Oh and what you said about adventure games. If someone needs to make a remake of Quest for Glory/Hero's Quest. Modernize it to take out the grind and the interface clunkiness and you have a guaranteed winner.
Jimquisition: Welcoming A Digital Future
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I see what you're saying but I don't buy a £40 game every month. I can't afford to do that either, I'm living off the bare minimum student loan for the next 3 years so yeah I seriously can't afford it. Know how many games I've bought since september? 1. MGS HD collection for £20 thanks to vouchers for Xmas.Elate said:
When I stop being a poor student then maybe I can afford to upgrade my shit. When I say I can't afford any upgrade I mean it.
Each time I try to feel passive about EA I'm reminded of just how many companies I've loved that they've crushed.Aircross said:
:/.
Maxis and Westwood alone are enough for me to never forgive them, but the list grows relentlessly.
I own more games digitally than I do physically.SupahGamuh said:
I >love< physical more, but digital is so much more cost friendly.
I've spent maybe .25% of the "value" of my steam catalogue. Valve found the real price point for games.
Why not? All they're doing now is blaming the gamers who don't have as much of a variety to shop from anymore since certain retailers have near monopolies.J-meMalone said:
And that's what makes me back away from the digi-dist future: sure we see some good prices on things like Steam and Onlive right now. But when they become the only game in town, I have a feeling we'll be seeing much fewer great deals.
Also, it sounds like digi-dist will be great for independent devs with projects that aren't terribly ambitious, it will kill the big budget AAA part of the industry. Not that it would be a terrible thing to happen at this point. Over the past few years they seem to be selling less & less (quality) content while asking for more and more money. Fuck 'em.
What does computing power have to do with it? Internet availability and speed is what's important. I doubt that small villages and remote farms will have high-speed internet in 50 years.TheKasp said:
P.S. Actually, it has something to do with it, the more powerful PCs get, the faster the connection would need to be.
Maybe reread that bolded part there of what was said? Yeah I really don't see it likely to happen in the NEAR future 50 years isn't really the near future now is it.FelixG said:If you don't think that we will have that kind of computer science in 50 years you obviously have no idea how much advancement we have made in the last 50.RoseArch said:
as an example this is what we had 50 years ago
you want to know what can out compute that?
We have come a long way, in 50 years we would likely not even recognize what the fuck was going on if we were able to look at it today.
I like phyisical copies of games because I know I own them. If something happens and I do, say, get banned from Xbox live, I can sell my copy of the game to another. That brings up my biggest fear with the digital age... it's giving publishers an incredibly amount of control over the consumer. In ways they really shouldn't be able to if you ask me.
The best example of this is something even the beloved Valve does. Taking away your ability to play all of your games for doing something that breaks the ToS. Or for some services *cough*Origin*cough* it's more like whenever the company feels like it. Now you can say that most companies would use it sparringly, but there is always margin for error. And the fact they have the power both legally and technically to just take away things that you legally purchased without any compensation seems wrong to me. And that's just one example of the kind of power companies will have with digital distribution.
The best example of this is something even the beloved Valve does. Taking away your ability to play all of your games for doing something that breaks the ToS. Or for some services *cough*Origin*cough* it's more like whenever the company feels like it. Now you can say that most companies would use it sparringly, but there is always margin for error. And the fact they have the power both legally and technically to just take away things that you legally purchased without any compensation seems wrong to me. And that's just one example of the kind of power companies will have with digital distribution.
If only we had a big digital distro network that was comparable to iTunes. Oh wait, we do. It's called Steam. And it hasn't changed pricing structures. It hasn't changed anything. Standard prices on Steam rival brick and mortar stores, the only breaks coming from Steam are sales. And that. Doesn't. Count.
This is a load of crap.
This is a load of crap.
The United States is full of companies so profit driven they will cap usage and ban people for too much internet rather than improve infrastructure. Comcast, one of the largest ISPs in the nation, has not laid new line in over a decade. In some regions, it's actually been fifteen years or more since there was any infrastructure increase.TheKasp said:
Now, I cannot prove a negative. There's a chance that things will change in the future, but there's also a chance that if I think positive thoughts, I will become a millionaire. You're talking about things changing away their normal progression in this country, not toward it and that shifts out of your favour.
And since the US is one of the largest gaming markets, this will impact distribution. Especially with how bitchy corporations get about dealing with rights overseas. The rest of the industrial world tends to be less in the pocket of media owners.
As I see it new game developers today have two basic options...
Alternative A:
Step 1. Create one or many simple low budget game(s), release for free or for low cost and build a fanbase.
Step 2. Avoid major parasite companies also know as publishers, ex EA, Activision, Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, Nintendo etc.
Step 3. Use the money you earned, kickstarter and/or alpha/beta payment to fund your next big project.
Step 4. Make a great title.
Step 5. Do the happy dance.
Step 6. Profit
Step 7. GOTO 3
Alternative B:
Step 1. Create one or many simple low budget game(s), release for free or for low cost and build a fanbase.
Step 2. Sellout to a major publisher.
Step 3. Forget about your dream projects and start working as slaves on the next generic casual shit game.
Step 4. Get fired, kill yourself or GOTO 3.
Alternative A:
Step 1. Create one or many simple low budget game(s), release for free or for low cost and build a fanbase.
Step 2. Avoid major parasite companies also know as publishers, ex EA, Activision, Sony, Microsoft, Ubisoft, Nintendo etc.
Step 3. Use the money you earned, kickstarter and/or alpha/beta payment to fund your next big project.
Step 4. Make a great title.
Step 5. Do the happy dance.
Step 6. Profit
Step 7. GOTO 3
Alternative B:
Step 1. Create one or many simple low budget game(s), release for free or for low cost and build a fanbase.
Step 2. Sellout to a major publisher.
Step 3. Forget about your dream projects and start working as slaves on the next generic casual shit game.
Step 4. Get fired, kill yourself or GOTO 3.
I want a physical library one way or another. It means I can save it and play it again later like with my Atari, NES, Genesis and "Golden Age" PC games. If I pay for a game, I should be able to burn a physical copy and not lose access should I stop using a service or a service goes out of business.
What happens if say, in 10-15 years, Steam or Valve is out of business, do you still have your library of games that can be installed and played without needing steam servers to be up? Is this library completely dependent on a company being in business in order to have anything to show for it when you get older? If so, people may realize they've flushed their money down the toiletZhukov said:
Digital distribution will make perfectly clear, once and for all, the untenable nature of the $60 price point.
Just watch what happens when customers suddenly find themselves with no choice but to pay full dosh for their games - instead of buying 5-7 games for $300, selling them back for $100 more, and buying another 2-3, suddenly they can only buy 5 games for $300, end of story.
No used sales, slower descending price point (watch what EA does with its $20 digital copies of five-year-old games!), fewer sale opportunities, no money back - ever... and much harder/less attractive gift giving.
What will happen as a result of this?
1. Sales turn down (slowly at first, but faster over time as retail dries up) for all but the biggest games as people are forced to choose which purchases to cut.
2. Consumers play fewer games and have less fun for their money.
3. In an attempt to stem the leaks, lesser companies and lesser games from major companies will switch to offerings at lower price points,
4. making the big games look just as overpriced as they are, leading to either
5a. the big games being forced to lower their prices to survive, or
5b. the big games simply dying off.
And throughout this charade, the B-list publishers will keep selling their $20-$40 titles - mostly on PC - which will be looking more and more attractive to a cash-strapped populace. And, of course, the Steam sales will continue.
Just watch what happens when customers suddenly find themselves with no choice but to pay full dosh for their games - instead of buying 5-7 games for $300, selling them back for $100 more, and buying another 2-3, suddenly they can only buy 5 games for $300, end of story.
No used sales, slower descending price point (watch what EA does with its $20 digital copies of five-year-old games!), fewer sale opportunities, no money back - ever... and much harder/less attractive gift giving.
What will happen as a result of this?
1. Sales turn down (slowly at first, but faster over time as retail dries up) for all but the biggest games as people are forced to choose which purchases to cut.
2. Consumers play fewer games and have less fun for their money.
3. In an attempt to stem the leaks, lesser companies and lesser games from major companies will switch to offerings at lower price points,
4. making the big games look just as overpriced as they are, leading to either
5a. the big games being forced to lower their prices to survive, or
5b. the big games simply dying off.
And throughout this charade, the B-list publishers will keep selling their $20-$40 titles - mostly on PC - which will be looking more and more attractive to a cash-strapped populace. And, of course, the Steam sales will continue.
Oh Jim, stop being so sexy and right all the time and giving me a fat fetish. All that oiled up gaming manflesh and those oiled up gaming gears lying on a bed just for you, oh~. Wait, what am I saying?!? OH GOD, DON'T LOOK AT ME. DON'T LOOK UPON ME IN MY SICK, PERVERSE SHAME. I DIDN'T SAY THIS. YOU SAW NOTHING. DON'T LOOK AT ME! DON'T LOOK AT MY SHAAAAAAAME!
Ehem, I pretty much agree with what's said therein. Unlike the piracy videos where my opinions are slightly different but similar. This pretty much shows a good portion of my opinions of why I want us to move to a purely digital age. Hopefully, the old age won't be able to hold on for very much longer. Because this current age, at the very least, is better for gaming. At least, in terms of distribution. Has indie gaming ever prospered as well as now? Certainly not.
Many indie developers are in fact, now being revived from more dead than Grey Fox. And many are prospering more than many major publishers. I may miss the 16-Bit era, but this part of the future is looking bright.
Ehem, I pretty much agree with what's said therein. Unlike the piracy videos where my opinions are slightly different but similar. This pretty much shows a good portion of my opinions of why I want us to move to a purely digital age. Hopefully, the old age won't be able to hold on for very much longer. Because this current age, at the very least, is better for gaming. At least, in terms of distribution. Has indie gaming ever prospered as well as now? Certainly not.
Many indie developers are in fact, now being revived from more dead than Grey Fox. And many are prospering more than many major publishers. I may miss the 16-Bit era, but this part of the future is looking bright.
I havnt seen the Video yet
but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I dont want to have to download my games to play them
I dont want to have to be connected to the internet while I play
my internet is crap, alot of others people inernetis crap and it expensive if you want enough data to be able to download games of that size
I just want to play my games, I dont want to fuck around to do so
but NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
I dont want to have to download my games to play them
I dont want to have to be connected to the internet while I play
my internet is crap, alot of others people inernetis crap and it expensive if you want enough data to be able to download games of that size
I just want to play my games, I dont want to fuck around to do so
My main concern with a move towards increased digital distribution isn't one over funding or publisher rights or anything covered in the video. It's infrastructure. Quite honestly, broadband penetration rates aren't as high as they need to be for an all-digital system to be as effective as Jim's making it out to be.
Some handy charts if you're into reading. [http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=us+broadband+penetration+2011&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websiteoptimization.com%2Fbw%2F1107%2F&ei=gKQ5T577K_Sr2AX-64iFAg&usg=AFQjCNH-TmQ5MFMogWItlpgWmw6MZv4dDg&cad=rja] If not, here's the short version: While nearly eight out of ten US households enjoys broadband access, that's still less than 30% of the population as a whole with "proper" access.
Yes, wireless networks are helping to distribute internet services where it's economically or technologically infeasible for large scale cable networks, but even the "best" wireless companies still leave huge patches of empty space in areas like the southwest and the Dakotas. Not to mention that availability of access does not correlate with affordability.
I like the concept of digital distribution, I really do. But the fact remains that current systems capacities aren't strong enough to handle that idea in this country, much less the rest of the world. And since this is an election year, five bucks says not one candidate (presidential, congressional, or otherwise) will place "I'll get you online!" over "I'll cut your taxes!"
Some handy charts if you're into reading. [http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=us+broadband+penetration+2011&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websiteoptimization.com%2Fbw%2F1107%2F&ei=gKQ5T577K_Sr2AX-64iFAg&usg=AFQjCNH-TmQ5MFMogWItlpgWmw6MZv4dDg&cad=rja] If not, here's the short version: While nearly eight out of ten US households enjoys broadband access, that's still less than 30% of the population as a whole with "proper" access.
Yes, wireless networks are helping to distribute internet services where it's economically or technologically infeasible for large scale cable networks, but even the "best" wireless companies still leave huge patches of empty space in areas like the southwest and the Dakotas. Not to mention that availability of access does not correlate with affordability.
I like the concept of digital distribution, I really do. But the fact remains that current systems capacities aren't strong enough to handle that idea in this country, much less the rest of the world. And since this is an election year, five bucks says not one candidate (presidential, congressional, or otherwise) will place "I'll get you online!" over "I'll cut your taxes!"
man i miss looking at a ton of boxes of a shelf and finding a classic buget game that i'd never seen. Warm happy memories of buying Legend and Future Wars.... Sad pandas all round but the future is online. As long as i live long enough to see EA burn i'll take that future. I have to buy ME3 on the xbox now!