Support NeoGAF

[Segata Sanshiro]

That's what demos, reviews and word-of-mouth serve for. When you go to the theater, do you think that they should give you your money back if you didn't like the movie?

No, which is why I don't go to the theatre except to see something I can guarantee I'll like. Anything creative waits until it costs me a couple bucks to rent it.

I don't expect a refund, I'm just stating the facts here. In a scenario where I can't resell the product, I am absolutely only going to stick to established franchises from developers I trust. I'm not going to roll a fucking $50 set of dice on NeoGAF hype and paid-off journalists.

 

[RurouniZel]

The "copy" of the prototype car costs much more to produce than the "copy" of the "original" video-game you're being sold. That's just a silly, non-sense analogy.

:lol Oh my GOD! I can't stop laughing at the idiocy of this argument.

So you're saying it's legitimacy as a product I own depends on the price?? Wow, just wow.

 

[7Th]

If you leave before the movie is over you can definitely get your money back. That's standard practice at pretty much any more theater I've been to.

That's what demos serve for. You're playing a part of the game, and if you don't like it you're obviously not going to spend a dime on it.

 

[Tobor]

How much do individual tracks cost on iTunes? You buy a song you don't like and you're out very little money. Not so with games.

Why do you assume $60 large content games are a mandatory part of this future?

Segata, same question.

 

[Night_Trekker]

That's what demos serve for. You're playing a part of the game, and if you don't like it you're obviously not going to spend a dime on it.

The irony being that so many demos have been released that don't even begin to reflect the actual experience of the full game.

Why do you assume $60 large content games are a mandatory part of this future?

Why did you assume I meant $60 games? And why do you think prices will drop dramatically for the big titles if people will continue to pay $60 for them?

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

That's what demos serve for. You're playing a part of the game, and if you don't like it you're obviously not going to spend a dime on it.

And if there's no demo? Or if the demo is a poor reflection of the final product?

 

[7Th]

:lol Oh my GOD! I can't stop laughing at the idiocy of this argument.

So you're saying it's legitimacy as a product I own depends on the price?? Wow, just wow.

It's not about the price they're being sold to you, learn to read. When you buy a car, you're paying for hard-to-manufacture physical technology. When you buy a video-game, you're paying for easily-replicated information.

Just think about it a little.

 

[Tizlor]

DD only is stupid. Especially in areas that have hard capped and tiered internet services.

 

[7Th]

The irony being that so many demos have been released that don't even begin to reflect the actual experience of the full game.

But what about the good demos? What about developers that know how to do a demo? Why don't you think developers will learn how to do competent, well-done demos that represent what you will get if you were to buy the full game?

 

[Shin Johnpv]

That's what demos serve for. You're playing a part of the game, and if you don't like it you're obviously not going to spend a dime on it.

Because

The irony being that so many demos have been released that don't even begin to reflect the actual experience of the full game.

I've played plenty of demos through out the years that didn't even come close to representing the final game. Planty of times the demo absolutely sucked/blew my mind and the subsequent game blew my mind/sucked.

Stop acting like the developers/publishers have all the power. We are the consumer, the ones with the money to be spent, there for the ones with the power.

 

[Night_Trekker]

But what about the good demos? What about developers that know how to do a demo? Why don't you think developers will learn how to do competent, well-done demos that represent what you will get if you were to buy the full game?

There are plenty of developers who can't create a competent, well-done game.

 

[7Th]

DD only is stupid. Especially in areas that have hard capped and tiered internet services.

Yes, this I agree with. Currently, DD is an impossibility because most countries don't have access to a fast enough Internet service.

 

[Malio]

Be quiet, Peter.

 

[RurouniZel]

It's not about the price they're being sold to you, learn to read. When you buy a car, you're paying for hard-to-manufacture physical technology. When you buy a video-game, you're paying for easily-replicated information.

Just think about it a little.

Oh, so if someone buys plastic and makes something with it, they don't own the plastic? Or the right to sell it?

I'll learn to read when you learn to think.

 

[Hobbun]

It's not about the price they're being sold to you, learn to read. When you buy a car, you're paying for hard-to-manufacture physical technology. When you buy a video-game, you're paying for easily-replicated information.

Just think about it a little.

What does how difficult it is to replicate the product have to do with it? The point is the copies of the original/prototype are products. Doesn’t matter how much the prototype/original is, doesn’t matter how difficult it was to make. That copy you bought you now own.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

But what about the good demos? What about developers that know how to do a demo? Why don't you think developers will learn how to do competent, well-done demos that represent what you will get if you were to buy the full game?

Why should they? Why not just put all the effort into the demo? I think you're thinking of the case where the demo made the game look worse than it was, but think about the case where the demo makes the game look better than it is. Is there any incentive for them not to do that?

 

[Koren]

edit: What I mean, is, this is completely obvious. Of course we will essentially be on a DD only solution in 10 years, it makes perfect sense.

It isn't so obvious to me. I have no doubt that there will be DD solution, maybe DD-only solutions. But I doubt they'll only remain DD-only solutions, I'm pretty sure at least one of the contender will have a physical-based solution.

Besides, I don't really see how games would be in such a hurry, seeing how physical media for music and movies won't disappear soon neither?

 

[Shin Johnpv]

But what about the good demos? What about developers that know how to do a demo? Why don't you think developers will learn how to do competent, well-done demos that represent what you will get if you were to buy the full game?

Because there's a shit ton of developers out there who aren't competent enough to make a quality game. Why do we suddenly assume every developer is going to be competent enough to make a good demo.

You're living in a perfect fantasy world.

 

[Mr YuYu]

No, which is why I don't go to the theatre except to see something I can guarantee I'll like. Anything creative waits until it costs me a couple bucks to rent it.

I don't expect a refund, I'm just stating the facts here. In a scenario where I can't resell the product, I am absolutely only going to stick to established franchises from developers I trust. I'm not going to roll a fucking $50 set of dice on NeoGAF hype and paid-off journalists.

my thoughts exactly.

 

[7Th]

Oh, so if someone buys plastic and makes something with it, they don't own the plastic? Or the right to sell it?

I'll learn to read when you learn to think.

Plastic isn't information, plastic is a material. What's up with the completely fucked-up analogies in this thread? A video-game is made of information, something virtual and intangible. It isn't the same as plastic.

 

[BananaBomb]

The feeling of ownership for one. The feeling of worth. Of value. Digital files downloaded over some network aren't nearly worth as much. I understand that this generation has fucked up everyone's sense of value and worth but I do see flickers of it everyday.

By running as fast as they can towards a DD only future, all they are doing is lowering the worth and value of their product. There is no feeling of ownership over a digital file. I don't feel the same after buying an album over itunes and buying a CD from my local music shop. I don't feel the same buying a game over PSN as I do buying it at my local store and having it in my hands. Just like I don't feel the same talking to someone over text messaging as I do face to face.

So, by speeding towards this future, all they will end up doing is devaluing their products at an increased rate while continuing to convince you it's worth just as much. Well, maybe to you. Those who have fucked up this gaming generation, but not me.

All of this comes from a devout minimalist. One who sees the value in decluttering your life. However, I'm also not about to be screwed up the ass just to have less things around.

You can say my view of something's worth is fucked up, but that doesn't change the fact that your analogies are too extended to be logical. Buying a cd from your local music shop is nice because you know the people who work there and have a human interest in supporting them, or you like the purchasing environment or whatever. Your talking face to face analogy doesn't even work - there's only one method to play a game. The result you have with different distribution methods of games is fundamentally the same damn product, a game, that works on whatever machine it was intended to work on, for you to play at your leisure and enjoy fully. The fact that you feel that because you can't wrap your hands around the disk devalues the game somehow is both illogical and irrelevant to the discussion (especially when many DDs allow you to make your own disks, although even if they don't the matter is not terribly significant). The only argument I can see against DD is that somehow local game shops will be castrated and gaming culture set back, but seeing as those barely exist nowadays anyway, there really isn't anything to lose.

 

[Version 3.0]

Law isn't logical or objective. Treating video-games as physical goods isn't logical, it is something that benefits the consumer. And that's fine, but it isn't logical at all.

Yes, it is. It's extremely simple, and it has nothing to do with tangibility. It has simply to do with reusability. If you buy something and it's still useful when you're done with it, you have the right to re-sell it unless you specifically agree not to do so. That's true whether you buy a hammer (physical) or a recipe (not physical) or a game (semi-physical). The "specifically agree not to do so" part is what they're trying to exploit with the EULA, but they've already lost that battle once. And rightly so.

 

[7Th]

Because there's a shit ton of developers out there who aren't competent enough to make a quality game. Why do we suddenly assume every developer is going to be competent enough to make a good demo.

You're living in a perfect fantasy world.

You wouldn't buy video-games from developers that can't make quality games now, why the hell would that change with the switch to DD?

 

[mentalfloss]

If means the end of the used games market then count me out.

 

[Malio]

Every reason for why Microsoft wants a digital download only future is a reason why consumers shouldn't want that :/

Absolutely correct. I would replace Microsoft with any gaming company wanting that.

 

[Minsc]

How much do individual tracks cost on iTunes? You buy a song you don't like and you're out very little money. Not so with games.

Does a law that gives you the same right to sell digital property as you have to sell physical property care how much the digital product costs?

If it's under $10 when you buy it, you're not allowed to resell it?

Of course not. In the eyes of a law, $1,000,000 is the same as $1 as far as your right to resell it would go. Same is true of physical products. Just because you didn't pay much money for some random album or single, doesn't mean you're not allowed to resell it at a tag sale or something.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Why do you assume $60 large content games are a mandatory part of this future?

Segata, same question.

Because while you seem to wholeheartedly trust these companies to not ass-fuck the customer to the fullest extent possible, I'm on the other end of things. I trust businesses to do one thing and one thing only: try to get as much of my money out of my wallet as possible. I can believe you see a future where Sony sells the latest Gran Turismo for $20, but as for me, I see a present where those assholes are selling a fucking Gran Turismo demo for $50, and somehow, I just don't have any faith that they're going to be dropping the prices.

 

[Salmonax]

In the not-too-distant future, the idea that we used to collect physical trinkets of media and clutter our homes with them will seem very quaint.

 

[7Th]

Yes, it is. It's extremely simple, and it has nothing to do with tangibility. It has simply to do with reusability. If you buy something and it's still useful when you're done with it, you have the right to re-sell it unless you specifically agree not to do so. That's true whether you buy a hammer (physical) or a recipe (not physical) or a game (semi-physical). The "specifically agree not to do so" part is what they're trying to exploit with the EULA, but they've already lost that battle once. And rightly so.

The problem is that a hammer gets old, loses usability and takes hard-work to replicate; a video-game is information that is instantly copied without any effort or cost.

 

[Tobor]

The irony being that so many demos have been released that don't even begin to reflect the actual experience of the full game.



Why did you assume I meant $60 games? And why do you think prices will drop dramatically for the big titles if people will continue to pay $60 for them?

You're missing my point. Once games are delivered online the need to sell a giant package of content in one gulp is no longer necessary. The issue of feeling burned on a large purchase goes away when there are no large purchases to make.

 

[RurouniZel]

Plastic isn't information, plastic is a material. What's up with the completely fucked-up analogies in this thread? A video-game is made of information, something virtual and intangible. It isn't the same as plastic.

DVDs ARE MADE OF PLASTIC YOU DUMB FUCK!!

EDIT: OK, that was out of line, but Jesus man, THINK!

 

[7Th]

DVDs ARE MADE OF PLASTIC YOU DUMB FUCK!!

But you're not buying DVDs, you're "buying" the information inside the DVD. A video-game isn't made of plastic, a video-game is made of information. DVDs are just a medium used for necessity, not a material.

 

[skee]

I think one solution to this may be doing both with an add on BD (or whatever disc is most popular at the time) unit.

If you have broadband access and dont care about owning the disc, just download the game to your console. if you still want to have a disc or need a disc, you would be required to purchase an add on unit. Your games would be purchased in store and burned to a BD. Once the disc with is played on your console, it becomes specific to that console.

Yeah, I dont like the idea either.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

But you're not buying DVDs, you're "buying" the information inside the DVD. A video-game isn't made of plastic, a video-game is made of information. DVDs are just a medium used for necessity, not a material.

Actually, I'm buying the DVD. Maybe you aren't, and that's probably where this difference of viewpoints is coming from.

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Oh, I think it would be very bad for Atlus. I think they sell a lot of copies on the "GET IT WHILE YOU CAN NOW WITH PREMIUM GOODIES FOR FIRST OWNERS" principle. Slashing out the used market (and the rental market) will also create a much more risk averse audience, and while that isn't going to hurt the Halo gents, the mid-tier quirky stuff will suffer badly.

This would be a good argument if Atlus didn't actually start restocking their games (they've even done reprints of Nocturne and Persona 2). For nearly the past 2 years Atlus has kept up to date on the vast majority of their games.

It seems like Atlus found availability more financially viable than to persuade buyers through the fear of the game not receiving a second shipment.

 

[Night_Trekker]

You're missing my point. Once games are delivered online the need to sell a giant package of content in one gulp is no longer necessary. The issue of feeling burned on a large purchase goes away when there are no large purchases to make.

To be replaced with the feeling of being burned when you realize how much you spent on the game plus all the "add-on" DLC!

I see what you're getting at. I welcome smaller, shorter and less expensive games. Heck, we're already seeing that in some downloadable titles. That's great.

This is an industry that's driven by "blockbusters", though. I don't think that's going to change, regardless of any DD-only future. If this generation has proven anything, it's that most of the players within the industry are unwilling to make big changes to their business models, even when those changes might be to their benefit.

Does a law that gives you the same right to sell digital property as you have to sell physical property care how much the digital product costs?

If it's under $10 when you buy it, you're not allowed to resell it?

Of course not. In the eyes of a law, $1,000,000 is the same as $1 as far as your right to resell it would go. Same is true of physical products. Just because you didn't pay much money for some random album or single, doesn't mean you're not allowed to resell it at a tag sale or something.

I will be very surprised if the law will, in the future, equate a 2-3 minute mp3 download as equivalent to a 10 to 15-hour video game.

As another poster said somewhere above, people don't consume video games and music in the same way.

 

[Pureauthor]

But you're not buying DVDs, you're "buying" the information inside the DVD. A video-game isn't made of plastic, a video-game is made of information. DVDs are just a medium used for necessity, not a material.

Yes, I am. I am buying a DVD that contains a certain amount of information, jsut like when I buy a packet of potato chips. The bag is simply the container for what I really want (most of the time), but that doesn't mean I don't buy the bag at the same time.

...Now I'm making stupid analogies. I blame this thread and the lack of sleep.

 

[Tobor]

Because while you seem to wholeheartedly trust these companies to not ass-fuck the customer to the fullest extent possible, I'm on the other end of things. I trust businesses to do one thing and one thing only: try to get as much of my money out of my wallet as possible. I can believe you see a future where Sony sells the latest Gran Turismo for $20, but as for me, I see a present where those assholes are selling a fucking Gran Turismo demo for $50, and somehow, I just don't have any faith that they're going to be dropping the prices.

Again, why are games going to be packaged in the same way after a total shift in delivery? Peter was speaking at "a panel about monetizing video games through micro-transactions and subscription-based services". The swapping of large amounts of cash for big chunks of content is not a safe business model longterm, any company that want's to survive will start looking at alternatives ASAP.

 

[mentalfloss]

The best scenario really is to have both so that the market can choose. If we get rid of physical media, you get rid of an entire market segment completely.

I mean look at the ads for PSP Go. Unless you're rich enough to be part of the O.C. cast, you really can't afford one or deserve to own one. That's the message here. And if that's the only market, the digital format will not take off, regardless of how much more convenient it is.

We're already learning that people aren't buying retail games because they're too expensive - they're not going to buy digital media for the same price.

 

[-viper-]

Who actually pops in a shop to buy games? I order them all from the internet.

But DD sucks.

No resale = no sale as far as I'm concerned. With DD, it really feel like I own the game.

Plus the prices are shit. GT PSP is cheaper in the shops than on the Playstation Store. What the fuck is that about eh?

 

[Falagard]

iPod touch might not be a 'console' on the strictest sense but it's actively marketed around games

both it and the PSPgo take effort to get anything on them, and both will be under trees this Christmas

I'd expect to have to set it up in advance of the big day, but many parents won't realise this

iPhone and iPod touch can download games pretty much instantly, since they're tiny. Therefore they've met the "must be able to play immediately" criteria I mentioned above.

Console games are currently an average of 4GBs or so, and can't exactly be compared to iPhone games.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

This would be a good argument if Atlus didn't actually start restocking their games (they've even done reprints of Nocturne and Persona 2). For nearly the past 2 years Atlus has kept up to date on the vast majority of their games.

It seems like Atlus found availability more financially viable than to persuade buyers through the fear of the game not receiving a second shipment.

You missed the trick. Create demand, leak out supply quietly. I bet Atlus sold a fair few copies with those reprints, more than they would have if the games didn't have a legendary "buy it while you can" status.

 

[Falagard]

I understand the posts lamenting the shift to DD as an affront to consumer rights. I understand the post's from atypical consumers who assume incorrectly that their absurd spending habits have any place in a discussion about the future of a mainstream medium.

What I don't understand is how anyone can look at all the trending and the vast changes that have occurred since the launch of the 360 and not see the inevitable conclusion.

I can see the inevitable conclusion - digital distribution. However, they have to be able to solve the problem of opening up a present on Christmas morning and playing it immediately rather than waiting for several hours, or days, to play a game.

That doesn't mean that a solution isn't possible, just that it needs to be found before they'll go completely digital.

 

[Tobor]

You missed the trick. Create demand, leak out supply quietly. I bet Atlus sold a fair few copies with those reprints, more than they would have if the games didn't have a legendary "buy it while you can" status.

And like I said, that is easily re-produceable in digital delivery with timed exclusives and goodies.

 

[Evlar]

Again, why are games going to be packaged in the same way after a total shift in delivery? Peter was speaking at "a panel about monetizing video games through micro-transactions and subscription-based services". The swapping of large amounts of cash for big chunks of content is not a safe business model longterm, any company that want's to survive will start looking at alternatives ASAP.

So now we should be happy about the loss of physical media and its associated benefits AND cheerful about the gutting of popular content-heavy genres.

 

[water_wendi]

im curious.. what is the return policy for games bought on Live or Steam? Are all sales final?

 

[RurouniZel]

But you're not buying DVDs, you're "buying" the information inside the DVD. A video-game isn't made of plastic, a video-game is made of information. DVDs are just a medium used for necessity, not a material.

... I'd say you take the cake when it comes to idiocy, but you'd insist you don't own the cake, just the license to eat it.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Again, why are games going to be packaged in the same way after a total shift in delivery? Peter was speaking at "a panel about monetizing video games through micro-transactions and subscription-based services". The swapping of large amounts of cash for big chunks of content is not a safe business model longterm, any company that want's to survive will start looking at alternatives ASAP.

Gran Turismo 5 Prologue is a demo. It sells for 6000 yen. What less are they going to sell here? 2000 yen for a picture of the cover? 500 yen to hear the horn honk? Tell me, man.

 

[Version 3.0]

The problem is that a hammer gets old, loses usability and takes hard-work to replicate; a video-game is information that is instantly copied without any effort or cost.

That's not a problem, that's just a difference. And it's a difference that can be extremely advantageous for the manufacturer. If you sell hammers, you'll never make much money on each one because your costs are pretty fixed. If you sell games, you have a high up-front cost, but after that you make pure profit and can sell unlimited copies forever.

I know what you're getting at: the hammer manufacturer can count on the hammer breaking, rather than it being sold from user to user forever, but the game maker can't. So what? That doesn't change the consumer's rights. And, if they want to have a tiny bit of vision, it's another thing the manufacturer can use to their advantage without trying to crush consumer rights.

 

[Segata Sanshiro]

Anyway, I'm done with the thread, I gotta get some sleep. We have this debate all the time and I think if there's one thing you can take away from it, it's that physical media isn't going to go without a fight.