Even if consoles don't move to download only, it'd be really nice if all games were released as download at the same time as in stores.
I could see consoles using a Steam like system where the discs are purely for installation and all games require registration as a step before going download only. Publishers get to kill used games sales and stores get to keep selling games.
I don't think anyone would want to sell consoles that required an internet connection to play games.
And while services might be getting better--not necessarily though (in the South US, there are lots of gamers, but ISP services frequently have monopolies or near-monopolies, even where people own their homes), games are certainly getting larger.
Is it different in the northern US? I honestly had no idea. I'd always assumed the whole country was screwed over this way, with the cable companies clearly dividing up the residential areas to avoid competition, and likewise basically only one choice for DSL.
Honestly, it might be, I just don't want to make any wide assumptions since I haven't lived in the North US since I immigrated to America years ago. In Georgia, and some of our neighbors, it's not uncommon to have either Comcast or Charter flat-out refuse to establish service in your home, particularly if you're living in an apartment (though it happens in houses too).
Add to the fact that DSL coverage is bad in a lot of places, or nonexistent in others (and really damn slow by comparison), and DD becomes a laughable joke. It's probably not an exaggeration to say that PC games can be twice as big as they were 3 to 4 years ago....but for the vast majority of my neighbors, their top download speed hadn't changed (in fact, it might have even slowed for some of them), for about 1.6 megabits/second. Meanwhile, we're 10 to 15 minutes away from Target, Best Buy, and two Wal-Marts, all of which sell PC games.
It's no wonder that I was the only gamer I knew in my town (and I know quite a few) who used Steam before the introduction of Steam to Mac OS X. Any sort of DD is a joke here--and this is not a unique thing to where I live (thankfully that's not true everywhere).
ISPs are almost always a near-monopoly. I can either pay $50/month to Comcast for 6mbps or $50/month to Qwest for 7mbps. And you can't get either of those prices unless you bundle so to switch from Comcast to Qwest I'd have to drop cable for satellite, Vonage for Qwest landline, and (clearly) Comcast cable internet for Qwest DSL. I have no desire to ever have a landline phone again and I don't want satellite TV so my only real choice for halfway affordable Internet access is Comcast.
Even if consoles don't move to download only, it'd be really nice if all games were released as download at the same time as in stores.
I could see consoles using a Steam like system where the discs are purely for installation and all games require registration as a step before going download only. Publishers get to kill used games sales and stores get to keep selling games.
I don't think anyone would want to sell consoles that required an internet connection to play games.
Even if consoles don't move to download only, it'd be really nice if all games were released as download at the same time as in stores.
I could see consoles using a Steam like system where the discs are purely for installation and all games require registration as a step before going download only. Publishers get to kill used games sales and stores get to keep selling games.
I don't think anyone would want to sell consoles that required an internet connection to play games.
Lots of places sell PCs.
That's true, the trick will probably be giving retailers a much larger cut of the console selling price if they go DD only. I've heard stories about retailers receiving $10 or even losing money on consoles sold.
And while services might be getting better--not necessarily though (in the South US, there are lots of gamers, but ISP services frequently have monopolies or near-monopolies, even where people own their homes), games are certainly getting larger.
Is it different in the northern US? I honestly had no idea. I'd always assumed the whole country was screwed over this way, with the cable companies clearly dividing up the residential areas to avoid competition, and likewise basically only one choice for DSL.
I'm not certain how it is everywhere, but this is how it is in my small town (around 1300-1500 people) in northwest SC: There is one cable company here, and that's Charter. They put down the lines, they run the signal. They're the only choice we have. If we wanted to, say, get Verizon to wire us up for FIOS because we're tired of Charter taking forever to fix outages? Well, it would involve paying Charter a hefty fine (the county contracted Charter to lay down the fiber for high-speed internet a decade ago, and while the mayor can't say exactly how hefty a fine it is, he's indicated that it would be "in the high six figures" at the least; for a very small town like ours populated mostly by retirees, that is untenable), and we would also have to pay to dig up the fiber and ship it back to Charter. Then we'd have to pay Verizon or Time Warner or some other company to come in and lay down their own line. It's fucking ridiculous.
And DSL? If it's not Bellsouth, you don't have it. And I've only ever seen people with DirecTV satellites as well.
korodullin on
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
Even if consoles don't move to download only, it'd be really nice if all games were released as download at the same time as in stores.
I could see consoles using a Steam like system where the discs are purely for installation and all games require registration as a step before going download only. Publishers get to kill used games sales and stores get to keep selling games.
I don't think anyone would want to sell consoles that required an internet connection to play games.
Lots of places sell PCs.
That's true, the trick will probably be giving retailers a much larger cut of the console selling price if they go DD only. I've heard stories about retailers receiving $10 or even losing money on consoles sold.
No, I mean none of the console manufacturers would want to sell a console that required an internet connection.
Why would they want to rule out such a huge number of their customers?
I want that to be true. I really do. But DD shops need to stop touting "convenience" as a factor. I already drive by and to shops that sell games. It is not inconvenient to pick up a game from the electronics section of Target when I'm already there to buy socks, bread, Vanilla Coke, and a LEGO kit. They want people to bite on DD? They're going to have to lower their prices.
Until DD is dominant - then I think we won't see prices lower hardly at all. They'll look at that 10 year old build of ME2 and say "you know what, that's still a good game - $60!" And if XBLM is my only choice since the next Xbox is pure DD then I'm either paying 4800 moonbux or I'm not playing the game.
Just because digital distribution isn't convenient for you doesn't mean it's not convenient for everyone. Especially when that convenience includes not having to worry about losing or damaging a physical copy of a game, or worrying that the obscure older title you want will be in stock at a mass-market store.
Also, if you think that any sane publisher is going to keep major franchise games at full retail price for decades after release, even if they have a theoretical monopoly on distribution, that means you're once again ignoring the numerous reasons why gradually lowering a price point is a really good idea.
The biggest one being basic economics. Lowering your price means more people will be willing to buy your game. Especially in the case of games that have been on the market for a while, selling more units at a lower price point can and does lead to more profit than selling fewer units at a higher price point.
Lawndart on
0
Dusdais ashamed of this postSLC, UTRegistered Userregular
DD is great, and I myself have bought quite a few games on PC, PSN and XBLA using it.
But until the majority of consumers have access to fast reliable internet service (with reasonable/no download limits) it won't replace retail. Simple as that.
Yes, if you have an awesome unlimited download-high speed connection you are in the minority.
Download limits are for backwards countries. I mean, I hear about this all the time from Brits and Aussies but this not an impediment for GAMERS in the US.
I live in Nowhere, Alabama and pay more than my electric bill for a DSL connection unable to stream 360p YouTube videos in real time. It's really the full package, complete with 17Gb download limit. This is within 100 miles of a major internet backbone pipe thingie, too.
I love Steam, but I pretty much have wait to download anything major until I can get a good connection on my laptop for several hours elsewhere.
I want that to be true. I really do. But DD shops need to stop touting "convenience" as a factor. I already drive by and to shops that sell games. It is not inconvenient to pick up a game from the electronics section of Target when I'm already there to buy socks, bread, Vanilla Coke, and a LEGO kit. They want people to bite on DD? They're going to have to lower their prices.
Until DD is dominant - then I think we won't see prices lower hardly at all. They'll look at that 10 year old build of ME2 and say "you know what, that's still a good game - $60!" And if XBLM is my only choice since the next Xbox is pure DD then I'm either paying 4800 moonbux or I'm not playing the game.
Just because digital distribution isn't convenient for you doesn't mean it's not convenient for everyone. Especially when that convenience includes not having to worry about losing or damaging a physical copy of a game, or worrying that the obscure older title you want will be in stock at a mass-market store.
Also, if you think that any sane publisher is going to keep major franchise games at full retail price for decades after release, even if they have a theoretical monopoly on distribution, that means you're once again ignoring the numerous reasons why gradually lowering a price point is a really good idea.
The biggest one being basic economics. Lowering your price means more people will be willing to buy your game. Especially in the case of games that have been on the market for a while, selling more units at a lower price point can and does lead to more profit than selling fewer units at a higher price point.
You're right that prices will gradually fall over time. I was exaggerating and I shouldn't have been. What puts me off is looking at games available as Xbox Originals on the 360. Every single one of them (if I recall correctly) is $15. Looking at the list on wikipedia I couldn't justify $15 on any of those games. Jade Empire? Great game. Worth maybe $5 now. Intellivision Lives? $1. Tops. Grabbed by the Ghoulies (even though I'm the one guy who liked it)? $5. It's ridiculous. I can't believe that they're actually selling very many of these games, but if you drop the price and throw them in the Spotlight Channel I'd pick a few up.
That's another great argument. Publishers want their games bought as gifts by Grandma for little Johnny. It's a lot easier for Grandma to go to Best Buy and get Blood Warriors 12 than it is for her to figure out how to gift a digital certificate (assuming the system in question even supports gift purchases).
In theory Grandma can still do this if the existing stores are willing to adapt. You can already buy PSN/XBL codes on Amazon so at least right now they seem to be embracing the idea of authorized merchants.
Take a Gamestop, keep the demo units, keep the new/popular/sales wall, loose the physical inventory, add kiosk for browsing entire libraries. How much business a "games-only" store would get outside of Grandmas to make this viable on the other hand is questionable.
Not completely related but since I've seen someone else bring this up, I am interested in seeing what, if any, kind of backlash will fall on these cable/internet providers who are doing whatever they can to combat services like Netflix for taking away their cable consumers.
I'm pretty sure MS backed out of their deal with Amazon. At least I can't find any XBLA games on there. PSN games show up just fine though. It's a shame, too. I really like being able to just buy a code online. It makes it easier to justify a purchase when I'm burning through the last bit of a gift card (just picked up Joe Danger last week for what felt like $8 because of random credit on my account).
You're right that prices will gradually fall over time. I was exaggerating and I shouldn't have been. What puts me off is looking at games available as Xbox Originals on the 360. Every single one of them (if I recall correctly) is $15. Looking at the list on wikipedia I couldn't justify $15 on any of those games. Jade Empire? Great game. Worth maybe $5 now. Intellivision Lives? $1. Tops. Grabbed by the Ghoulies (even though I'm the one guy who liked it)? $5. It's ridiculous. I can't believe that they're actually selling very many of these games, but if you drop the price and throw them in the Spotlight Channel I'd pick a few up.
True, but then we're getting into the murky waters of "perceived value".
Jade Empire, for example, is also $15 on Steam. Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines is $19.99 on Steam.
In both cases, the publishers have decided that anyone still interested in either game is willing to pay that much for them, and that a more effective way to spike demand for those titles is temporary price drops rather than permanent ones.
That line of thinking wouldn't change if either publisher had a distribution monopoly, although the process of getting to that price point might take slightly longer. But it'd certainly still happen.
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
That won't stop them from doing it.
Just look at Wizards of the Coast singlehandedly murdering every "90's era" game shop!
THOSE MONSTERS! Except for the fact that all of those D&D/D20/OGL only stores were destroying the indie market, and that they made no effort whatsoever to gather a community around them.
EDIT:Look at Tabletop trends RIGHT NOW. In two to five years that will be the vidya market.
You're right that prices will gradually fall over time. I was exaggerating and I shouldn't have been. What puts me off is looking at games available as Xbox Originals on the 360. Every single one of them (if I recall correctly) is $15. Looking at the list on wikipedia I couldn't justify $15 on any of those games. Jade Empire? Great game. Worth maybe $5 now. Intellivision Lives? $1. Tops. Grabbed by the Ghoulies (even though I'm the one guy who liked it)? $5. It's ridiculous. I can't believe that they're actually selling very many of these games, but if you drop the price and throw them in the Spotlight Channel I'd pick a few up.
True, but then we're getting into the murky waters of "perceived value".
Jade Empire, for example, is also $15 on Steam. Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines is $19.99 on Steam.
In both cases, the publishers have decided that anyone still interested in either game is willing to pay that much for them, and that a more effective way to spike demand for those titles is temporary price drops rather than permanent ones.
That line of thinking wouldn't change if either publisher had a distribution monopoly, although the process of getting to that price point might take slightly longer. But it'd certainly still happen.
But MS doesn't do that. The only time I've ever seen an Xbox Original go on sale I snapped it up. Halo: CE on my 360 is worth $5, but I didn't think twice about passing on it when they released it at $15.
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
That won't stop them from doing it.
Just look at Wizards of the Coast singlehandedly murdering every "90's era" game shop!
THOSE MONSTERS! Except for the fact that all of those D&D/D20/OGL only stores were destroying the indie market, and that they made no effort whatsoever to gather a community around them.
EDIT:Look at Tabletop trends RIGHT NOW. In two to five years that will be the vidya market.
For those of us who don't follow tabletop trends, do you mind elaborating?
korodullin on
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
That won't stop them from doing it.
Just look at Wizards of the Coast singlehandedly murdering every "90's era" game shop!
THOSE MONSTERS! Except for the fact that all of those D&D/D20/OGL only stores were destroying the indie market, and that they made no effort whatsoever to gather a community around them.
EDIT:Look at Tabletop trends RIGHT NOW. In two to five years that will be the vidya market.
For those of us who don't follow tabletop trends, do you mind elaborating?
Indeed, I'm also confused.
My problem with an all digital console is that broadband and cable services have (in the US at least) been getting more expensive and more limited lately. Soon the uncapped package will be a thing of the past, and until the government realizes that unlimited internet is vital and only not being provided due to monopolies there it will stay. So, your $60 20 Gb game download will actually cost you an extra $10 in download fees or whatever.
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
That won't stop them from doing it.
Just look at Wizards of the Coast singlehandedly murdering every "90's era" game shop!
THOSE MONSTERS! Except for the fact that all of those D&D/D20/OGL only stores were destroying the indie market, and that they made no effort whatsoever to gather a community around them.
EDIT:Look at Tabletop trends RIGHT NOW. In two to five years that will be the vidya market.
For those of us who don't follow tabletop trends, do you mind elaborating?
All tables are now proprietary. Wrong brand games slide right of the table into the cheetos.
I just lost a big ass post because the browser mistook my backspace as a go back.
To sum up what I just lost.
Microsoft does not have full backwards compatability, and too my knowledge the latest itteration of the PS3 have removed backwards compat all together, so theres no reason for them to hold onto optical media for the next console generation when they could reduce the mechanical parts and points of failure in favor of carts, Which would also remove the need to install games to harddrives as they would provide almost the same level of read/write speed, Thus removing the need and cost of engineering it.
And my second point, to sum up, was
DD only consoles are not going to happen in the next generation, and probably not the generation after. They wont happen until everyone has ultra high speed broadband that can download the 20-50gig games in a few minutes for dirt cheap, and dirt cheap access to multi-terrabyte harddrives. The harddrives will probably come before the broadband, I know.
Why? because no one is going to want to spend hours to days downloading something for their instant-play console when they could just go to the store, buy it, come back home and throw it in and be playing in 30 minutes or less.
Microsoft doesn't have full BC now at least partly because of their deal with nVidia. There's no reason to think they might not have it next time. And if they're going to have anything downloadable at all, it seems to me that Sony and MS have to have the hard drive unless they want to impose something like Nintendo's 40 MB limit on downloadables. Flash memory is still smaller and more expensive, even compared to Microsoft's insulting 5-10x markup.
Microsoft doesn't have full BC now at least partly because of their deal with nVidia. There's no reason to think they might not have it next time. And if they're going to have anything downloadable at all, it seems to me that Sony and MS have to have the hard drive unless they want to impose something like Nintendo's 40 MB limit on downloadables. Flash memory is still smaller and more expensive, even compared to Microsoft's insulting 5-10x markup.
MS clearly doesn't want to enforce a limit like that. They used to have one and gave it up. It used to be that any downloadable game had to fit on an MU (so all games had to be 512MB or less assuming all sizes of MU launched at the same time). They wanted bigger and better games and to charge more for them so now we have XBLA games that are over 2GB in size.
DD is great, and I myself have bought quite a few games on PC, PSN and XBLA using it.
But until the majority of consumers have access to fast reliable internet service (with reasonable/no download limits) it won't replace retail. Simple as that.
Yes, if you have an awesome unlimited download-high speed connection you are in the minority.
Download limits are for backwards countries. I mean, I hear about this all the time from Brits and Aussies but this not an impediment for GAMERS in the US.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
I concur. The high price of a game is offset by the fact that, if it sucks, i can drop it on Goozex and only be out around $10-$15.
Digital distribution as a primary medium (nevermind only medium) for a console's gaming library is so far away that people who are actively anticipating it just have no idea how many stars have to align before that can actually happen.
RoyallyFlushed on
0
mrt144King of the NumbernamesRegistered Userregular
DD is great, and I myself have bought quite a few games on PC, PSN and XBLA using it.
But until the majority of consumers have access to fast reliable internet service (with reasonable/no download limits) it won't replace retail. Simple as that.
Yes, if you have an awesome unlimited download-high speed connection you are in the minority.
Download limits are for backwards countries. I mean, I hear about this all the time from Brits and Aussies but this not an impediment for GAMERS in the US.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
What backwards part of the world do you live in then? I mean, I've never hit download cap in all my life, ever.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
Non-zero yes but I'm assuming insignificant compared to the hordes of people that buy Madden year-after-year, or must have the mega franchise's (Halos, CoDs, etc) new offering on day one. I wouldn't be surprised for the industry to force the minority to choose between their principals (for lack of a better term) and their hobby.
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
I really doubt the publishers and MS/Sony give a fuck about the corporate wellbeing of Gamestop.
The future isn't cartridges or optical media, it's digital distribution. Lower manufacturing and distribution costs and zero resell -- publishers love that sort of shit.
Retailers hate that sort of shit.
I really doubt the publishers and MS/Sony give a fuck about the corporate wellbeing of Gamestop.
I really doubt MS/Sony want Gamestop promoting the other console of the day over theirs. Everyone in the supply chain needs some love.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
Non-zero yes but I'm assuming insignificant compared to the hordes of people that buy Madden year-after-year, or must have the mega franchise's (Halos, CoDs, etc) new offering on day one. I wouldn't be surprised for the industry to force the minority to choose between their principals (for lack of a better term) and their hobby.
As an adult, if I'm relegated to playing AAA titles 4 years after their release when they're on sale for $10, then so be it. I honestly don't mind, and it means that I don't need to keep up with hardware requirements and I spend less money. If they can make more revenue with DD only releases, more power to them. It's a luxury item and I won't lament its loss.
The next gen will have optical drives, because a BR is going to be cheaper than a comparable flash drive for the next few years, at least. What I think we will see is a focus on downloads with the drive as a secondary option in the eyes of the console makers. Think huge/replaceable hard drives, downloadable exclusives, pre-sale pre-downloads and download prices being lower than retail discs 90% of the time.
I think the next gen will be where console makers and developers decide that it is not worth the cost to try and play nice with GameStop and BestBuy.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
Non-zero yes but I'm assuming insignificant compared to the hordes of people that buy Madden year-after-year, or must have the mega franchise's (Halos, CoDs, etc) new offering on day one. I wouldn't be surprised for the industry to force the minority to choose between their principals (for lack of a better term) and their hobby.
As an adult, if I'm relegated to playing AAA titles 4 years after their release when they're on sale for $10, then so be it. I honestly don't mind, and it means that I don't need to keep up with hardware requirements and I spend less money. If they can make more revenue with DD only releases, more power to them. It's a luxury item and I won't lament its loss.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing your stance. I just don't think that non-zero number is big enough for the industry to care and that they'll hedge their bets that a portion of said group will cave eventually.
Clearly a mix of DD and physical distribution is best for consumers. I don't know why anyone would want to no longer have the option to buy games physically.
I won't pay more than $10 for a game- any game- that I can't resell. I barely buy games retail, and if I can't resell them then I'll simply stop buying them completely.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
Non-zero yes but I'm assuming insignificant compared to the hordes of people that buy Madden year-after-year, or must have the mega franchise's (Halos, CoDs, etc) new offering on day one. I wouldn't be surprised for the industry to force the minority to choose between their principals (for lack of a better term) and their hobby.
As an adult, if I'm relegated to playing AAA titles 4 years after their release when they're on sale for $10, then so be it. I honestly don't mind, and it means that I don't need to keep up with hardware requirements and I spend less money. If they can make more revenue with DD only releases, more power to them. It's a luxury item and I won't lament its loss.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing your stance. I just don't think that non-zero number is big enough for the industry to care and that they'll hedge their bets that a portion of said group will cave eventually.
When it happens, we'll find out to what degree used game sales drive new game sales. I'd theorize the link isn't trivial.
The next gen will have optical drives, because a BR is going to be cheaper than a comparable flash drive for the next few years, at least. What I think we will see is a focus on downloads with the drive as a secondary option in the eyes of the console makers. Think huge/replaceable hard drives, downloadable exclusives, pre-sale pre-downloads and download prices being lower than retail discs 90% of the time.
I think the next gen will be where console makers and developers decide that it is not worth the cost to try and play nice with GameStop and BestBuy.
The performance and reduced complication for the console could offset that price difference until the economy of scale brought the prices down for flash memory.
Because whats easier to design and manufactor? a simple slot you throw the game in or a whole complicated drive system that has a dozen more points of fail, as well as increased cost of production
Posts
I don't think anyone would want to sell consoles that required an internet connection to play games.
Honestly, it might be, I just don't want to make any wide assumptions since I haven't lived in the North US since I immigrated to America years ago. In Georgia, and some of our neighbors, it's not uncommon to have either Comcast or Charter flat-out refuse to establish service in your home, particularly if you're living in an apartment (though it happens in houses too).
Add to the fact that DSL coverage is bad in a lot of places, or nonexistent in others (and really damn slow by comparison), and DD becomes a laughable joke. It's probably not an exaggeration to say that PC games can be twice as big as they were 3 to 4 years ago....but for the vast majority of my neighbors, their top download speed hadn't changed (in fact, it might have even slowed for some of them), for about 1.6 megabits/second. Meanwhile, we're 10 to 15 minutes away from Target, Best Buy, and two Wal-Marts, all of which sell PC games.
It's no wonder that I was the only gamer I knew in my town (and I know quite a few) who used Steam before the introduction of Steam to Mac OS X. Any sort of DD is a joke here--and this is not a unique thing to where I live (thankfully that's not true everywhere).
Yup, see above.
Lots of places sell PCs.
That's true, the trick will probably be giving retailers a much larger cut of the console selling price if they go DD only. I've heard stories about retailers receiving $10 or even losing money on consoles sold.
my twitter | my youtube
I'm not certain how it is everywhere, but this is how it is in my small town (around 1300-1500 people) in northwest SC: There is one cable company here, and that's Charter. They put down the lines, they run the signal. They're the only choice we have. If we wanted to, say, get Verizon to wire us up for FIOS because we're tired of Charter taking forever to fix outages? Well, it would involve paying Charter a hefty fine (the county contracted Charter to lay down the fiber for high-speed internet a decade ago, and while the mayor can't say exactly how hefty a fine it is, he's indicated that it would be "in the high six figures" at the least; for a very small town like ours populated mostly by retirees, that is untenable), and we would also have to pay to dig up the fiber and ship it back to Charter. Then we'd have to pay Verizon or Time Warner or some other company to come in and lay down their own line. It's fucking ridiculous.
And DSL? If it's not Bellsouth, you don't have it. And I've only ever seen people with DirecTV satellites as well.
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
No, I mean none of the console manufacturers would want to sell a console that required an internet connection.
Why would they want to rule out such a huge number of their customers?
Oh yea, I agree. That's not happening anytime real soon.
my twitter | my youtube
Just because digital distribution isn't convenient for you doesn't mean it's not convenient for everyone. Especially when that convenience includes not having to worry about losing or damaging a physical copy of a game, or worrying that the obscure older title you want will be in stock at a mass-market store.
Also, if you think that any sane publisher is going to keep major franchise games at full retail price for decades after release, even if they have a theoretical monopoly on distribution, that means you're once again ignoring the numerous reasons why gradually lowering a price point is a really good idea.
The biggest one being basic economics. Lowering your price means more people will be willing to buy your game. Especially in the case of games that have been on the market for a while, selling more units at a lower price point can and does lead to more profit than selling fewer units at a higher price point.
I live in Nowhere, Alabama and pay more than my electric bill for a DSL connection unable to stream 360p YouTube videos in real time. It's really the full package, complete with 17Gb download limit. This is within 100 miles of a major internet backbone pipe thingie, too.
I love Steam, but I pretty much have wait to download anything major until I can get a good connection on my laptop for several hours elsewhere.
You're right that prices will gradually fall over time. I was exaggerating and I shouldn't have been. What puts me off is looking at games available as Xbox Originals on the 360. Every single one of them (if I recall correctly) is $15. Looking at the list on wikipedia I couldn't justify $15 on any of those games. Jade Empire? Great game. Worth maybe $5 now. Intellivision Lives? $1. Tops. Grabbed by the Ghoulies (even though I'm the one guy who liked it)? $5. It's ridiculous. I can't believe that they're actually selling very many of these games, but if you drop the price and throw them in the Spotlight Channel I'd pick a few up.
And that is batshit crazy.
Take a Gamestop, keep the demo units, keep the new/popular/sales wall, loose the physical inventory, add kiosk for browsing entire libraries. How much business a "games-only" store would get outside of Grandmas to make this viable on the other hand is questionable.
Not completely related but since I've seen someone else bring this up, I am interested in seeing what, if any, kind of backlash will fall on these cable/internet providers who are doing whatever they can to combat services like Netflix for taking away their cable consumers.
True, but then we're getting into the murky waters of "perceived value".
Jade Empire, for example, is also $15 on Steam. Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines is $19.99 on Steam.
In both cases, the publishers have decided that anyone still interested in either game is willing to pay that much for them, and that a more effective way to spike demand for those titles is temporary price drops rather than permanent ones.
That line of thinking wouldn't change if either publisher had a distribution monopoly, although the process of getting to that price point might take slightly longer. But it'd certainly still happen.
Especially considering they basically make no money from the disc versions, but Xbox originals is pure profit (split between them and the publisher).
That won't stop them from doing it.
Just look at Wizards of the Coast singlehandedly murdering every "90's era" game shop!
THOSE MONSTERS! Except for the fact that all of those D&D/D20/OGL only stores were destroying the indie market, and that they made no effort whatsoever to gather a community around them.
EDIT:Look at Tabletop trends RIGHT NOW. In two to five years that will be the vidya market.
But MS doesn't do that. The only time I've ever seen an Xbox Original go on sale I snapped it up. Halo: CE on my 360 is worth $5, but I didn't think twice about passing on it when they released it at $15.
For those of us who don't follow tabletop trends, do you mind elaborating?
- The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
Indeed, I'm also confused.
My problem with an all digital console is that broadband and cable services have (in the US at least) been getting more expensive and more limited lately. Soon the uncapped package will be a thing of the past, and until the government realizes that unlimited internet is vital and only not being provided due to monopolies there it will stay. So, your $60 20 Gb game download will actually cost you an extra $10 in download fees or whatever.
All tables are now proprietary. Wrong brand games slide right of the table into the cheetos.
To sum up what I just lost.
Microsoft does not have full backwards compatability, and too my knowledge the latest itteration of the PS3 have removed backwards compat all together, so theres no reason for them to hold onto optical media for the next console generation when they could reduce the mechanical parts and points of failure in favor of carts, Which would also remove the need to install games to harddrives as they would provide almost the same level of read/write speed, Thus removing the need and cost of engineering it.
And my second point, to sum up, was
DD only consoles are not going to happen in the next generation, and probably not the generation after. They wont happen until everyone has ultra high speed broadband that can download the 20-50gig games in a few minutes for dirt cheap, and dirt cheap access to multi-terrabyte harddrives. The harddrives will probably come before the broadband, I know.
Why? because no one is going to want to spend hours to days downloading something for their instant-play console when they could just go to the store, buy it, come back home and throw it in and be playing in 30 minutes or less.
MS clearly doesn't want to enforce a limit like that. They used to have one and gave it up. It used to be that any downloadable game had to fit on an MU (so all games had to be 512MB or less assuming all sizes of MU launched at the same time). They wanted bigger and better games and to charge more for them so now we have XBLA games that are over 2GB in size.
As it is, I have bought none. Ghostbusters may end up being the first.
And this is coming from a total XBLAAIG fanboy, I've bought literally 100+ of those beauties.
In theory, I say - fuck disks, bring on pure DD baby.
But don't charge as much for those damned harddrives!
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I suspect there are a non-zero number of people out there who feel the same way.
I concur. The high price of a game is offset by the fact that, if it sucks, i can drop it on Goozex and only be out around $10-$15.
What backwards part of the world do you live in then? I mean, I've never hit download cap in all my life, ever.
I really doubt the publishers and MS/Sony give a fuck about the corporate wellbeing of Gamestop.
As an adult, if I'm relegated to playing AAA titles 4 years after their release when they're on sale for $10, then so be it. I honestly don't mind, and it means that I don't need to keep up with hardware requirements and I spend less money. If they can make more revenue with DD only releases, more power to them. It's a luxury item and I won't lament its loss.
I think the next gen will be where console makers and developers decide that it is not worth the cost to try and play nice with GameStop and BestBuy.
When it happens, we'll find out to what degree used game sales drive new game sales. I'd theorize the link isn't trivial.
The performance and reduced complication for the console could offset that price difference until the economy of scale brought the prices down for flash memory.
Because whats easier to design and manufactor? a simple slot you throw the game in or a whole complicated drive system that has a dozen more points of fail, as well as increased cost of production