every new system requirs the repurchase of games. That could change, but at the same time companies are weak on backwards compatability. If I buy PS4 games, then I move on to the PS5 and it can't handle PS4 games, I'm SOL again. YOu could cling to your old system forever, but it probably won't be supported and you probably can't log into multiplayer games, and probably won't even be able to play them at all as the database is abandoned.
I can play NES games whether Nintendo goes out of business or not.
Also to those argueing that only collectors care about this, you are wrong. Go to any main stream gaming site, and you will see your average gamer threatening a boycott. This is because of things like not being able to trade in their games, or bring them to their friend's houses.
Adam, on your comment about 'if all digital..prices would need to be slashed' part, I hate to break it to you, but they won't. My brother called me this afternoon and knowing this thread I asked him a few questions about the rumor with Sony and digital distribution.
Basically Sony and MS are working on something, but not the death of the used market. They are going go likely with a unified system, the thing I mentioned, where off the hub of the hardware if it detects a game you give it the code it came with, if not, you pay a flat rate across the board per game to fire it up, say like $10. This will keep used around, and ultimately will only punish the crap out of Gamestop as they'll be forced to lower their used prices the 'reset fee' and then some to entice those to not buy used.
Now here's the crap part, digital is coming. He told me where things are going and how it looks to stretch out. As with DVD when it hit a wall they went do double sided DVD like the 360 uses. Well they're working on a high capacity double sided blu-ray which is faster than they are now too. They'll want to keep blu-ray around for quite a few years until the nations and global infrastructure is around to support at least the megabit if not the gigabit broadband connections. So like with the PS4/MS whatever they'll be doing dual releases, Sony is testing it now with VITA. Basically on vita you can buy a $40 disc, or a $35 digital copy. With consoles due to the higher cost it will be a $50 download or a $60 hard copy. They'll do this, and once the broadband catches up, they'll in the PS5 era(or 6 if need be 10-15 years out) go digital only. They will claim it's to save money, kill piracy, and bring down their costs. In the end, used games are going to die, and all of us will have to suck it up or pack up and leave town because the era of a system lifespan 'rental' of a purchase is where it is going and it is already decided. The when is whenever the global internet speeds in general can handle broadband basically anywhere, my guess would be a gigabit connect at the least due to the huge size some games are now and will increase in size.
I assume you're referring to dual layer and not double sided, since we don't have to pop our games out and flip them over
However, that sucks to hear about the future of gaming. Looks like this current generation will be my last generation of gaming, which sucks. I guess we all come to a point where we stop, and it looks like that's where my ride ends with the mainstream market. Oh well.
Adam, on your comment about 'if all digital..prices would need to be slashed' part, I hate to break it to you, but they won't. My brother called me this afternoon and knowing this thread I asked him a few questions about the rumor with Sony and digital distribution.
Basically Sony and MS are working on something, but not the death of the used market. They are going go likely with a unified system, the thing I mentioned, where off the hub of the hardware if it detects a game you give it the code it came with, if not, you pay a flat rate across the board per game to fire it up, say like $10. This will keep used around, and ultimately will only punish the crap out of Gamestop as they'll be forced to lower their used prices the 'reset fee' and then some to entice those to not buy used.
Now here's the crap part, digital is coming. He told me where things are going and how it looks to stretch out. As with DVD when it hit a wall they went do double sided DVD like the 360 uses. Well they're working on a high capacity double sided blu-ray which is faster than they are now too. They'll want to keep blu-ray around for quite a few years until the nations and global infrastructure is around to support at least the megabit if not the gigabit broadband connections. So like with the PS4/MS whatever they'll be doing dual releases, Sony is testing it now with VITA. Basically on vita you can buy a $40 disc, or a $35 digital copy. With consoles due to the higher cost it will be a $50 download or a $60 hard copy. They'll do this, and once the broadband catches up, they'll in the PS5 era(or 6 if need be 10-15 years out) go digital only. They will claim it's to save money, kill piracy, and bring down their costs. In the end, used games are going to die, and all of us will have to suck it up or pack up and leave town because the era of a system lifespan 'rental' of a purchase is where it is going and it is already decided. The when is whenever the global internet speeds in general can handle broadband basically anywhere, my guess would be a gigabit connect at the least due to the huge size some games are now and will increase in size.
Lol, that really sounds like they are planning on stealing people's money to me.
Hehe, we are going to sell you this thing, and build something in it to break it when you sell it, but don't worry you can pay us more money to fix it each time
Don't you guys have some kinda first sale law there that this must be breaking to smitherines?
Edit:
Whatever their plan is, if it involves some sort of trick to force more money out of people instead of actually doing something to earn more money, it isn't going to work in the long run.
Yeah. I'm definitely getting the next gen. But not from Nintendo. I kinda lost hope for them sense I don't see any games that I'm interested from them anymore.
Yeah I meant dual layer, was totally whipped last night from being away all weekend.
Cradelit, pretty much yeah though it's not so much stealing as blackmail I suppose. Basically the idea was the gaming industry feels unique and entitled basically. I mean you can buy a book or a kindle book, a movie or a download movie, a cd or a pile of mp3s...but with games, they want that not to happen. Gaming very well could end up the model test child for the future. When they go dual release next generation in 2014 if they don't grow a brain and stop the nonsense that will be the last generation of discs along side of downloads, and they'll give the bigger price cut to ween people off physical media. If they can't force it, get sued, whatever over it, then it will stay optional, but if it works how they like and people keep buying crap from them and it doesn't fall off watch the dual layer blu-rays and current audio music options dry up, and books short of hard cover specialty stuff if e-readers keep penetrating going too.
See they're not actually breaking the games, that's the problem. They're in a way actually re-enforcing current laws with a game. Using the NES, back then you bought the plastic, board, chips, paper, stickers, etc and in all of that was 1 copy of a game. You bought the parts and the LICENSE to run one copy of it. With the laws then and now, if you can make a backup you can use it, but not use it and the original at the same time as that's two licenses. So when you forfeit your game to another party, that license is null. So all the companies are doing is selling someone another license and at a cheaper rate than buying a new disc. So unfortunately they're not breaking the law, they're just being jerks about backing it up for once to get paid more.
Yeah I meant dual layer, was totally whipped last night from being away all weekend.
Cradelit, pretty much yeah though it's not so much stealing as blackmail I suppose. Basically the idea was the gaming industry feels unique and entitled basically. I mean you can buy a book or a kindle book, a movie or a download movie, a cd or a pile of mp3s...but with games, they want that not to happen. Gaming very well could end up the model test child for the future. When they go dual release next generation in 2014 if they don't grow a brain and stop the nonsense that will be the last generation of discs along side of downloads, and they'll give the bigger price cut to ween people off physical media. If they can't force it, get sued, whatever over it, then it will stay optional, but if it works how they like and people keep buying crap from them and it doesn't fall off watch the dual layer blu-rays and current audio music options dry up, and books short of hard cover specialty stuff if e-readers keep penetrating going too.
See they're not actually breaking the games, that's the problem. They're in a way actually re-enforcing current laws with a game. Using the NES, back then you bought the plastic, board, chips, paper, stickers, etc and in all of that was 1 copy of a game. You bought the parts and the LICENSE to run one copy of it. With the laws then and now, if you can make a backup you can use it, but not use it and the original at the same time as that's two licenses. So when you forfeit your game to another party, that license is null. So all the companies are doing is selling someone another license and at a cheaper rate than buying a new disc. So unfortunately they're not breaking the law, they're just being jerks about backing it up for once to get paid more.
Yeah, except that isn't how it worked. They never made up this whole "you are only renting" or "you are only getting a restricted license to use this under certain circumstances" bullshit until later. When you bought a nes game, you bought a nes game. There was no license agreement or any other underhanded tricks or loopholes at the time. You bought a copy of a game, on a cart. And you can do what you want with that copy of a game on a cart because you owned it after you bought it. No you didn't own the rights to recreate the game, since that isn't what you bought. You did, however, own that copy of the game on a cart. They couldn't legally steal it back from you or control what you did with it, prevent you from using it or selling it or whatever. *you* couldn't legally reproduce it, but thats because of copyright law which restricts your actions, not because you didn't actually own your copy. This whole "only bought a license even though we sold you a product" bullshit didn't start until much more recently.
I know that, but that's how they write up the legalese on the stuff now so disgustingly so they're within their rights unless someone does some huge class action massive lawsuit against it and can pull off a win (and take no settlement on it.) I just went into my closet and read the legal bs on every generation of Nintendo games from NES through the Wii and 3DS and every single warranty makes no mention of a license at all, just that the 'game' is warranted against defects, etc. Seems to me that Nintendo is the only one not corrupt enough currently to play the 'bought a license' card as they specifically say 'game software' as in the program, not a right to run it.
Now I don't have MS junk, do have a PS3, did have a PSP and those two devices with their boot screens(first power on and with updates) the EULA does talk about solitary licenses and the rest. I don't recall all the fine print nor do I care, but I bet in there it does say one license perhaps non-transferable I don't know, but I'm sure they could easily upgrade a EULA to say so.
^ There was no license needed, because you only need a license to make copies and not just to use existing copies. Whoever actually made the copy of the software that you bought would have needed a license to do so. You needed licenses for computer software and such that required you actually creating your own install. The licenses were always still purchased and I would think should be covered under first sale doctrine though. They shouldn't have the right to prevent you from reselling the license you bought either.
I really think it should be a requirement by law that they state in large bold letters on the front of games that you are purchasing a license to play the game, you are not actually purchasing anything to own. Especially since you purchase these games from a third party retailer. You should really have to sign a contract right there at the register. How can I purchase something in a retail setting, then after they have my money, I open up a device I purchased and it tells me I am now entering into a license agreement. What.. No I'm not. I just put cash down at a retail store that sells physical goods. How can this be legal? Can Milton Bradley put a license agreement on the instruction manual that comes inside a board game, that you can only read once you have already payed for the game? Can this license state that if I purchased the game used I must mail MB $10 if I am to be legally allowed to place the pieces on the board and begin moving them around in the fashion MB has copy written?
Sorry this license issue has just annoyed me for a long time.
Comments
Originally posted by: Tanooki
Mainstream gamers are used to the AppStore like stuff with their phones. Cheap games, click it and it appears, and when you're done you're just done with it and move on. They've been grooming the entire youngest generation of gamers to think of solid copies as a stupid overpriced waste of space and it's working.
They're also grooming the handheld "click, buy, play" market to $1 games that they don't care if they get wiped or not... however, they can redownload the app when they upgrade their phone of the same platform (at least for Apple and Blackberry, unsure about droid, though I'd imagine they could), so they can always play it later on, on newer hardware. Sony is killing all backward compatibility with the PS 4/Orbitus. And the fact you HAVE to have an internet connection to your console may also kill it for those that don't have internet. They're really pushing many types of gamers out of this upcoming generation:
- Those that have no access to the internet
- Those that don't want to have their games tied to an account/console
- Those that don't want to buy a preowned game and get paid for a licensing fee
- Those that know how much shoveware was out there in this generation will be very skeptical for buying new games that they get little to none returns on since it locks the game to their console
- Collectors
And I'm sure even more could be added to that list. We have a very wide range of gamers here, and 63% voted "no" based on what Sony and Microsoft are about to pull. Granted we aren't the world say, but that's a pretty big percentage.
Originally posted by: 3GenGames
I think not having a physical media option will bu absolute suicide for the next consoles. I wouldn't dare buy something without physical media I can actually own.
This makes a lot of sense to most of us. You also have to think outside yourself, and realize how many casual gamers there are, that buy everything that comes out, regardless of price or functionality, but simply because it's new. Apple products are a fine example of this. 75% of people that must have the new release of Apple items, are dumb as fuck and only use 25% of the product's capability. If lockouts or download only games should happen...these products would be more sucessful than you would think. A lot of gamers play and move on to the next game, collecting nothing.
However ...
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country and plus, help put an end (at least in terms of a date) of my hobby. I know I can count on Nintendo to not do this, so you can damn bet I'll be there for the Wii U. I just hope they take another step forward in the world of online and has a large quantity of quality games.
It wouldn't break my heart if I no longer support Microsoft or Sony. I could only dream that Sega would get back in the game, though. That would be just awesome to be back to them and the Big N.
I really hated Nintendo for binding my digital downloads to one console, so I'd like to boycott the Wii-U if it's going to be the same, but I'll probably end up buying it because of Pikmin 3. Good job, Nintendo!
Originally posted by: Three
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worthwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
I think we can all agree that digital download is bad for people who want to collect future generations of games.
But it is good for gamers, as evidenced by the many, many interesting digital-only releases (there are good examples on every platform) that would have never seen the light of day in the traditional physical media retail model.
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: Three
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worhwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
You mean saturating the already over saturated industry is a good thing? The rest of your post I agree with 100%, but not with this High tech jobs, while expanding, aren't expanding fast enough to meet the wants of people who are trying to get into them, plus all the "paper techs" out there that truly can't do the job, but don't get fired/repositioned/etc because they meet the qualifications of the position. Besides, do we really need another Color Dreams/Wisdom Tree esque company?
Originally posted by: dra600n
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: Three
If direct digital download becomes standard I just may count myself out. I cannot support anything that will eliminate further jobs in this country
If anything, digital download shifts shitty retail jobs to worhwhile independent developers and high tech jobs, and better democratizes the game industry... I would say in the long run that is a good thing.
You mean saturating the already over saturated industry is a good thing? The rest of your post I agree with 100%, but not with this High tech jobs, while expanding, aren't expanding fast enough to meet the wants of people who are trying to get into them, plus all the "paper techs" out there that truly can't do the job, but don't get fired/repositioned/etc because they meet the qualifications of the position. Besides, do we really need another Color Dreams/Wisdom Tree esque company?
Useless people get fired all the time. The only qualification I know of that really protects some incompetent is a top secret clearance where the contract organization gets money for filling a seat with a warm body. And that is changing pretty quickly as wars spool down.
I don't see how "paper techs" would survive in a deliverables-oriented job like dev work. It's too easy to weed out the useless and move on. This isn't about useless people being able to hide behind layers and layers of middle management, to eventually be swept up in mass layoffs.
Also, I'd challenge that the game industry is not a saturated market, when it comes to making good games that are actually worth playing.
The point of my post is that it is better to have the market support a greater variety of innovative content from small developers, than to have it consolidated in the hands of a few mega-studios. It's better for gamers and it's almost certainly better for the individual devs, since with small studios they see a greater share of the profits, rather than having it watered down by the corporation.
Fewer platforms probably wouldn't be a bad thing, either, though, for anyone other than factory workers in China.
The gaming industry isn't saturated with great titles, but it is saturated with sub par games and shovelware. From what I've seen in the last 2 generations is that developers focus on 2 things as top priority: anti-piracy measures, and graphics. Games shouldn't cost Hollywood budgets since we're playing a video game, not an interactive movie, so if this whole thing shifts to better quality games, I'm definitely down for it. If it goes all digital though, prices would need to be slashed significantly from the $60 price tag and the console would need to be less than they currently are now with higher reliability for me to consider it (this is just my opinion/feelings).
I'm praying for tidal waves
I wanna see the ground give way.
I wanna watch it all go down.
Originally posted by: dra600n
If we went purely digital, small/independent developers would strive much easier to a wider audience than now, I do agree with that. But yes, lots of paper techs retain their positions because of their qualifications. I've seen it in the last 4 places I've worked, granted it's not the game dev industry, but the high tech field covers the whole spectrum from PC support, to application developer, to PC/Server maintenance.
The gaming industry isn't saturated with great titles, but it is saturated with sub par games and shovelware. From what I've seen in the last 2 generations is that developers focus on 2 things as top priority: anti-piracy measures, and graphics. Games shouldn't cost Hollywood budgets since we're playing a video game, not an interactive movie, so if this whole thing shifts to better quality games, I'm definitely down for it. If it goes all digital though, prices would need to be slashed significantly from the $60 price tag and the console would need to be less than they currently are now with higher reliability for me to consider it (this is just my opinion/feelings).
This. I don't see a justifiable reason for companies to keep charging $60 per game if there is no physical media to manufacture. If there is a good reason, I am all ears and will stand corrected if needed.
Regarding the digital-only rumor, I hope it isn't true. I just can't see having any pride in a digital-only collection of anything. As I'm sure most of us would be, I would gladly pay a bit more for physical media.
Originally posted by: arch_8ngel
Originally posted by: cradelit
Digital games are worth less since they are temporary
This is not a true statement. Stuff from Steam, for instance, or GoG, is no more temporary than any of the physical media you own.
There is no reason the console makers can't subscribe to a similar business model where content is tied to a login with a checkout/unlock system in place.
If the games are linked to your account, and a few years down the road they abandon the database or network you are SOL. This is why they are temporary. You are depending on the company to continue wanting to give you access to the games, or even remaining around to do so.
Also PCs are a bit different, as they have been backwards compatible for decades. I can still play a DOS game from forever ago on my Windows 7 system. I can upgrade my PC or buy a new one. The way consoles companies have been operating their digital business so far, is every new system requirs the repurchase of games. That could change, but at the same time companies are weak on backwards compatability. If I buy PS4 games, then I move on to the PS5 and it can't handle PS4 games, I'm SOL again. YOu could cling to your old system forever, but it probably won't be supported and you probably can't log into multiplayer games, and probably won't even be able to play them at all as the database is abandoned.
I can play NES games whether Nintendo goes out of business or not.
Also to those argueing that only collectors care about this, you are wrong. Go to any main stream gaming site, and you will see your average gamer threatening a boycott. This is because of things like not being able to trade in their games, or bring them to their friend's houses.
Basically Sony and MS are working on something, but not the death of the used market. They are going go likely with a unified system, the thing I mentioned, where off the hub of the hardware if it detects a game you give it the code it came with, if not, you pay a flat rate across the board per game to fire it up, say like $10. This will keep used around, and ultimately will only punish the crap out of Gamestop as they'll be forced to lower their used prices the 'reset fee' and then some to entice those to not buy used.
Now here's the crap part, digital is coming. He told me where things are going and how it looks to stretch out. As with DVD when it hit a wall they went do double sided DVD like the 360 uses. Well they're working on a high capacity double sided blu-ray which is faster than they are now too. They'll want to keep blu-ray around for quite a few years until the nations and global infrastructure is around to support at least the megabit if not the gigabit broadband connections. So like with the PS4/MS whatever they'll be doing dual releases, Sony is testing it now with VITA. Basically on vita you can buy a $40 disc, or a $35 digital copy. With consoles due to the higher cost it will be a $50 download or a $60 hard copy. They'll do this, and once the broadband catches up, they'll in the PS5 era(or 6 if need be 10-15 years out) go digital only. They will claim it's to save money, kill piracy, and bring down their costs. In the end, used games are going to die, and all of us will have to suck it up or pack up and leave town because the era of a system lifespan 'rental' of a purchase is where it is going and it is already decided. The when is whenever the global internet speeds in general can handle broadband basically anywhere, my guess would be a gigabit connect at the least due to the huge size some games are now and will increase in size.
However, that sucks to hear about the future of gaming. Looks like this current generation will be my last generation of gaming, which sucks. I guess we all come to a point where we stop, and it looks like that's where my ride ends with the mainstream market. Oh well.
Originally posted by: Tanooki
Adam, on your comment about 'if all digital..prices would need to be slashed' part, I hate to break it to you, but they won't. My brother called me this afternoon and knowing this thread I asked him a few questions about the rumor with Sony and digital distribution.
Basically Sony and MS are working on something, but not the death of the used market. They are going go likely with a unified system, the thing I mentioned, where off the hub of the hardware if it detects a game you give it the code it came with, if not, you pay a flat rate across the board per game to fire it up, say like $10. This will keep used around, and ultimately will only punish the crap out of Gamestop as they'll be forced to lower their used prices the 'reset fee' and then some to entice those to not buy used.
Now here's the crap part, digital is coming. He told me where things are going and how it looks to stretch out. As with DVD when it hit a wall they went do double sided DVD like the 360 uses. Well they're working on a high capacity double sided blu-ray which is faster than they are now too. They'll want to keep blu-ray around for quite a few years until the nations and global infrastructure is around to support at least the megabit if not the gigabit broadband connections. So like with the PS4/MS whatever they'll be doing dual releases, Sony is testing it now with VITA. Basically on vita you can buy a $40 disc, or a $35 digital copy. With consoles due to the higher cost it will be a $50 download or a $60 hard copy. They'll do this, and once the broadband catches up, they'll in the PS5 era(or 6 if need be 10-15 years out) go digital only. They will claim it's to save money, kill piracy, and bring down their costs. In the end, used games are going to die, and all of us will have to suck it up or pack up and leave town because the era of a system lifespan 'rental' of a purchase is where it is going and it is already decided. The when is whenever the global internet speeds in general can handle broadband basically anywhere, my guess would be a gigabit connect at the least due to the huge size some games are now and will increase in size.
Lol, that really sounds like they are planning on stealing people's money to me.
Hehe, we are going to sell you this thing, and build something in it to break it when you sell it, but don't worry you can pay us more money to fix it each time
Don't you guys have some kinda first sale law there that this must be breaking to smitherines?
Edit:
Whatever their plan is, if it involves some sort of trick to force more money out of people instead of actually doing something to earn more money, it isn't going to work in the long run.
Cradelit, pretty much yeah though it's not so much stealing as blackmail I suppose. Basically the idea was the gaming industry feels unique and entitled basically. I mean you can buy a book or a kindle book, a movie or a download movie, a cd or a pile of mp3s...but with games, they want that not to happen. Gaming very well could end up the model test child for the future. When they go dual release next generation in 2014 if they don't grow a brain and stop the nonsense that will be the last generation of discs along side of downloads, and they'll give the bigger price cut to ween people off physical media. If they can't force it, get sued, whatever over it, then it will stay optional, but if it works how they like and people keep buying crap from them and it doesn't fall off watch the dual layer blu-rays and current audio music options dry up, and books short of hard cover specialty stuff if e-readers keep penetrating going too.
See they're not actually breaking the games, that's the problem. They're in a way actually re-enforcing current laws with a game. Using the NES, back then you bought the plastic, board, chips, paper, stickers, etc and in all of that was 1 copy of a game. You bought the parts and the LICENSE to run one copy of it. With the laws then and now, if you can make a backup you can use it, but not use it and the original at the same time as that's two licenses. So when you forfeit your game to another party, that license is null. So all the companies are doing is selling someone another license and at a cheaper rate than buying a new disc. So unfortunately they're not breaking the law, they're just being jerks about backing it up for once to get paid more.
Originally posted by: Tanooki
Yeah I meant dual layer, was totally whipped last night from being away all weekend.
Cradelit, pretty much yeah though it's not so much stealing as blackmail I suppose. Basically the idea was the gaming industry feels unique and entitled basically. I mean you can buy a book or a kindle book, a movie or a download movie, a cd or a pile of mp3s...but with games, they want that not to happen. Gaming very well could end up the model test child for the future. When they go dual release next generation in 2014 if they don't grow a brain and stop the nonsense that will be the last generation of discs along side of downloads, and they'll give the bigger price cut to ween people off physical media. If they can't force it, get sued, whatever over it, then it will stay optional, but if it works how they like and people keep buying crap from them and it doesn't fall off watch the dual layer blu-rays and current audio music options dry up, and books short of hard cover specialty stuff if e-readers keep penetrating going too.
See they're not actually breaking the games, that's the problem. They're in a way actually re-enforcing current laws with a game. Using the NES, back then you bought the plastic, board, chips, paper, stickers, etc and in all of that was 1 copy of a game. You bought the parts and the LICENSE to run one copy of it. With the laws then and now, if you can make a backup you can use it, but not use it and the original at the same time as that's two licenses. So when you forfeit your game to another party, that license is null. So all the companies are doing is selling someone another license and at a cheaper rate than buying a new disc. So unfortunately they're not breaking the law, they're just being jerks about backing it up for once to get paid more.
Yeah, except that isn't how it worked. They never made up this whole "you are only renting" or "you are only getting a restricted license to use this under certain circumstances" bullshit until later. When you bought a nes game, you bought a nes game. There was no license agreement or any other underhanded tricks or loopholes at the time. You bought a copy of a game, on a cart. And you can do what you want with that copy of a game on a cart because you owned it after you bought it. No you didn't own the rights to recreate the game, since that isn't what you bought. You did, however, own that copy of the game on a cart. They couldn't legally steal it back from you or control what you did with it, prevent you from using it or selling it or whatever. *you* couldn't legally reproduce it, but thats because of copyright law which restricts your actions, not because you didn't actually own your copy. This whole "only bought a license even though we sold you a product" bullshit didn't start until much more recently.
Edit: More specifically, right around DMCA time.
Now I don't have MS junk, do have a PS3, did have a PSP and those two devices with their boot screens(first power on and with updates) the EULA does talk about solitary licenses and the rest. I don't recall all the fine print nor do I care, but I bet in there it does say one license perhaps non-transferable I don't know, but I'm sure they could easily upgrade a EULA to say so.
Sorry this license issue has just annoyed me for a long time.