Slashdot Mirror
Gran Tourismo HD Cars Sold Seperately?
KDR_11k writes "1up reports on a Famitsu article discussing the future of microtransactions for PS3. According to the article, Gran Tourismo HD will require all cars to be bought via microtransactions. More specifically, the 'classic' package will come with no cars or tracks and the 'premium' package will include 30 cars and a measly 2 tracks to race on. Additional cars cost between 50 and 100 yen ($0.43-$0.85) and tracks go for 200-500 yen ($1.71-$4.26) a piece. No pricing was given for the game itself." From the article: "Now, is it possible that the game will be a full-priced title with a built-in download system that allows users to download cars and tracks equal to the number of the game's retail price? We hope the model ends up similar to this. However, right now, details are extremely sparse, and Sony has to have an answer to these questions -- most of the people who can answer are over in Tokyo, we'll update if we hear back. Welcome to next-gen."
Dies a fast and painful death. It could completely ruin the console gaming experience.
'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7
batteries not included
I sat down to write a new sig tonight and all I did was make the chair warm.
Why does this seem like its going to piss off a number of kids who get this game for christmas or a birthday? "YEA!!! I got Gran Turismo HD!!!" *Runs upstairs and puts it in PS3* "What! No cars! No Tracks! WTF!!"
The ONLY THING...THE FRIGGIN ONLY THING!!! That I would have even thought about buying a PS3 for... has now been raped and screwed. GT was the standard, IMHO, in racing sims. Now a pathetic peice of marketing in sonys cannon of crap.
History repeats... the bigger the empire the harder than fall. Well Sony last vestage of empire just came cashing down at 80 cents a car vs thousands of loyal players that are willing to wait years and years of delay for a game to be "right"...
<fineprint>
Seriously though, reduced-price modular video games expandable through micropayments is a neat concept. I can only hope that such a system remains optional, however...
This message printed on 100% post-consumer recycled electrons.
Gran Turismo is a great game, but do you think people will really be lining up to pay for extra cars? You've got to be kindding me. SONY: You're a big stupid idiot.
With such foresight with games, will the hardware manufacturers catch on as well? I wonder if buttons will come with the controllers or will they be an extra, "optional" feature to, to be purchased on a 1 by 1 and on a "as needed" basis!
Seriously, it's cool if true EXTRAS are open to purchase, but I tend to feel jipped if a product doesn't even provide the basic experience I was expecting out of the box.
Nintendo Wii and Xbox 360 just jumped WAY ahead of PS3. Xbox 360 seems to be slowly tipping towards more bought-n-downloaded content. Soon, all the casual gamer will have left is the Ninetndo Wii.
Wii-hoo!
What kind of game is $60 dollars to begin with and also requires the player to shell out extra cash for unlockables? This is ridiculous. Sony just is making one mistake after another.
... in fact it looks like that is just what they are doing if they think this will sell. I sure as hell will be the first one to say I will not buy that bunch of bull. I own all the other GT games, and "was" looking forward to the new installments on the next system (when I get around to buying a PS3 which won't be right away). Note the key term of "was" in the previous statement. I certainly WON'T "buy" a game that I can't even play without spending even more money for the individual "parts" that make up the "game"... Basically it is trying to sell a car at full price and then telling the people who bought it, "oh, by the way, if you want to be able to actually start the car, well you need to buy an engine. And if you want the engine to run, you need to buy a exhaust system, fuel pump, fule lines, air intake duct, alternator, spark plugs, and fuel injection system. Oh and do you want to be able to stop? Yeah, you will need to get brakes, brake pads, brake assemblies, pressure lines, and brake fluid. Oh I forgot, you also need to buy the seat belts if you want to be legal too..."
Screw them...
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Gran Toursimo HD... the only game out there that could possibly make be buy a PS/3. I would have to replace my LCD-TV (no HDMI), would spend big bucks on a PS/3 and even for the game itself.
I always liked GT... had bought a PS/1 _only_ for Gran Toursimo, same about half a year ago with a PS/2, because I was in a spending mood.
I personally haven't touched a computer game for six or seven years right now - except Gran Tourismo.
Buying each track, each car? This would be just a rip-off. So, Sony/Polyphony Digital/Whoever you're expecting me to pay hundreds of bucks to play all the nice cars and tracks that had been available in every game before? I say NEVER, NEVER.
YOu now what? Your PS/3 seems to be a blatant consumer rip-off and if the story is true the day will come that I - as a consumer - will stop buying Sony products.
Go and copy some macbooks, your big days are obviously over.
Now, is it possible that the game will be a full-priced title with a built-in download system that allows users to download cars and tracks equal to the number of the game's retail price?
Well going by Sony's track record, the game will be at best half price, and will include a maximum of $10 worth of "credit".
Sony is just asking to bomb.
PS games have been overpriced for years without any silly ideas like this. There is absolutely no way people are going to pay for odds and ends that should be a part of the game in the first place, and just aren't worth that kind of money.
So the games industry wants to know what fuels piracy? Well, stuff like this certainly helps quite a bit.
I guess THIS is what they meant when they told me to 'think outside the box'. It's literally like Sony sat down and went 'just how badly can we screw up the PS3'? They are definitely executing that strategy to perfection.
Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
If someone is stupid enough to buy a ps3 for $599, and a game at 80$, they have more money than brains, and will probably buy all the tracks and cars too.
God spoke to me.
I'm assuming that something like this will let you download the cars and tracks to the PS3s built in HDD, so how long will it last before someone hacks it so can you can just copy the cars and tracks other people have purchased to your HDD?
The only other option is to make the game online play only
Indeed as the story points out, pricing is the key to this being good or evil for us as consumers.
If the game sells at half price to start, and I can buy just the cars I like and all the tracks at a price lower than most of the other retail titles - then the idea will be a good one for the game designers and consumers alike.
But outside of that, automatic mistrust of micropayments that seems to be rampant in responses to this story smacks of luddite thinking. Is not this the future we wanted, to be able to buy things in small components and assemble them as we wish? Greed may or may not enter into it but as a gamer the ability to buy a custom variety of tracks (some perhaps user designed!!) and cars is appealing.
But then again, it came from Sony so all of the normal interest in technology is turned topsy-turvy in bloodlust to see Sony fall. What a shame there are not more pure gamers and enlightened technical thinkers about Slashdot nowadays rather than having the populace fall to the Herd Mind of Rage which is all too popular in so many areas of thought these days. Far easier to demonize than engage in rational thought, I guess.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Console makers have been threat... err, promising to do this since Xbox Live first came out, but no one's been stupid enough to actually go all out on a title people actually want. Enter Sony. The one console maker stupid enough to actually believe the crap that comes out of the marketing department. I'm a big Sony fan, and I'm still looking forward to the PS3 if for no other reason it has a lot of potential for homebrew app development. But the only thing good I see coming out of this is the inevitable penny-arcade comic. Come on, combine a next-gen console with stupid microtransaction crap, and Gabe and Tycho must be salivating at the possibilities even now.
Disclaimer: I bought a PS2 to play Gran Turismo 4. I also bought the Logitech Racing Wheel. You could say I'm a fan.
A micropayment strategy for online games is still novel in the US; compare that to Korea, where developers have created a bustling market for addons purchased online. Many of the games eschew subscription fees in favor of allowing no-payers to play, but be significantly handicapped through game-mechanics (didn't buy that turbo boost?), or socially handicapped in the world (their avatar isn't decked out in the latest sprite fashion). It is my understanding that alternate forms of payment, like gamecards or charging items to your mobile phone account makes billing less painful (and more impulsive). The bottom line is that this model is appropriate for some types of online games.
That said, what implications might this have for Gran Turismo specifically? Having to pay for cars and tracks will certainly limit the appeal somewhat.
0. Having to purchase, presumably via credit card, vehicles to play online will restrict the audience. Especially in the U.S. where alternate forms of online payment are in their infancy.
1. It will encourage a new user to research the virtual autos available, and pick one/few suited to their desires/needs. This serves to extend the nature of the simulation somewhat.
2. It will encourage users to practice with that vehicle, to the point where they can actually handle it properly on the track. This also serves the overall simulation (if you buy all 750 cars, you aren't playing Gran Turismo, you're playing a game of Jay Leno).
3. A combination of 0, 1 and 2 will lead to a higher general level of competition online. Just like the barriers to real-life autocrossing; people mildly interested in cars are not to be found on a real racetrack. This will further serve the simulation. This will also tend to drive off casual players to a greater degree than 0 or 1. This will serve as a draw for the serious players, who will spend more money over time.
4. Which tracks I have will limit the number of other players I can race against. This reflects the real world in a rather un-fun way (I can't drive from Kansas to Japan to "attack the downhill" on their mountain passes).
5. Due to 4, the more casual players would tend to buy a few tracks, and practice them. They will likely have a favorite, likely one that matches their car well. This would put them at an advantage over another person who owns the track, but has a different sort of car and another favorite track. This could serve as sort of a handicap, skilled players challenging other players who specialize in one course or one type of course. Think Initial D, where you have an "86" (A sporty version of the early eighties Toyota Corrolla) defeating 400HP AWD R32 Nissan Skylines. Handicap races with cars unsuited to the course they are on could partially offset 4, because they might have a stream of more heavily invested/skilled players (i.e. bought more tracks and cars) interested in racing them on their home turf.
6. Over time, because the investment is low, the more casual players will get disatsfied with their tracks and vehicles and buy more. This would support the server infrastructure over time, and lend longevity to the game. Microsoft does a lot to support live, it is clear what Nintendo intends to do with the Wii, but Sony was approaching the new generation with the same general attitude towards online play as they did with the PS2; it is the publisher's problem. And since the publisher finds few people (proportionate to sales) are willing to pay any monthly or yearly fee at all to support online infrastructre, that makes those subscription fees high. Micropurchases over time
Performing sanity checks on your own beliefs is vital in avoiding poisoned koolaid.
Sounds like Last-Gen. Battlefield2 came with a few levels and player types but when you got bored of those you could buy add-ons which basically give you a few new player types and some new levels.
$180 plus the initial purchase cost. This is if the lowest cost per car and track is figured. At the highest point, it's $383.
....
Forza Motorsport 2 is going to be $49.99.
Why does Sony persist in speaking to anyone in the public or press? They just keep making things worse for themselves.
Welcome to the future, where everyting is pay as you go, where you cant actually own anything, and 'the base price is'.. where they nickle and dime us to death...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
To me a micro-payment is something in the order of a couple of cents (US$, fill in appropriate equivalant for other currencies). It is a very difficult problem to solve - how do you track micro-payments in such a way that it doesn't cost you more than what you'll end up collecting. Charges in the order of US$1.00 are not micro-payments. They're small, quite possibly impulse-payments, but definately not micro-payments. Marketing is trying to use the term to get consumers comfortable with the idea of dishing out cash. "Oh... it's just a 'micro'-payment of $5.00"
Like most technologies, I can see the good and bad of this.
I'm fine with the developers expanding a game (in an incremental way as compared to major expansion packs) after the initial release, but the initial release MUST be a complete gaming experience. To release an incomplete game (no cars or courses as given in the example) and expect users to buy additional components to make the game playable is ridiculous.
I'm sure this will be sold as a "feature" and will be explained away with "why FORCE users to buy items that they don't want or need," but to me it sounds like a lovely way to force you to sign up for a "service."
There is absolutely no way people are going to pay for odds and ends that should be a part of the game in the first place, and just aren't worth that kind of money.
I'll bet money that people not only are going to pay for this crap, but they'll line up around the block to do it. Fanboys are that stupid.
As of now, the Wii is clearly the only system I'd consider buying and if any of this type of stuff pops up on the Wii, then the console gaming industry can lick my sweaty nutsack because they aren't going to get any of my money.
Calm down people, it's just a stupid (console) game.
This may, or may not, be a good thing. Of course, having any relation to Sony automatically implies it's something horrible and evil, but there are a lot of ways this can improve the game overall.
I'd gladly throw out all the ricer cars from the latest NFS game if it meant I could have more McLaren and Ferrari cars, or that I could save a few bucks. This would also show the devs which cars are in most demand, encouraging them to make more of those. Now, this last point could be negative for me if everybody drove riced out civics, but whatever. GTR2 seems to have all the official FIA championship tracks (and a few variations), but being able to drive on a local race track could be worth a buck or two.
No, I won't buy it, and I also won't get a PS3 or any other console, but it'll be interesting to see how this works out. Maybe it'll suck and be the first and last game to try this, or maybe it'll be the best thing since sliced bread.
All I can say is I'm damned glad November 19th is almost here. Wii!!!!
This sig will self destruct in 5 seconds.
Is it just me, or does someone else think they can go straight to Hell?
SONY: You're a big stupid idiot.
The DRM rootkit wasn't proof enough for you?
Oh god, that woman is John Romero!
So, a game with no capability? Perhaps they can now start selling Duke Nukem Forever... Parts sold separately, soon (no really, soon)!
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
"Even if there was a consumer who decided to buy the PlayStation 3 perhaps as a Blu-ray player, I think that they will quickly realize the potential and the entertainment value of the fantastic content in true (high definition). Any consumer would be hard-pressed really not to try that functionality out."
-- Kazuo Hirai Let the PS3 games Begin
Witness the awesome entertainment value enabled by Blue-Ray games disks! No cars or courses!
"We wanted to take advantage of the storage capacity that Blu-ray offers in terms of motion pictures and other content, but most importantly, for games as well. Our decision to include the Blu-ray player from day one in all of our PlayStation 3s was the right decision and, quite honestly, the only decision we can make.
Look at the massive amounts of data that's required to provide a truly immersive gaming experience in true HD. If you only have a DVD ROM drive, which can only go up to about 9GB or so, you're going to end up with a game that's going to have two or possibly even three discs. And then you're going to have to ask consumers to swap discs out or cache all the game onto the hard drive which I think is an inconvenience--not to mention the fact that you're going to fill up a 20GB hard drive very quickly with some of these games. So trying to go without a Blu-ray drive in the PlayStation 3 really is a nonstarter."
Demented But Determined.
Is this game going to be restricted to people with credit cards?
I hate signatures
When *no* one spends a cent on that sucky Ford, or even low-end Porshe... They'll suddenly realize the flaw in their logic.
Some of the facts aren't entirely straight: Both HD-Premium (GT5) and HD-Classic (GT4 HD) will be pakaged and sold together, and Yamauchi has stated it will be "cheap" (so its not full retail price). Most of the pricing has not been decided. It will have cars and tracks included, but there will be over 770 cars and 51 extra tracks that can be downloaded. The game will be designed more like an MMO where will be cars clubs (aka Guilds), teams, custimizable logos and license plates, online-tournaments etc will be included. The game will run at full 1080p(1980x1080) and 60fps. Ferrari has also been confirmed for the game. Official GT Hompage: http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/sp/detail.do?articl e_id=376
http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/sp/detail.do?articl e_id=375
Imagine a game like Halo - not only do you have to buy the weapons, but you also have to buy the ammo. And when it's all gone you'll need to buy more. Frightening to even contemplate, but it's probably the future.
The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.
400 bucks for the complete game? Somehow I doubt it. Sony is known for pushing pricing limits, but I don't think they'd be risking one of their exclusive system sellers with a pricing scheme like that. If those values are anywhere near correct then the game itself will be completely free. I can't imagine that it won't come with at least a decent amount of tracks and cars. It would be a cool idea for that type of game, because anyone could try it out, and if you didn't like it, you'd have only wasted a few bucks, and they could support it with a million extra tracks for the people who really love it. Then again this strategy would leave people who did not have a means for hooking their PS3 to a fast internet connection in the dark, so I doubt it will be the dominant strategy.
Only way I could see this working, is if the base game were a pack-in with the console.
Then it's a 'free demo' that everyone can try out, even if they (like me) don't currently care for racing games.
Manufacturers dont include batteries because:
1. You cant just fly a product with batteries into the US. Its easier and cheaper to ship batteryless gadgets or did you want to pay a premium on crappy bottom-barrel no name batteries?
2. Its costs you more because now youre paying increased shipping for the product in the total cost instead of being able to freely choose batteries at the store. What if one brand is one sale but youre paying 2x that in the bundled batteries? Guess what, you just got ripped off.
3. Ever notice how bundled batteries die a short while after purchase? Who wants more of that?
Because according to this http://uk.gamespot.com/events/tgs2006/blog.html?ev ent=tgs2006&topic_id=25005824&tag=blog;continue;1 the numbers of cars and tracks quoted are what you get as standard with downloadable available in addition.
To clarify, it also seems its one game with two different modes rather than two seperate games.
Sure, we all know Sony are completely batshit crazy - but if you ignore the gloom-and-doom reporting you'll realise that the following scenario is more plausible:
Gran Turismo: Menu Edition comes free with your PS3 Live account, which also includes $20 of credit at the Sony store. Everyone picks up a couple of tracks and a couple of cars with their credit and plays a LIMITED PREVIEW of the real new Gran Turismo game. Sony gets to showcase their online service with a popular franchise and gets free publicity for said franchise. Micropayments seperate fanboys from their money, everyone else just plays the game with a couple of cars.
The game is also available as Gran Turismo: I'm Too Lame For The Internet Edition, which has a couple of cars and a couple of tracks and you can play it with your mates without ever connecting to the internet.
Now THAT'S a sensible plan... what Sony will actually do remains to be seen.
.evom ton seod gis eht
I'd happily drop $30 if they'd re-release Morrowind on the Oblivion engine...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I thought video games were about escaping reality. If developers start making video game world where success mirrors the player's real-life wealth, rather than their skill, then what would be the point? If I wanted to see rich people getting what they want, and the average joe getting screwed because they don't have enough money, all I have to do is read the news. I don't see why I should shell out $60 and hours of my time to do that. Furthermore, wasn't the video-game industry originally about entertaining kids? A kid can't afford to buy power-ups, to pay for new race tracks, and all but the most spoiled won't be able to coax their parents into it. So if a kid sees a game like GT, they get all excited, they wait all year for it, they buy it with their birthday money, they get, what? A couple cars, a few tracks. You know, for all this talk of next-gen, the gaming experience seems to have gone significantly backwards. It's all about the money these days, and never about the fun.
MS sold additional maps for Halo 2. MS sold cars for PGR2 on Xbox years ago. They have sold two packs of cars on PGR3 for 360. They sold an upgrade for GRAW for $15 that is basically mandatory if you want to play online, because if you don't buy it you can't play in games hosted by people who bought the upgrade, even if they don't use any maps that came with the upgrade.
They sold a Santa outfit for the main character in Kameo.
They sell custom player icons for a few bucks. These icons are mostly ads for games.
They are readying new technology for October that allows developers to see you consumables in game. So they can sell you something, have it wear out and SELL IT TO YOU AGAIN.
I can understand not knowing the last part, but the rest just shows you aren't paying any attention. If you were looking at everything that is going on, MS would have made your hit list long before Sony.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
Are you using slashes in those abbreviations for any particular reason? My keyboard connects to my PC with a standard PS/2 jack, while several people enjoy playing games on their PS2s. ;)
Know what that means?
They're going to locked to your particular playstation or memory card to prevent "piracy".
Would it not be far more likley these items are tied to your account rather than a particualr Playstation or memory card (the latter not even making sense since it would probably go on the internal hard drive).
There are a number of negatives you're not taking into account:
-Shitty resale value for the game itself
Why? Other people still have to buy the shell, so you can always sell it to people wanting that. It's no different than selling any other game so it is an irrelvent problem to raise in the context of expanding the shell of a game through online purchases.
-Extreme difficulty or virtual impossibility of selling cars
And you know that for sure how? Now you dscount the possibility of a virtual auction house, as many games have nowadays.
-Need for net access to have a game that's worth playing (not all of us like to give our game consoles net access)
That is a good point and will be taken into account my purchasers, it will be interesting to see how much that limits sales.
-The cost of your time downloading cars and the general hassle it involves
If the game design is good it should involve no hassle and almost no bandwith (tracks I imagine would be larger)
-The cost of your time figuring out what cars are worth buying in the first place
I see you've never played GT before, or you would realize that a huge part of the game (indeed, mnay car games) is spent deciding what cars you like and what you want for upgrades. This changes nothing really in the game dynamic except perhaps to offer you new choices over time.
-The cost of your time signing up for this micropayment system and the assosciated privacy and fraud concerns
None of those issues anyone really cares about, or eBay would not be a success. The 360 has shown plenty of people are happy indeed to sign up with such a service. If you do not want to, you don't have to - you just miss out on expanded features you could get online.
I guess you must be really tweaked about the Wii letting you have access to every nintendo game ever, all online...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I was working at Target when Gran Turismo was originally released. I can't remember a single game moving consoles faster than that game. I know that three of my friends had me buy them PSX's along with that game to use my employee discount. When the PS2 came out, the only reason I bought it in addition to my Dreamcast was because of Gran Turismo.
So this news bothers me. I have a 360 and so far I'm pretty pleased with it. I'll probably pick up a Wii too. My PS3 purchase was pretty much solely based on Gran Turismo. I was looking at dropping something retarded like $600 for a console, and now you're telling me I'm going to be spending $100+ for Gran Turismo? And this is just to get a better graphics version of a game that I already own on the PS2?
I'm not impressed. I never played that Forza game before - I guess I need to hoping it's a good one.
2 Words... "That sucks". When I pay for a game, I don't want a recurring charge for whenever I need a new car. The whole point of the game is to race to get virtual money to buy a car. Look for a gameshark cheat near you!
Fuck That Shit.
Seriously. I'd buy a game for 10-20 USD and then add in the rest for .50 to 1USD for different things, on a conditional basis:
.50 USD for a car, I want a friggin' fleet at my disposal should I decide to spend the money. This way, when I buy a sticker prices worth of addons, I have EXACTLY the game I want.
Don't give us a fnord of a game. It has to exist, and be somewhat enjoyable, for 10-20 USD.
The amount of content included and ability to progress should relate to the price of the game. For 10 bucks, I'll take a really cool demo. For 20, I better be able to find an ending to whatever game it is. It might be harder for me, but I better have the same plot progression/tournaments/etc. The cooler (addin) version of the game should never make me feel like the core game was a waste.
There should be a LOT of content available. As a consumer, the only point of this system is that I buy what I want. So all of the content out there shouldn't add up to the sticker price or slightly past. If I'm paying
This has just been my thoughts. This can be an advantage. It can ruin a lot of games, and franchises. Gamers will speak with their money, endorsing the games done well and ignoring the rest. This should definitely not be the end of free (quality) content. And if Sony (or M$) screws this up, I'm sure they'll rethink their plans within 1 holiday season.
PS: That is what part of the alphabet would look like if the letters "Q" and "R" were removed.
Uh, if you only buy one game for their system then they don't want you anyway. Sony would be losing money on that deal.
Get the free alternative: http://www.racer.nl/ and donate if you think their development effort needs reward.
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
Why on earth are they calling these microtransactions? At $.40 to $2.50 a pop these transactions are no more micro than buying a pop or chocolate bar.
You won't need HDMI to play HD games.
Mada mada dane.
I was one of the otaku at the Tokyo Game Show yesterday and I wasted an hour of my life waiting in line to play GTHD.
It was a cool experience. They had arcade style cars you could sit in, with pedals and a steering wheel, but the game itself didn't play much better than GT4 (which IMHO didn't play much better than GT3), it just had higher definition graphics.
According to the TGS2006 Official Guide Book magazine thing, development on GTHD is only 50% completed, so there is still a lot of time to add features - which would explain why the graphics seemed like the only improvement, but shit, it's the TGS! pull out the big guns!
Personally, I'm not for the Xbox 360 over the PS3, nor the other way 'round (I'm waiting for the Wii, of which there were none at the show T_T ), but I also played Forza Motorsport 2 for the 360. Now, FM2 is only at ?% of development completed (truly an M$ product), which may or may not be more than 50%, but (other than the experience of the pedal and wheel) it blew GTHD away.
Hey, wasn't sure if they were making another Forza game for the XB360- Forza itself is a great reason to own an XB 360;
I found it much more immediate than any of the GT games, and the online play (y'hear that sony!) was great.
Anyway, it sounds as though PS3 owners would be much better off just getting an old copy of Grand Turismo and playing *that* until Sony get off the LSD.
Assuming there'll *be* any PS3 owners.
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
Spectacular Breaking News! Zonk becomes PS3 fanboy!
/.?
Just joking.
Hey, Zonk: when PS3 crushes 360, with or without Gran Turismo, d'you think you'll still be hanging around
## NB: Comment here
This pay for additional content movement seems to be the game industry's first step towards reversing the trend of gaming becoming more popular. Having to search through a catelogue of features and purchase the ones that interest you strikes me as adding a step that the casual gamer just is not interested in. At this point I am a casual gamer myself, I want to be able to just pop in a game and play away. I would not touch GT HD knowing what I know now.
This is idiotic! It's like going to the store to buy a "computer." But instead they try to sell you just the parts of a computer like a motherboard and an cpu and a video card. Who the hell wants that?!
Oh wait, I want that. And I'll bet a lot of you want that too. I'm no fan of Sony, but I don't see this as necessarily bad. Sure they MAY be trying to screw us if the game comes out for $60 and then requires customization, but what if the game came out at $10? Would it interest you then? I might be willing to give a model where I choose what I put in to my game and pay per part a shot.
I'm not saying I think this is a good idea. But I'm not ready to lynch Sony for this yet. (Though I will point and laugh at them for all the other stupid shit they've been doing leading up to the PS3 launch.)
this is a natural response to game piracy.
they figure, why lose all your dough in one pop?
you most likely won't be able to access the pay-per content without connecting to your sony online account.
this is smart business. but poor form from the gamer perspective.
though, this is better than the mmorpg model from the gamer perspective.
though I'm sure they'll charge full price for the crippled game.
They're using their grammar skills there.
From what I saw at the game show it looked like Sony was on Zoloft and Ritalin - boring rehashed ideas will little effort or inginuity.
The good acid is going in to all the whacky DS games.
Assuming that they price the game down to the point where the game price + some tracks and cars = a reasonable cost...
This might be good because it would force the developers to make the car's and tracks worth playing or they will not be used.
It could prevent the usual placement of tracks/cars that are worthless just to fill the space. It might also make more tracks available then would be in a usual game disk, allowing for more replay value.
The only downside that I can think of is used games, but as long as you can back them up to a (small) memory card and sell the card with the game, then you could sell the tracks and cars along with the used game, thus adding value to the used game market.
Before everyone says that I am on Sony's side and I forgot about the rootkit thing, I can think of a number of ways off the top of my head that they could disprove the above points (and I would not put it past them to do just that).
Now, maybe if ingame racing and winning gets me credits to buy shit, then I'm all over this. Winning = more tracks = more cars. Doubtful, but I can dream.
I realise I'm chiming in far too late here, but the summary is wrong. According to this Gamespot article (scroll halfway down to the "update"), Gran Turismo HD Classic will feature all 750 cars and 51 tracks from previous Gran Turismo games, updated to look better in HD. The Premium version only contains 30 cars and 2 tracks, but it's content that's been designed from scratch for HD (far more polygons per model). The idea is that the Premium version focuses on online racing and downloadable content, while the Classic version is for people who just want to play Gran Turismo in HD.
Still pretty unexciting IMHO, and I have pretty strong reservations about it working. Time will tell I guess.
Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
How is this really different than a pay per month MMORPG? I mean, you pay 10 bucks a month or whatever to connect to X-Box Live/WoW/FFOnline/etc just so you can play the game. It doesnt do you any good disconnected from the net. That's why I've never bought one of those games. Sure I like playing with friends sometimes, that's what a big screen and 4 controllers are for. I don't mind having the OPTION of connecting to a service to play other people, but I remember the days when that sort of thing was free (Rogue Spear/Starcraft/and others). I mean, you can think about this the same way. If every month you buy yourself a new car and track, it's like you're playing an MMO game. Atleast this one you can stop paying after you got what you want and keep playing the game. WoW isn't really worth anything without the connection.
-=JML=-
I was planning on waiting for the next Gran Turismo before I bought a PS3, hoping the console price would come down a little. But now, I think I'm just going to go play outside. Consoles have gone to shat. I find little enjoyment with video games these days. My dogs make me happier than all the electronics in the world.
See you outside. The resolution is higher anyway.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
I am sorry, you have damaged your front fender; would you like to pay $2.95 for a new one? *bring up the payment option*
lol! and lets not forget the price of upgrading your machine...
might be cheaper to buy a car in real life X>)
advertising causes me therapy
Of course, limiting second-hand sales does impact the market. The harder it is to buy second-hand games, the more likely it is to find them available via BitTorrent, nicely cracked and proper.
The torrent version of Half-Life 2 even had a fancy optimizer (not sold by Valve) that made the game run faster and fixed a few bugs. I'm still waiting to see the first game that can't be diddled to defeat the copy protection or online authentication. Or maybe it's already come along but nobody cared (or bought the title).
I say, let these foolish content providers destroy themselves with more onerous methods of limiting the value of their games to the second-hand market. It will give us a new generation of creative young people who will be our next software designers. And other companies will come along that embrace their customers and the after-market market that provides us with a longer life for our games in the form of mods and patches.
Most of you aren't old enough to remember the motto of merchants in the past: "The Customer is Always Right" - a motto that made them successful and their customers happy. These rapacious bastards have embraced the opposite approach to the people that keep them in business.
You are welcome on my lawn.
hello hackers-do you need more of an open invitation than that?
In other news: iTunes changes their pricing scheme from $.99 a song to $.0002 per musical note. Tax not included.
HA HA HA!!! Drop dead Sony.
...Welcome to next-gen."
We all want next-gen, but we just don't want to pay extra for it...
this is utterly retarded... what kind of moron would buy a game this pathetic.. not to mention racing games suxor to begin with.
I never play games on PC, I started to use linux 'cause it was free and I always bought my consoles and their games... and I have a huge dvd collection.
But then it comes to this kind of crap, I'm positivt I'll wait until they cracked the ps3 (they did it pretty easily in the past with PS1/2) and download all my games from the big internet. This will endorse piracy even more, and if they don't get that, they will go under.
Keep diggin that hole.
Will they hold an account of what you have bought online? This will mean if you sell the game the new owner will have to pay again for the stuff you have already paid for and downloaded.
In Second Life, an account is free but you have to make everything from scratch or buy from another player. Everything. Buy, buy, buy, buy, buy.
If you want a reasonable amount of land, you more or less buy the game over and over again each month or your stuff gets deleted.
But I guess that the endless downtime, the total lack of support, it's beyond belief lag and graphics that look 8 years old make it worthwhile to some people,
and they'll be glad to tell you so.
Compared to Second Wife ^h^h^h^hLife, beautiful GT, even at $75 would be quite the bargain.
It's spelled Gran Turismo you mooks.
In any case, if Sony goes ahead with this craptastic plan then I'll have to go with Forza 2 after all...
I'm with you on the overpriced nature of the PS3, and the blatant rip-off price structure of GT:HD (if what we've heard is correct, and it is always wise to stock up on grains of salt before believing pre-release info).
But I gotta ask: you're willing to replace your LCD TV (~ $1000) and buy a PS3 and the game (~$600) just to play GT:HD... but you're not willing to spend $200 the cars and tracks? By my math, that's only a 12.5% premium. So is it a question of that last $200 being the final straw, or that you can barely afford $1600 and $1800 is out of the question, or a matter of principle?
If the game is that important to you, and you've been looking forward to it that much, why not spend the extra couple of hundred? If it's the only game you play in the next 5 years, that amortized cost is $40/year.
I'm genuinely curious, and not trying to play devil's advocate or anything. Me, I can't imagine replacing my already-modern TV just for a game, so I'm trying to get some insight into a more enthusiastic fan's reasons for drawing the line at micropayments.
-b
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
In the future expect toll booths on the tracks. Granted, slowing down to hand change to the attendant once a lap might affect the realism a bit, but Sony's got to pay for those battery recalls somehow.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
The concensus so far on this forum is that it's a stupid idea. We really don't know enough about it yet, though.
If the game's base price is kept relatively low (say $30) compared to other games going for $40, then people will figure they have $10 to spend on the cars they want.
Or, they could sell it for $40 and say that it includes $10 worth of free downloads.
Either way, they are getting people used to the idea of micropayments and purchasing online, which is probably their number one goal. Because once someone spends $0.50 on something, they're going to be doing that a lot more often. It's the first purchase that is the hardest.
-David
No they don't.
The fact they sell the hardware at a loss still gives them more money than not buying it at ALL.
Example:
Cost 700$
You pay 600$, Sony loses 100$
You pay 0$, Sony loses 700$
^_^
[nostalgia]...when we called a game with 30 cars and 2 tracks a DEMO[/nostalgia]
The things like horse armour are 100% optional. It's mainly cosmetic and is just kinda silly. There is still an entire very massive game to play without it. It's not like you need horse armour to access any special content. You pays your money for the game, you get tons of entertainment out of it, no additional purchase necessary. Also, on the PC at least, you can mod the shit out of it for free. There are tons of fan created mods that cost nothing. The game not only allows it, but is designed to make it real easy to do.
What is being proposed for GT would be like selling things in Oblivion on a per quest basis. "Oh you want to do that quest? That'll be $1 please.". In Oblivion they give you plenty for your money, I mean the game is very large, very rich, and very detailed. They are just also willing to sell you some additional content. It's not really worth it and is mostly for show, but if you wish to spend the money fine. However they aren't trying to decrease your experience and require that you buy it.
Basically what you are paying for in WoW is the use of Blizzard's servers. It seems worth while, given that it is expensive to operate something of that scale. Also, they do continually upgrade and expand their game world at no charge. They still haven't released the first pay-for upgrade. Basically what it comes down to is it doesn't feel like a ripoff, it feels like you get your money's worth. This kinda feels like a ripoff. They want to sell you essentially nothing but a game engine and what you to pay for any and all content. Well what for? I mean the reason I pay you for a game is for your work. The game should include lots of content because of that.
Also the pricing seems really out of whack. Sure I'll pay for an expansion but it'd better have a worthwhile amount of new content for the money.
I don't understand... The US economy is going to shit and people are coming up with clever little ways to make everything more expensive. How does that work? Anyone?
YOu now what? Your PS/3 seems to be a blatant consumer rip-off and if the story is true the day will come that I - as a consumer - will stop buying Sony products.
Oh no, Sony completely relied upon you buying it! Now they might as well give up on the PS3.
You should take this info for what it is. As for how cool it is going to play on the market: we'll see this on the market.
I claim our ability to predict the future in mad Slashdot rants is severely limited, and should not be relied upon.
That's because Gran Turismo HD is just GT4. It's nothing new, except GT4 with HD graphics. The only GT I'm waiting for is GT5, which should be awesome if Polyphony Digital doesn't screw it up.
Can you sell back cars after you've modded them? Moreover, can you get another card, copy your garage, sell your copied cars to yourself, and THEN sell it back to Sony? I remember something like that working in GT1 and GT2
Hi,
no I would not replace my LCD just for the PS3, I always wanted a larger screen (it's 32 inch), but the PS3 would be a nice reason to buy a bit earlier...
it's Gran Turismo dammit, not "TOUrismo"! what is it with english-speaking people and spelling? open warfare?
"I was one of the otaku at..."
Surely you could've come up with a less derisive term.
I agree with you 100%. My own experience is from being a longtime Gran Turismo player on PS1 and PS2. GT 3 A-Spec was the very best IMO. I finally got around to buying GT 4 recently and I was seriously underwhelmed. The game is OK and all, but it just doesn't have the same fun factor as the previous installment, and the map/menu screen is total crap.
This kind of system deserves to fail. If someone buys a game, it should be well stocked with options Automatically. If anything, they should be offering FREE (as in beer) downloads for extra cars or tracks, and maybe offering some user-designed material.
Oh my god! If you don't buy a PS3 you're actually stealing from Sony! And if you buy one you're still stealing, but they won't come after you until they sued everyone who didn't buy a PS3.
Well, there may be one type of consumers that profits from this scheme: the casual gamer. I don't play games that much and certainly never play a game all the way through (where are the days as a kid in front of the SNES :-).
This new scheme might create some games that are cheap upfront. This would be great for consumers like myself that never use the full content available anyway.
2. DOSBox is your friend. Just because a game is 10-15 years old without stunning graphics does not make it a bad game. Stop with the Valve / Blizzard fanboy nonsense and just go find some of these old games to try for yourself in an emulator like DOSBox - or go check out PC emulators for other systems.
3. Ignore the peer pressure to have the latest system all of the time. I've just picked up a second Gamecube for £30 and can buy Gamecube games used for around £5 each now. I really don't care that the "graphics are 5 years old", it's the playability of the game that's important, not how nice it looks.
Sure, you may like the idea of "subscription model" games like Warcraft III and Gran Turismo HD and good luck to you. But please don't forget that you're just being railroaded into renting games rather than owning them outright because that way the games companies can crowbar more money out of you through subscriptions and endless upgrades.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Wow. I'd really like to go into business with you. Will you be my fall^H^H^H^Haccounting guy?
It's "Turismo", not "Tourismo"
[/nitpick]
Perl, n. A language spoken by Eskimos.
You know, I've been thinking that greedy moves like this and others like Cell phone manufacturers charging you everytime you take a photo and want to save it, or making you pay an extra 200 bucks for the same cell phone WITH a stereo headphone jack should have an award.
We could call it the Ferengi award, after those lovable capatilists in the Star Trek universe.
What sony is doing is VERY Ferengi like.
Rules of Aquisition #202: The justification for profit is profit
It would seem no one remembers this being talked about for previous Gran Tourismo versions, because of the "fear" that the game is going to be barebones. There was much talk about the ability to sell cars that have been raced and modified, building digital equity for more cars. It was scratched from earlier releases, obviously, because there was no online content. That's not the only example, though. I'm not versed in it, but I've been told of their EQ2 merchant server specifically designed for selling items.
I'm hoping this turns into a supported market system, allowing the sale of new content, used cars from PLAYERS to PLAYERS, maybe even to a sony run used car lot. Content should be online driven. Offer prizes, hold tournaments. Unique cars could fetch a great price for the winner, who would most likely reinvest back into the game.
If you can ignore the initial fear instilled by the article, it dosen't take long to imagine some truly unique opportunites that the Gran Tourismo series will have to explore.
--ari
As with others, I think this is definitely a bad idea, as it stands. But...
I would _love_ to see the extensible race game that this is indirectly proposing. I want to see manufacturers releasing models of their new models that we could download and start playing with. I want to be able to pick up new tracks just like FPS players can download new maps. How about racing IndyCars round Brooklands, or WRC cars on the Targa Florio or TT Mountain Course? How about Clermont Ferrand, or the Gross Glockner hillclimb course?
GT4 showed what's possible, but didn't go far enough. THe full extensible race game, when it hopefully appears, will have some marvellous possibilities for the anorak.
Greg
(Inside a nuclear plant)
Aaaarrrggh! Run! The canary has mutated!
I read a thread that said "not ALL next gen games charge money after purchase". RIIIIGGGHHHHT. If one company makes money from this tactic, many other companies will quickly follow suit.
By the time my 2 year old starts playing games, they will have an initial purchase price of $200.00, require 27 hours per day to play, and the entertainment industry will be watching you through a built-in camera to make sure you're not using "their" product wrongly.
I'll stick to Ur-Quan Masters on my hand-me-down Ubuntu laptop. Fantastic game that has yet to cost me a penny.
I really enjoyed building up a huge collection of cars and fixing them up in the previous GT games. Are the parts stores going to charge me money now as well?
Can we still win cars after races or would that be hurting the bottom line?
I just can't see myself being able to pay for something that has always been included in the game up to this point...it just seems like a fanboy tax to me.
Sony almost has me convinced that the xbox360 is the second console I should get this time around (wii being the first). I know people will say that MS is doing the same micropayments scheme, but I really don't think they're stupid enough to try and release an empty game.
I was going to post a comment of my own, but you're actually an example of one of the points I wanted to make: Sony is going to drive away the casual/occasional gamer crowd with tactics like this. I would probably be considered an occasional gamer and would have considered shelling out the dough for a PS3 for no other reason than to get the latest and greatest in the Gran Turismo series. Not now. Not if GT:HD and GT5 are going to be released on this sort of business model.
/. thinks this is a bad idea. What really remains to be seen is whether or not Sony can pull this PS3 debacle off or not. They've clearly lost their minds.
I bought a PS2 specifically for two games: Gran Turismo 3 and Grand Theft Auto 3. I would probably have eventually broken down and purchased a PS3, after it came down in price a bit, just to play the next installments of those two games. Now, GTA4 is also being released on the 360 and Sony is killing the Gran Turismo series for me. And that's just me, the occasional gamer, who would have eventually ended up building his PS3 game library to the same 25 - 30 game level as my PS2 library. The guy who buys accessories and who pays for XBox Live!, even though I maybe play one game a month over it.
What about the casual gamers? Many times these are the same people that don't have broadband at home. Some of them probably don't even have computers as they have no need for them. They just like to play the occasional video game as a way to unwind. I know several characters like this (mostly amateur racers and semi-pro racers) who bought a PS2 and don't play anything other than GT3 and/or GT4. I used to go to one friend's house and we would end up playing GT3 for hours on end. I guarantee you that friend isn't going to be buying a PS3 and GT:HD.
Anyway, enough ranting. I think it's safe to assume that everybody on
If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.
I am one of those unfortunate people that went out and bought a PSP. After playing the games I bought for it, I started looking for other things I could do with it. I found a keyboard that was in production and was supposed to be released sometime this year. I found out, about a month ago, that sony had scrapped their keyboard and will not let a aftermerket accessories maker get the command codes to create their own. Now I hear this. I have been very faithful to the playstation line of products ever since they came out. This is the last straw. I have had it with sony and their "only to make a buck" mentality. I will not be buying a PS3 from a retailer. Maybe from a friend that wants to get rid of it later down the road. But sony WILL NOT be getting my money. It is sad to see a leader in technology continually trying to squeeze as much money out of the consumer. Forget about product loyalty I'm getting a WII and a 360, screw you SONY.
Kazunori Yamauchi revealed that Sony plans to make GT HD available for the cost of the game disk and instruction manual. This suggests a retail price point of just a few dollars for the first PS3 Gran Turismo game.
To me this sounds like a great way for the game to work.
"The stupider people think you are, the more surprised they will be when you kill them..."
If this report is true, that would be a big turn off for me. I can't see myself purchasing a game, then paying more just for basic functionality that should have been built in to the game in the first place.
Maybe it's true. Maybe Sony really has already lost the war. Of course, the article could be completely wrong, or Microsoft propaganda.
Cool links.
The word is written with an a:
separately
Many games have zero resale value. True, a GTA game or a Mario game will always have some value, but buyers know that the Madden '0X game they buy has ZERO resale value after a year. There isn't an EB/Gamestop in the country that'd give you more than 40 cents for a perfect copy of Madden 2003...
Wrong. One of the key characteristics is the ability to resell. If this goes the way it appears to be going, those add-ons will be locked to me, not my copy of the game.
So you have no idea but are sure enough to declare me wrong. How do you know they will not allow trading or online auctions for virtual items owned?
Would you say Everquest characters were the same? Yet people sell those, and other accounts, all the time. So there is resale potential (even if the granularity is high) without individual sale mechanisms as well.
It's a more limited form of ownership to be sure, but it is ownership.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Well, the solution to this issue seems pretty simple. If you don't want to deal with the nickel-and-dime fees (or rather, "microtransactions"), then don't buy the software. It's that simple - if you, as a customer, are offered something that you don't want, you don't A. Gripe about it, or B. Buy it anyway and then gripe about it. You just don't buy it. That way, companies get the message that they need to change their products to appeal to consumers and make money. If you want to be active about it, then organize a boycott or whatever. That's how capitalism is supposed to work, anyway.
As a side note, if the only products available are objectionable in this regard, then a host of new problems are raised. But inter-corporational cooperation to limit consumer choice is something that seems, for the moment, to be limited mostly to the music industry and DRM.
quia potentia mens mentis
And don't forget Nintendo is already getting into this business as well!
Seriously, why are people here so blind to stuff like the fact that other console companies, even the beloved Nintendo, are doing/going-to-do the exact same thing? Or is it some how much better that Microsoft has all these similar "nice" ways to keep charging you for your games(horse armor, new levels, multiplayer weapons you can buy but others can't use, episodic content, etc), and stuff you could do/get on a PC for free? I remember when they were called expansion packs, you were usually given the full treatment(new campaigns, story, units, multiplayer maps, etc), were usually planed after development and not during it(i.e. Oblivion).
And I am not just singling out one company, I hate all of them along this route. I really don't care to have to plunk down more money for games like GTA 4, even if the downloads are just optional side missions. I do hope there is a GTA 4 -fill in the title- Stories DISC, because I have no desire to buy a Xbox360 or pay for the extra missions separately.
If they're not careful, they'll end up making Gran Turismo more expensive than actually racing a real car on a real track.
I guess there's still the little side-benefit that you don't die every time you crash at 155mph.
I go everywhere on foot. I would say horses are optional.
_signature creation failed.
Call it episodic content, call it miscrotransactions. It just gives consumer and developers another option to interact and reasons for developers to make a GOOD game and WORTHWHILE add-ons.
And no, I didn't buy the horse armor.
Aren't Grand Tourismo et al. really just massive advertisments for car manufacturers? I mean, making people play the game to "unlock" the rest of the ad was pretty bright, but how are they going to move their metal when people steadfastly (and somewhat inexplicably) refuse to pay the extra $.50 (or whatever) for the priviledge of watching another few hours of car commercials?
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
I could see potential gambling abuse with this system. Say you buy an add-on car and race it online. You lose to somebody else in a race, you lose your car. End result: you spend more *real* money on the car you just lost. Rinse and repeat.
If you've already got a PS2, component cables for it, an LCD with a component input and a copy of GT4, why not just enable the 1080i option?
If your LCD won't take HDMI, there's no way it's going to accept 1080p over component either, so you're not missing out.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Fantastic. So when I spend 70 (~$90) on a a PS3 game here in Europe, I'm not getting a playable game. I'm just getting a demo of the game I wanted to play with the ability to buy the content needed to play. What's the 70 for anyway? The right to buy content? Seems a bit harsh. Make the "demo" of the game cost 10 or die slowly and painfully as your customers give you the finger. No customer should ever join this bandwagon (which is on fire, containing flamable gases... with no wheels).
For $59.99 I should get more than 3 cars and two tracks...
For 9.99 I'm cool with that. This could be a really great concept for driving games. The last GT had what 300+ cars. How many of you drove each one? How many of you were remotely interested in more than 20% of those cars? If I could buy a game for 9.99 and add the things I'm interested in for a small fee I'd do it in a heartbeat. That sure beats having to spend hours racing a series or getting some inhumane time on a track to unlock a car/track that wasn't that great in the first place.
More specifically, the 'classic' package will come with no cars or tracks
Yeah, I bought the 'classic' package for the loading screen, menu, and the manual, not to mention the catchy theme music!
Rockstar & Microsoft have already announced they will be producing episodic content for GTA. Want to bet that it costs money? Perhaps the lower capacity DVD of the 360 version means it will be missing out on content or textures that the PS3 has straight from the disc.
Wow, you must have been an economics major.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
With the combined cost of the PS3 and GT after all these "micropayments" one could just as easily buy a cheap corolla or something and compete in grassroots motorsport and have more fun than one could possibly have infront of the ol' idiot box
Just yesterday i competed in a Khanacross in a toyota corona which was free, $25 AUD entry and i even came first in my class
I know i wont be buying a playstation 3
Phill
Let me get this straight.
They want you to pay a premium to hold a blu-ray player inside your PS3. You're going to pay a lot more for the machine for this device that is considerably optional when it relates to gaming. Yet this optional device is made mandatory by Sony.
*THEN*, when it comes to games, the *NECESSARY* parts of a game are now made optional... with a price attached to each one. So, if it's $50 for the blu-ray disc, but it costs extra money just to get *A* track and *A* car to putt around with...
Double-U. Tee. Eff.
Also, why would you need blu-ray for storage IF they're not putting the damn content on the disc in the first place? Do they need 20+ gigs just to show you a HD pre-rendered video of all the fun you could be having?
As a certain grey-tinted cat said, what's $600 and smells like snake oil? Next gen.
We have been rootkitted.
Our PSPs (the last fools that believed Sony would wisen up this time) are crippled every month or so ( so we can't run the games we prrogram).
We couldn't play our MP3 files in the first digital musci players made by Sony (that my friend, was a nasty surprise, I still have their nasty piece of shit gathering dust somewhere).
The minidiscs were a tehcnical nightmare full of contrived copy protection.
And the laptop batteries.
You may call the interest of many to see Sony punished "topsy-turvy", but oh man, that fucking sounds like blaming the victim if you check how much Sony is loving us.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Our PSPs (the last fools that believed Sony would wisen up this time) are crippled every month or so ( so we can't run the games we prrogram).
I would love to use the PSP for homebrew. But Sony has made it very, very extremely clear with an exclamation mark they do not want you to.
And so I will not buy one.
I do not blame the victim the first time something bad happens, but when you are being abused in any relationship over a long period of time it is up to YOU to get out of it.
The PS3 is a whole different system though, and I have no qualms about going there as I know what to expect.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actually not.
Sony already spent the 700$ on producing a PS3. That money has been paid. They can't un-produce the unit to retrieve the 700$. For Sony, a PS3 is worth nothing on its own. When sold it's worth the price paid for it.
If you then buy it for 600$, then they have a net loss of 100$.
If you don't buy it at all, then they have a net loss of 700$, since the PS3 is worth 0 when it sits on the shelf.
Another example:
You have 1000$.
You buy an item for 1000$, you now have 0$ and an item.
You figure you don't want it (for example, it's fake), it's value for you is 0.
You try to sell it for 900$.
If you sell it, you have 900$. Net loss 100$.
If you don't, you stay at 0$ plus the item you don't want. Net loss 1000$ since the item is worth 0 to you.
^_^