Vanilla Forums has been nominated for a second time in the CMS Critic "Critic's Choice" awards, and we need your vote! Read more here, and then do the thing (please).
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Krazy Ken steps down! (SONY Reshuffles)

12345679»

Posts

  • darleysamdarleysam Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Titmouse wrote: »
    bongi wrote: »
    because if they don't they'll go out of business?

    A net-based console would probably be based on buying games off of the internet. This would cut out the traditional stores and would at least make any sales from traditional stores secondary. It would also destroy the sales of used games. Supporting a console like that would make no sense for the business because they wouldn't profit off of the sale of the console.

    Unless they function as a hub for those without a connection capable of downloading several gigs in anything shorter than a week.

    my fear with any kind of service like that though, would be how quickly would they turn it into subscription based, or even pay-per-play.
    I guess i'm just paranoid, but i always get the feeling that, in an ideal world, that's how the media distributors would have it.

  • FuruFuru Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    darleysam wrote: »
    syndalis wrote: »
    graizur wrote: »
    Syndalis are you ok with me sort of copying your style of avatar?
    No.

    I am going to call the avatar police and have them kick your ass.

    :roll:

    dude, stop quoting yourself


    Oh no!

    which one of them is the real syndalis

    saiyan2.jpg
  • DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic I've Done Worse Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    darleysam wrote: »
    my fear with any kind of service like that though, would be how quickly would they turn it into subscription based, or even pay-per-play.
    I guess i'm just paranoid, but i always get the feeling that, in an ideal world, that's how the media distributors would have it.


    I have a feeling they'd be shooing themselves in the head if they did that. Wow many crappy games have you picked up and promptly decided were pieces of shit and you weren't going to bother playing? Now imagine after your first session you got to make that same choice with the added incentive of not playing anymore saved you money?

    While quality games could happily move to such a system the 80% sequel/shovelware section would be absolutely murdered in profitability.

    Trogg wrote: »
    Not as positive as AIDS and cancer, but positive nonetheless.

    PSN: QuipFilter
  • darleysamdarleysam Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    darleysam wrote: »
    my fear with any kind of service like that though, would be how quickly would they turn it into subscription based, or even pay-per-play.
    I guess i'm just paranoid, but i always get the feeling that, in an ideal world, that's how the media distributors would have it.


    I have a feeling they'd be shooing themselves in the head if they did that. Wow many crappy games have you picked up and promptly decided were pieces of shit and you weren't going to bother playing? Now imagine after your first session you got to make that same choice with the added incentive of not playing anymore saved you money?

    While quality games could happily move to such a system the 80% sequel/shovelware section would be absolutely murdered in profitability.

    true, it is all just paranoid speculation on my part. But if it happens, someone's going to eat their own cock.

    That's just how it works.

  • graizurgraizur __BANNED USERS
    edited April 2007
    Can any one really say what Sony will be like with out these crazy guys in charge? The last time Sony wasn't hugely effected by their decisions was... how far back?

    robosagogo wrote: »
    Finally, an Apocalyptian-American superhero. I've been waiting so long.
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Carnivore wrote: »
    Fuck digital distribution.

    I like having a boxed copy with a manual.

    Special editions with the bonus DVDs and art books and all that jazz.

    Digital distribution is not the future, it will be big but wont replace hard copies.

    You're suggesting that companies that spend money on pressing, packaging, and shipping wouldn't jump at the chance to cut all of that out and charge the consumer directly saving untold amounts of money? And thereby eliminating the menace of 'lost revenue' from used sales?

    I like having hard copies too. It lets you feel like you actually 'own' something. But that's not going to happen forever. EA already cuts costs by making those silly 8 page manuals that are barely useful as a coaster. Do you seriously think that they wouldn't go to a DD model? Not to mention cutting out the middleman and retailer thus keeping all of the money?

  • bashbash Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Carnivore wrote: »
    Fuck digital distribution.

    I like having a boxed copy with a manual.

    Special editions with the bonus DVDs and art books and all that jazz.

    Digital distribution is not the future, it will be big but wont replace hard copies.

    Not to be mean but you're deluding yourself. Online distribution is most definitely the Way of the Futureâ„¢ for better or worse. Online distribution solves a number of problems for game developers and console manufacturers. For one content development for a game can take place over a longer span of time without sacrificing a timely release (holidays, movie concurrency, etc.). Traditionally in console game development extra content has been added through the release of full-on sequels. In order for a developer to charge full price for a game they've had to make an entirely new game out of what usually should only be an expansion of the original content. Quite a few PC franchises have gotten away from sequels and simply released content additions as expansions. Since they're not full games themselves they can be developed and sold for far less than a full sequel. The nature of console packaging makes expansions largely futile efforts in the console world. For a long time there were no hard drives to store added content or feasible ways to swap carts or discs to access added content.

    Second there's also the capability to provide updates and patches to games. This has already been done with some games on this and last generation consoles. The QA process is never 100% perfect and until consoles had persistant storage there was no way to provide any sort of updates for games. This is more of an issue as online gameplay becomes more common on consoles. A noclip bug in a shared screen multiplayer game might be a slight annoyance but in a networked game can entirely alter the game's balance and keep people from playing. Subscription services provide an impetus for game developers to provide patches and updates. If they already have your $50 and aren't going to get any extra money for fixes it's not worth it, if they have a constant revenue stream from subscription sharing or some such patches and updates keep the money flowing in.

    Online distribution moves the balance of power in the game publishing industry away from big third party publishers like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft and puts it in the hands of first party publishers MGS, SCE, and Nintendo. This allows the first parties to grab the guaranteed platinum games and make sure they're console/platform exclusive titles. First party publishers can make themselves the sole distributor to a console. This is probably the biggest reason for online distribution. Increasing the power of first party publishers can fuel a powerful snowball effect for exclusive titles. If the first parties can get more platinum selling titles they can attract more third party platinum sellers.

    Increasing first party publishing power directly relates to customer lock-in. If you've got an XBox 720 with a XBL subscription you're far less likely to buy a PS4 and an equivalent Sony subscription. This is a much more extreme extension to console lock-in of yesteryear. You had to own a Genesis to play your Genesis games but at least if you had the games you could play them as long as you had a TV and an AC outlet. With the (theoretical) XBox 720 the game collection would be tied to your XBL subscription.

    Yeah, writing that made me realize what a shitty gaming future we're all in for. Online distribution is where consoles and even PCs are heading. Along with the cool aspects there's also a lack of permanence. If Microsoft or Sony decided to shut their servers down or cancel your subscription you're locked out of all of the content you've paid real money for. They try to hide the loss behind "Microsoft Points" but you're still losing real money. There's also the loss of your own history. Anyone growing up playing video games thinks of them as part of their life. Playing SMB or LoZ now reminds me of playing those when I was a kid. In a few years young kids won't be able to keep games from their childhood around to play when they get older if the publisher goes under or the content provider pulls the plug. There's something to be said for physical distribution of games but unfortunately that's not where the trend in heading.

    comi-sig1.jpg
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    On the other hand, assuming that the servers do stay up, purchasing games that would be completely unavailable if they were in hard copy would be trivial. Imagine that the Virtual Console contained every single game that had ever been made for the systems that it covered; once digital distribution is several generations in, something like that could very well be reality.

  • DarkCrawlerDarkCrawler Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    graizur wrote: »
    Can any one really say what Sony will be like with out these crazy guys in charge? The last time Sony wasn't hugely effected by their decisions was... how far back?

    Let's just say that when the first dinosaur was born, Ken was there to proclaim that the Triassic period doesn't start until they say it does.

  • MarlorMarlor Registered User
    edited April 2007
    graizur wrote: »
    Can any one really say what Sony will be like with out these crazy guys in charge? The last time Sony wasn't hugely effected by their decisions was... how far back?

    Let's put it this way... Krazy Ken got himself in lots of trouble for opposing Stringer's plan to put DRM on everything. He may be crazy, and he might have gone overboard with the PS3's hardware specs, but he is generally a good guy.

    Now he's gone, Stringer will have less opposition for his pro-DRM plans.

    Mario Kart Wii: 1332-8060-5236 (Aaron)
  • LewiePLewieP Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    the big problem with online distribution for me, I like to hunt for bargains and buy in clearance sales. Clearance sales happen because retailers do not have perfect inventory management. If/When all/most content is distributed digitally, inventory management won't be an issue. Which leads to me being unable to buy Sprung for 97p and Forza/Fable/Conker for 99p.

  • Unco-ordinatedUnco-ordinated Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I don't think games being available only online is a smart move at all. Broadband speeds just aren't fast enough to handle downloading 5-20 gig games (the 20 gig being the maximum number for now since Resistance was 16 gigs). And what happens when I run out of space on my 200 gig HDD? I delete a few games and then have to download it again if I want to play it? Oh boy.

    Personally, I like the idea of what Sony may do with Warhawk (emphasis on the "may"), which is to develop the game in chunks (online and then single player) and then release them as downloadable titles. When the game is completely finished, they then release the game on a Blu-Ray disc. The biggest positive is that it lets them recover some of the development costs halfway through the project, while still delivering a high quality title.

    bash: I don't have a clue what you're talking about.

    Marlor: "Krazy Ken" got himself in trouble because he aimed too high with the PS3's specs (he's far too ambitious for his own good) and then said to Stringer "hmm, I think we should drop the price in Japan!"

    Steam ID - LiquidSolid170 | PSN ID - LiquidSolid
  • MarlorMarlor Registered User
    edited April 2007
    Marlor: "Krazy Ken" got himself in trouble because he aimed too high with the PS3's specs (he's far too ambitious for his own good) and then said to Stringer "hmm, I think we should drop the price in Japan!"

    Yeah, of course that's the main reason (especially the part where he sprung the price drop on Stringer at the last moment). But publicly criticizing Stringer over DRM (in Sony's music players) probably didn't help his cause.

    Mario Kart Wii: 1332-8060-5236 (Aaron)
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I don't think games being available only online is a smart move at all. Broadband speeds just aren't fast enough to handle downloading 5-20 gig games (the 20 gig being the maximum number for now since Resistance was 16 gigs). And what happens when I run out of space on my 200 gig HDD? I delete a few games and then have to download it again if I want to play it? Oh boy.

    Nobody ever said they had to make it convenient for the consumer.

  • Unco-ordinatedUnco-ordinated Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I don't think games being available only online is a smart move at all. Broadband speeds just aren't fast enough to handle downloading 5-20 gig games (the 20 gig being the maximum number for now since Resistance was 16 gigs). And what happens when I run out of space on my 200 gig HDD? I delete a few games and then have to download it again if I want to play it? Oh boy.

    Nobody ever said they had to make it convenient for the consumer.

    Then how can anyone expect digital distribution to overtake retail distribution?

    Marlor: Agreed.

    Steam ID - LiquidSolid170 | PSN ID - LiquidSolid
  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I don't think games being available only online is a smart move at all. Broadband speeds just aren't fast enough to handle downloading 5-20 gig games (the 20 gig being the maximum number for now since Resistance was 16 gigs). And what happens when I run out of space on my 200 gig HDD? I delete a few games and then have to download it again if I want to play it? Oh boy.

    Nobody ever said they had to make it convenient for the consumer.

    Then how can anyone expect digital distribution to overtake retail distribution?

    Marlor: Agreed.
    Because that's what the publishers want. The systems are set up and prepared. What are the odds that this or any other generation of hardware will not have some kind of built in storage device and a network type connection? All three current generation systems can do this. All they have to do is slowly implement it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft tested the waters by making Halo 3 available this way. Perhaps at a slightly lower cost than retail?

    All it would take would be for a large publisher to release a Triple-A title solely available for download. The good news about DD is that it can allow smaller (and even larger) publishers to release titles for download that probably wouldn't ever see the light of day simply because the costs involved become significantly lower.

  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2007
    I don't think games being available only online is a smart move at all. Broadband speeds just aren't fast enough to handle downloading 5-20 gig games (the 20 gig being the maximum number for now since Resistance was 16 gigs). And what happens when I run out of space on my 200 gig HDD? I delete a few games and then have to download it again if I want to play it? Oh boy.

    Nobody ever said they had to make it convenient for the consumer.

    Then how can anyone expect digital distribution to overtake retail distribution?

    Marlor: Agreed.
    Because that's what the publishers want. The systems are set up and prepared. What are the odds that this or any other generation of hardware will not have some kind of built in storage device and a network type connection? All three current generation systems can do this. All they have to do is slowly implement it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft tested the waters by making Halo 3 available this way. Perhaps at a slightly lower cost than retail?

    All it would take would be for a large publisher to release a Triple-A title solely available for download. The good news about DD is that it can allow smaller (and even larger) publishers to release titles for download that probably wouldn't ever see the light of day simply because the costs involved become significantly lower.

    See, here's why I don't buy this happening so easily. I have a 250gig HDD in my PC that requires regular uninstalls to install new games. Admittedly, I do have a massive backlog of games, but I just don't see consoles doing this that easily. Streamed content? Maybe. But consoles aren't given to a direct-to-drive format.

    However, things like Live, the PSN, and the VC already perform a service similar to that last point. Indie publishers and big publishers with experimental/small/innovative titles can put their stuff up on those services (save for VC, but same basic idea) instead of releasing them on a disc.

    Spoiler:
  • PataPata Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Online distrubution isn't going to happen anytime soon.

    While tech-nerds may like it it's not going to be used for big games for a long, long time.

    The average consumer is not going to pay 50 bucks for a download.

    Spoiler:
  • BetaflameBetaflame Registered User
    edited May 2007
    Pata wrote: »
    Online distrubution isn't going to happen anytime soon.

    While tech-nerds may like it it's not going to be used for big games for a long, long time.

    The average consumer is not going to pay 50 bucks for a download.

    Theoretically the lack of shipping/packaging/printing costs would reduce the price somewhat. So games would ideally be between $30-40 as a result of only having to upload the game to the servers. But you are right in the fact that if DD isn't as convienent as hard copy's people will still be willing to pay more so that they can "own" the copy of the game.

    Bash: Agreed except for the
    Online distribution is most definitely the Way of the Futureâ„¢ for better or worse. Online distribution solves a number of problems for game developers and console manufacturers.
    No company can force customers to buy there product, now matter how benificial it may be for the company. The customer is always right... right? O_o

  • KelorKelor Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    It sure as hell won't be happening over here anytime soon. Hell, I've got 40gb of bandwidth a month, which is as much as my provider will give. So I could download maybe one game a month.

    I'm with Carnivore. Boxes and chunky manuals all the way.

  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    I haven't been reading... but... I, too, like having boxes/cases, manuals, and physical discs.

    Plus, if we went DD all the way, I suspect that we wouldn't see decreased prices, despite the lack of "middlemen" at retail and lack of cost due to cases/manuals/boxes.


    Even so, I could probably live with DD if that's what it came to.

  • Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    edited May 2007
    Because that's what the publishers want. The systems are set up and prepared. What are the odds that this or any other generation of hardware will not have some kind of built in storage device and a network type connection? All three current generation systems can do this. All they have to do is slowly implement it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft tested the waters by making Halo 3 available this way. Perhaps at a slightly lower cost than retail?

    All it would take would be for a large publisher to release a Triple-A title solely available for download. The good news about DD is that it can allow smaller (and even larger) publishers to release titles for download that probably wouldn't ever see the light of day simply because the costs involved become significantly lower.

    See, here's why I don't buy this happening so easily. I have a 250gig HDD in my PC that requires regular uninstalls to install new games. Admittedly, I do have a massive backlog of games, but I just don't see consoles doing this that easily. Streamed content? Maybe. But consoles aren't given to a direct-to-drive format.
    However, all the current systems have this in mind. Any content purchased can be redownloaded at any time. (With limitations for login IDs and player IDs and such.) Let's say you have a console with the same 250GB drive. You have filled the drive with games averaging 20GB in size (Using the previously mentioned example of Resistance for PS3) which would be about 12. Are you actually playing them all, all the time?

    People are already buying Half-Life over Steam. GameSpy/FilePlanet has their Direct2Drive stuff. It's already a reality. It'll be sooner rather than later that DD becomes a larger part of the consoles.
    slash000 wrote: »
    Plus, if we went DD all the way, I suspect that we wouldn't see decreased prices, despite the lack of "middlemen" at retail and lack of cost due to cases/manuals/boxes.
    Sadly, I believe this will be true. I'd expect that the first few releases will see both DD and Box release. The DD will be priced a bit lower (or include some kind of free downloadable content) to entice people to buy that way instead. Then when Boxes are getting phased out, the DD price will increase because of 'server maintainance' or something.

  • Wonder_HippieWonder_Hippie __BANNED USERS
    edited May 2007
    Because that's what the publishers want. The systems are set up and prepared. What are the odds that this or any other generation of hardware will not have some kind of built in storage device and a network type connection? All three current generation systems can do this. All they have to do is slowly implement it. I wouldn't be at all surprised if Microsoft tested the waters by making Halo 3 available this way. Perhaps at a slightly lower cost than retail?

    All it would take would be for a large publisher to release a Triple-A title solely available for download. The good news about DD is that it can allow smaller (and even larger) publishers to release titles for download that probably wouldn't ever see the light of day simply because the costs involved become significantly lower.

    See, here's why I don't buy this happening so easily. I have a 250gig HDD in my PC that requires regular uninstalls to install new games. Admittedly, I do have a massive backlog of games, but I just don't see consoles doing this that easily. Streamed content? Maybe. But consoles aren't given to a direct-to-drive format.
    However, all the current systems have this in mind. Any content purchased can be redownloaded at any time. (With limitations for login IDs and player IDs and such.) Let's say you have a console with the same 250GB drive. You have filled the drive with games averaging 20GB in size (Using the previously mentioned example of Resistance for PS3) which would be about 12. Are you actually playing them all, all the time?

    People are already buying Half-Life over Steam. GameSpy/FilePlanet has their Direct2Drive stuff. It's already a reality. It'll be sooner rather than later that DD becomes a larger part of the consoles.

    Yeah, not buying it. The hassle of redownloading on a delete and the limitations because of DRMs and such that we're seeing with the 360 Elite will prevent it from being a widely adopted medium.

    I mean, do you know how successful those business models are for full games outside of Steam? PCs are entirely different beasts than consoles; the average console user is going to prefer a catalogue of games in the corporeal sense.

    Spoiler:
  • MarlorMarlor Registered User
    edited May 2007
    Digital distribution might work in many countries, but it won't be possible everywhere.

    For example, digital distribution of large-scale content won't fly in Australia at the moment. Even high-end internet plans only allow 20-40GB of downloads per month. Most customers are on lower-end plans with only 2-5GB of downloads per month.

    I'm on a higher-end plan, but a 10GB game would still eat up half of my monthly download quota. If I have to replace my HDD and re-download 200GB of games, it would take me almost a year to do so.

    Not to mention that many casual gamers still only have dialup anyway.

    Boxes and DVDs will have to be around for a while yet.

    Mario Kart Wii: 1332-8060-5236 (Aaron)
  • WybornWyborn GET EQUIPPED Registered User regular
    edited May 2007
    So, anybody see this?

    Anybody else smell that, come to think? 'Cause I think I smell a burn.

Sign In or Register to comment.