I thought about this for a bit, and it strikes me as incredibly stupid to think that the content providers can hurt iTunes by moving content away from it. Apple doesn't make money with the iTunes store. They make money with the iPod. Furthermore, the iTunes store is not popular just because. It's popular due to the iPod's popularity.
You can't attack the iTunes store. People who own iPods are what makes the iTunes music store popular; if they can't get their content through the iTunes store, they will not buy content at all.
Think about it. If I can't buy some TV show through iTunes, what am I going to do? Every other store is incompatible with my iPod. I can either buy stuff from the iTunes store, buy stuff from a store that sells DRM-free content, or rip stuff from somewhere else; a DVD, perhaps, or some P2P network.
Which essentially means that if I can't buy the NBC stuff from the iTunes store, I can't pay for it at all, unless I wait until the DVD box comes out. So how does that hurt Apple? It doesn't hurt Apple at all, because Apple doesn't make a lot of money with the iTunes store anyway. It only hurts NBC, because now they get less content, and it hurts the customers, because now they're forced to go less simple and (possibly) more illegal ways.
That's also why Apple doesn't mess around. If content providers don't do what Apple wants, they're out. It's no loss for Apple. Universal wants higher prices? Screw them. NBC wants tougher DRM? Screw them, too.
If the content providers wanted to attack the iTunes store, they'd have to provide an alternative for iPod owners, which means no DRM. Oh, the irony. Delicious.
Traditionally, Apple's margins have always been around 25%-35%. I'd be extremely surprised if the iPhone was different in any way; and so far, teardowns (which tend to underestimate prices somewhat) seem to suggest the iPhone's margin is business as usual for Apple.
As a user of all three major OSes, I would argue that it would do Windows and Linux users a lot of good to be a bit more critical. Looking at the apps available, there's a reason Mac apps are generally more polished: Mac users complain about stuff like that and will ignore (and thus eventually kill) crappy apps.
Please, people, learn something from Mac users. Don't accept crap just because it's free.
However, I don't see Metroid as being much of a system seller. It's sales pale in comparison to titles like Halo, Smash, GTA, or even Mario and Zelda
The reason I think Metroid is a system seller is because it doesn't sell to the "traditional" Nintendo audience. I believe the people who love Metroid are more likely to not yet own a Wii than the people who love Smash Bros. So far, Nintendo had a lot of games for more casual fans (apart from Zelda, I guess). Metroid is the first real hard core Wii game. I think a lot of people who were on the fence because they didn't like the current game selection are going to pick up Wiis for this game (if they find any).
Heavenly Sword has an aggregated rating of around 80%. It's not the game everybody wanted it to be, but it's definitely not crap. Lair, though, yeah. Seems to be crap. Warhawk is great, although too expensive, and as for Drake: It's not going to be a system seller, but I'm hoping it'll be a great game anyway.
File this one under 'no shit'. Is anyone even remotely surprised by this? What 20-something guy did never play violent video games? Maybe the lack of violent gaming affected him negatively in some way:-)
First of all, I see you've added me as a foe or something. I'm afraid I have to disappoint you, I don't really care about you, so I'm hardly your foe. Second:
My god, you're a stupid ass.
If you want to antagonize people, don't start with an insult. It doesn't work. See, I'm not insulted. At this point, I'm thinking you're a sad freak who has nothing better to do than troll people on/. and pretend that they care. And lest you think I do because I write this, let me point out that I'm just a bit bored and taking a break from coding. Reading your drivel is a perfect way to get some air into my brain.
Let's continue:
Maybe you live in a country where street racing is legal, but I doubt it.
Ah, I see we're making progress. Instead of insulting me, you're now trying to make an argument. Well done. Too bad your argument is crap. Obviously, street racing is not legal where I live. We do, however, have racing tracks where you can race all day long. Anyway, you're kind of making my point: You can't do what you do in NfS:Underground in real life. Same applies to gardening: I'm living in a rather big city. I don't have a garden. I guess I could get one of these garden patches outside of the city, but then I'd have to take two half-hour train rides whenever I wanted to do some gardening.
So guess what, I can't do any gardening, just like I can't do any underground racing - although underground racing is a bit more feasible.
And you can't always have 5-19 friends ready to run out and play your favourite sport.
Congratulations, another argument, although similarly poorly thought out as the former. Neither do you need to find 5-19 friends (in fact, I doubt you have any at all, considering your inane ramblings, but that is, of course, quite beside the point). You could joint a sports club, or go to a sports court near you and see if you can join a game that's already on. But of course, that takes quite a bit of work; less so then gardening, but still.
And even if you did this, the experience of playing a console sports game and of doing real sports is entirely different. It's a different activity. The same applies to car racing. And - surprise - the same also applies to gardening. I think stacking shit is a really boring activity, yet I love Tetris. I think shooting people is a dumb idea, yet I love Warhawk. I play the guitar, but I also play Guitar Hero.
Games are not the same as real life, even if they are about the same themes.
A gardening game has nothing to do with actual gardening apart from the subject. The experience is entirely different.
Okay, let's see what else you've got.
Gardening however, is:
a) boring to a great many people
So? I think Tennis is the most boring shit ever invented by mankind, yet I love to play Wii Tennis against my friends. Is gardening boring? My parents would disagree; so would a lot of people. It doesn't really matter: The fact that something is boring in real life does not in any way imply that it must be boring in a videogame. Eating pills is boring. Pac-Man is fun.
b) has low entry cost (you need dirt and seeds)
If you already have a garden, which a lot of people don't.
c) a solo activity
So? Most games are solo activities. Perfect fit.
d) is usually enjoyed because
i) it gets you outdoors
Same applies to sports in general, yet sports games seem to be okay with you.
ii) you get to see something real grow
And you won't when playing games. So? When playing a sports game, you also don't get to exercise. Yet people still play them.
If you're going to make a comparison at least put some thought into.
And if you're going to call others "a stupid ass," at least follow it up with an actual argument.
Personally, I wouldn't touch the 360 at this point on hardware issues and stupid add on costs like a proprietary hard drive and headset, and the Xbox Live cost. But that's just me.
Agreed. I own both a PS3 and a Wii, but I won't buy a 360, even though it has some tempting games. There are three reasons:
Hardware reliability is crap
Online gaming costs money (I want to play online games, but not often enough to pay money for it)
It's from Microsoft
I could live with it being from MS, but the other two are killers.
Well, it'll sell a few system, probably. But it's not on the level of a BioShock (even though that is available on PCs, too), and it's definitely not on the level of a Halo 3 or a Metroid Prime 3. That game will definitely move a ton of Wiis (or would, if they were available).
The real PS3 movers are MGS and FF, and they aren't coming for some time now. The other A-list PS3 titles are all somewhat questioniable or no-names: Drake, Lair, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword...
The PS3's games selection is looking better and better, but unfortunately, it has few system sellers.
Yes, I have. Wii Sports was a collection of minigames that could've been done better on any modern console, with or without waggle.
HAHAHA! Man, your comments are getting better and better as I scroll through the thread. Also, more and more desperate. Wii selling less than Cube! No online games on Wii! Wii Sports would be better on other consoles!
Really, you should listen to yourself. You're not helping your point by making these inane arguments.
Whether the Wii will catch up with the PS2 in total sales depends mainly on how long Nintendo will milk it. So far, in each generation, the leader was the last to launch the next generation console. It stands to reason that, with Nintendo winning this generation, it would wait for Sony or Microsoft to make a move.
However, Sony could go either way. If the PS3 never catches on, Sony might decide to not throw bad money after good money and launch a new generation early, just like Microsoft did with the 360. On the other hand, with the PS3 being (arguably) the strongest of the current-gen consoles, hardware-wise, Sony might decide to keep it alive as long as possible to gain back as much of its investment as possible.
As of now, Microsoft is in a good position vis-à-vis the PS3, and has no chance of competing with the Wii anyway - the 360 is the hardcore console, and Microsoft can't just change that short-term. I think they'll keep the 360 alive for quite a bit longer than the original Xbox. Should the PS3 catch up with the 360 and beat it by a good margin, I could even see Microsoft exiting the console business for good.
Personally, I think Nintendo won't launch an HD version of the Wii as long as the other two don't make their move. Still, I believe the Wii's lifespan will be considerably shorter than the PS2's (which is still selling rather well). I don't think the Wii will reach 120 million sold consoles.
Why do you hate the Wii so much? Reading through your posts, it seems you're scared or something. What is your issue?
Adding a unique control scheme forces game studios that want to follow that same model to either port games to the Wii poorly, or port games from the Wii poorly.
And it's going to be (and already is) the former, not the latter.
It's both. Anyone with Internet access can clearly see this. Why do you feel the need to even post when it's clear from your posting history that you're only going to say bad things about the Wii, regardless of the truth?
If you think that there are going to be more than a handful of third-party games that go beyond mini-game gimmickry, you're living in a dream world. Waggle really doesn't change anything.
GAH! Stop with the minigames meme! The Wii has more FPS than minigames. It needs more minigames. In fact, I'd be happy if third-party devs concentrated on making minigames. Of course, they don't, so that dream world thing... Applies to somebody else than you think.
You do realize that if a game costs 25%-50% of another game, those extra savings are coming from somewhere other than a nebulous void right?
Maybe because they don't need to create huge hi-res textures, characters with tons of polygons, and orchestrated music? Or maybe because they don't have to train programmers to program the cell chip, but can keep their toolchains and programming skills from the Cube? Maybe because they don't need to do face motion capturing for cut scenes because nobody would notice the difference on the Wii's resolution anyway?
Nah, gotta be because Wii games are designed for my grandmother (may she rest in peace).
I have a Wii but I just can't spend long on the Wii, there's simply nothing on it to keep me playing. Play through Zelda, play through Red Steel, have a bit of a bat about on Wii sports or a play around on Rayman now and then but that's pretty much all there is to the Wii
WHA? Are you only allowed to play launch titles or something? Do you realize that new games come out even after the console's launch day? In fact, there have been new Wii titles coming out weekly. Check out the shelf at your local games store, and you'll find great titles like Metroid Prime 3, Resident Evil 4, Super Paper Mario, Wario Ware, Mario Party 8, Madden, Trauma Center, Mario Strikers, Elebits, Excite Truck or The Godfather (it's good, trust me).
I realize that it hurts to identify with a company, and then see it get fucked up by another company you despise. That's okay, vent a bit on/.; I'm sure you're already feeling better.
However, I'd like to point out that you're wrong on two accounts. First, the innovative games aren't the ones with the waggle. Second, the Wii doesn't have many minigames at all, unfortunately. In fact, it has more FPS than minigames. Personally, I'd love to see more minigames, Mario Party 8 is getting a bit old.
Slashdot Mirror
I thought about this for a bit, and it strikes me as incredibly stupid to think that the content providers can hurt iTunes by moving content away from it. Apple doesn't make money with the iTunes store. They make money with the iPod. Furthermore, the iTunes store is not popular just because. It's popular due to the iPod's popularity.
You can't attack the iTunes store. People who own iPods are what makes the iTunes music store popular; if they can't get their content through the iTunes store, they will not buy content at all.
Think about it. If I can't buy some TV show through iTunes, what am I going to do? Every other store is incompatible with my iPod. I can either buy stuff from the iTunes store, buy stuff from a store that sells DRM-free content, or rip stuff from somewhere else; a DVD, perhaps, or some P2P network.
Which essentially means that if I can't buy the NBC stuff from the iTunes store, I can't pay for it at all, unless I wait until the DVD box comes out. So how does that hurt Apple? It doesn't hurt Apple at all, because Apple doesn't make a lot of money with the iTunes store anyway. It only hurts NBC, because now they get less content, and it hurts the customers, because now they're forced to go less simple and (possibly) more illegal ways.
That's also why Apple doesn't mess around. If content providers don't do what Apple wants, they're out. It's no loss for Apple. Universal wants higher prices? Screw them. NBC wants tougher DRM? Screw them, too.
If the content providers wanted to attack the iTunes store, they'd have to provide an alternative for iPod owners, which means no DRM. Oh, the irony. Delicious.
As long as you don't endanger anyone with your bomb, you should be ok in many countries.
Traditionally, Apple's margins have always been around 25%-35%. I'd be extremely surprised if the iPhone was different in any way; and so far, teardowns (which tend to underestimate prices somewhat) seem to suggest the iPhone's margin is business as usual for Apple.
A lot of news outlets have reported that the iPhone's price is not subsidized, among them reputable sources like ars technica.
But I guess your own question applies to you, too. Where's the evidence that it is subsidized?
As a user of all three major OSes, I would argue that it would do Windows and Linux users a lot of good to be a bit more critical. Looking at the apps available, there's a reason Mac apps are generally more polished: Mac users complain about stuff like that and will ignore (and thus eventually kill) crappy apps.
Please, people, learn something from Mac users. Don't accept crap just because it's free.
The reason I think Metroid is a system seller is because it doesn't sell to the "traditional" Nintendo audience. I believe the people who love Metroid are more likely to not yet own a Wii than the people who love Smash Bros. So far, Nintendo had a lot of games for more casual fans (apart from Zelda, I guess). Metroid is the first real hard core Wii game. I think a lot of people who were on the fence because they didn't like the current game selection are going to pick up Wiis for this game (if they find any).
Heavenly Sword has an aggregated rating of around 80%. It's not the game everybody wanted it to be, but it's definitely not crap. Lair, though, yeah. Seems to be crap. Warhawk is great, although too expensive, and as for Drake: It's not going to be a system seller, but I'm hoping it'll be a great game anyway.
And yet you do. And even reply to it.
Sources?
First of all, I see you've added me as a foe or something. I'm afraid I have to disappoint you, I don't really care about you, so I'm hardly your foe. Second:
My god, you're a stupid ass.If you want to antagonize people, don't start with an insult. It doesn't work. See, I'm not insulted. At this point, I'm thinking you're a sad freak who has nothing better to do than troll people on /. and pretend that they care. And lest you think I do because I write this, let me point out that I'm just a bit bored and taking a break from coding. Reading your drivel is a perfect way to get some air into my brain.
Let's continue:
Maybe you live in a country where street racing is legal, but I doubt it.Ah, I see we're making progress. Instead of insulting me, you're now trying to make an argument. Well done. Too bad your argument is crap. Obviously, street racing is not legal where I live. We do, however, have racing tracks where you can race all day long. Anyway, you're kind of making my point: You can't do what you do in NfS:Underground in real life. Same applies to gardening: I'm living in a rather big city. I don't have a garden. I guess I could get one of these garden patches outside of the city, but then I'd have to take two half-hour train rides whenever I wanted to do some gardening.
So guess what, I can't do any gardening, just like I can't do any underground racing - although underground racing is a bit more feasible.
And you can't always have 5-19 friends ready to run out and play your favourite sport.Congratulations, another argument, although similarly poorly thought out as the former. Neither do you need to find 5-19 friends (in fact, I doubt you have any at all, considering your inane ramblings, but that is, of course, quite beside the point). You could joint a sports club, or go to a sports court near you and see if you can join a game that's already on. But of course, that takes quite a bit of work; less so then gardening, but still.
And even if you did this, the experience of playing a console sports game and of doing real sports is entirely different. It's a different activity. The same applies to car racing. And - surprise - the same also applies to gardening. I think stacking shit is a really boring activity, yet I love Tetris. I think shooting people is a dumb idea, yet I love Warhawk. I play the guitar, but I also play Guitar Hero.
Games are not the same as real life, even if they are about the same themes.
A gardening game has nothing to do with actual gardening apart from the subject. The experience is entirely different.
Okay, let's see what else you've got.
Gardening however, is: a) boring to a great many peopleSo? I think Tennis is the most boring shit ever invented by mankind, yet I love to play Wii Tennis against my friends. Is gardening boring? My parents would disagree; so would a lot of people. It doesn't really matter: The fact that something is boring in real life does not in any way imply that it must be boring in a videogame. Eating pills is boring. Pac-Man is fun.
b) has low entry cost (you need dirt and seeds)If you already have a garden, which a lot of people don't.
c) a solo activitySo? Most games are solo activities. Perfect fit.
d) is usually enjoyed because i) it gets you outdoorsSame applies to sports in general, yet sports games seem to be okay with you.
ii) you get to see something real growAnd you won't when playing games. So? When playing a sports game, you also don't get to exercise. Yet people still play them.
If you're going to make a comparison at least put some thought into.And if you're going to call others "a stupid ass," at least follow it up with an actual argument.
Come on, you can do better, son.
Agreed. I own both a PS3 and a Wii, but I won't buy a 360, even though it has some tempting games. There are three reasons:
I could live with it being from MS, but the other two are killers.
Well, it'll sell a few system, probably. But it's not on the level of a BioShock (even though that is available on PCs, too), and it's definitely not on the level of a Halo 3 or a Metroid Prime 3. That game will definitely move a ton of Wiis (or would, if they were available).
The real PS3 movers are MGS and FF, and they aren't coming for some time now. The other A-list PS3 titles are all somewhat questioniable or no-names: Drake, Lair, Warhawk, Heavenly Sword...
The PS3's games selection is looking better and better, but unfortunately, it has few system sellers.
HAHAHA! Man, your comments are getting better and better as I scroll through the thread. Also, more and more desperate. Wii selling less than Cube! No online games on Wii! Wii Sports would be better on other consoles!
Really, you should listen to yourself. You're not helping your point by making these inane arguments.
Whether the Wii will catch up with the PS2 in total sales depends mainly on how long Nintendo will milk it. So far, in each generation, the leader was the last to launch the next generation console. It stands to reason that, with Nintendo winning this generation, it would wait for Sony or Microsoft to make a move.
However, Sony could go either way. If the PS3 never catches on, Sony might decide to not throw bad money after good money and launch a new generation early, just like Microsoft did with the 360. On the other hand, with the PS3 being (arguably) the strongest of the current-gen consoles, hardware-wise, Sony might decide to keep it alive as long as possible to gain back as much of its investment as possible.
As of now, Microsoft is in a good position vis-à-vis the PS3, and has no chance of competing with the Wii anyway - the 360 is the hardcore console, and Microsoft can't just change that short-term. I think they'll keep the 360 alive for quite a bit longer than the original Xbox. Should the PS3 catch up with the 360 and beat it by a good margin, I could even see Microsoft exiting the console business for good.
Personally, I think Nintendo won't launch an HD version of the Wii as long as the other two don't make their move. Still, I believe the Wii's lifespan will be considerably shorter than the PS2's (which is still selling rather well). I don't think the Wii will reach 120 million sold consoles.
It's both. Anyone with Internet access can clearly see this. Why do you feel the need to even post when it's clear from your posting history that you're only going to say bad things about the Wii, regardless of the truth?
What's your issue?
The Wii isn't getting equivalent gameplay. It's getting better gameplay.
Deal with it.
GAH! Stop with the minigames meme! The Wii has more FPS than minigames. It needs more minigames. In fact, I'd be happy if third-party devs concentrated on making minigames. Of course, they don't, so that dream world thing... Applies to somebody else than you think.
Just FYI: Attach rate on the Wii is bigger than on the PS3, and comparable to the 360 at the same time in its lifespan.
As for non-Nintendo games, people will buy them if they are available, see NES, SNES, early Wii sales numbers for Ubisoft.
Maybe because they don't need to create huge hi-res textures, characters with tons of polygons, and orchestrated music? Or maybe because they don't have to train programmers to program the cell chip, but can keep their toolchains and programming skills from the Cube? Maybe because they don't need to do face motion capturing for cut scenes because nobody would notice the difference on the Wii's resolution anyway?
Nah, gotta be because Wii games are designed for my grandmother (may she rest in peace).
WHA? Are you only allowed to play launch titles or something? Do you realize that new games come out even after the console's launch day? In fact, there have been new Wii titles coming out weekly. Check out the shelf at your local games store, and you'll find great titles like Metroid Prime 3, Resident Evil 4, Super Paper Mario, Wario Ware, Mario Party 8, Madden, Trauma Center, Mario Strikers, Elebits, Excite Truck or The Godfather (it's good, trust me).
And why play racing games if you can drive a car? Why play sports games if you can go out and play the game IRL?
Geez. Can we stop with these stupid questions?
It's not either-or. It's both.
Wow, that post must have come here from the past. The amazingness of the Wiimote has not been an open question since we all played Wii Sports.
I realize that it hurts to identify with a company, and then see it get fucked up by another company you despise. That's okay, vent a bit on /.; I'm sure you're already feeling better.
However, I'd like to point out that you're wrong on two accounts. First, the innovative games aren't the ones with the waggle. Second, the Wii doesn't have many minigames at all, unfortunately. In fact, it has more FPS than minigames. Personally, I'd love to see more minigames, Mario Party 8 is getting a bit old.