After all 640K addresses should be enough for anyone!
Uhhh...I mean 2^32. Sorry.
Please don't put limitations on what you think the world will need 30-40 years from now.
Sorry if I find your argument rediculous, but the only reason its ok to talk about spiderman or star was now is because they both just had huge thearetical releases with amazing special effects. If the movies wern't out, you would still be beaten up.
Isn't that what I said? What once was "nerdy" is now accepted as "popular" culture because of ease of access or general mass acceptance (in this case because of the films). I think the point of the discussion is these things are _now_ becoming mainstream when before they probably would have stayed on the sidelines. Computers were around and popular when I was in high school, but if you spent lots of time with them, you were odd. Now its commonplace. Its not so much that nerds have been accepted as their culture has been assimilated.
I've actually thought about this topic a bit, and to show how fast things change ("internet speed" as it were), I'll compare my brother and myself. My brother went to high school 4 years after I did, so I graduated 1996 and he started fall of that year.
During my high school days, AOL had _just_ gotten the web so not too many people were on it (and there were only a few local ISPs cropping up). BBS's were almost done, but they had been my major "online time". Liking Star Wars (even though I wasn't into it) would have been extremely nerdy, etc.
Fastforward three years.
My brother talks to all his friends, hell, the whole school, on IM, in chat rooms, on the web, etc. A large amount of people spend their time downloading things (porn, music, games) off the internet, just like I used to off BBSs. Star Wars is back in style.
Liking Spiderman 4 years ago would have gotten your ass kicked. Now you'll just be one of many. I think all of this applies most aggresivly to the high school and younger crowd, because they're the ones to apply the labels to exclusion.
Hi there! Here's the deal: A system you envision would require thousands of readers in a local area to even get just the major chokepoints in a moderate sized metropolitan area. This is going to require a dedicated group of workers to maintain these buggers (power, networking, and eventual breakage from exposure to the elements because unlike velcro the aliens didn't give the tech to us) Thats a bunch of people. I'll tell you what: I go outside on MY street and I see a bunch of freaking potholes in the street. Traffic is congested all over the place, and nonstop construction doesn't keep pace with population growth in the area.
So you're telling me that the good people of the land are going to vote this system in? Ahead of say a new lane on the bottleneck highway or perhaps some new pavement so we don't all actually reaquire H2s to navigate the streets?
Who's paying for this tinfoil technology? Not the state governments, that's for sure. You seem to forget that despite the wild slippery slope theories people come up with, no one really looks at the practicality of making such a system work. Embedding millions of RFID tags nation wide at the cost of billions and billions of dollars to build and operate just doesn't seem like something people want.
But don't worry, this is just FUD. I work for THEM, and now that you're onto us Mr. Slashdot #ID 710711, we're going to have to shut you up. After all, we know where you are! (Cue creepy music)
Nip/Tuck
Sopranos
The Shield
I'm doubting PCness is on anyone's mind when making television that sells. If anything they're playing off the Lara Croft type female James Bond thing that's cropped up in recent years.
Why can't I? If you expect only a certain percentage of a market will buy a certain item, then you have to price it accordingly. Many games typically only expect to sell a few hundred thousand copies. To recoup the 5M or so they spent on development, plus try to gain some profit, companies have to price it higher. What we don't see in the game industry (and I'll agree its a problem) is pricing more popular games at a cheaper rate. Some games have to go higher to meet limited demand, but WCIII coming out the gate at $60 is a little excessive.
Game prices have come down as the market has grown, and I expect they will continue to do so. If Playstation3 sells 150 million units worldwide, I'd expect to see AAA titles start cracking the $30 mark.
The real question is, why do movie prices continue to exceed inflation in terms of rising costs?
This has nothing to do with the size of the potential gaming audience. Those buying the games are repeat buyers, and further more those games are sequels (just as Starwars movies are sequels) Each mario game is completely redone from the last (Madden may carry over stuff between years, but there's a lot of added content).
Hundreds of millions? Now you're the one doing the hyperbole. There aren't even "hundreds of millions" of systems sold.
What are you trying to prove with this statement anyway? Its one thing to argue facts, but what are you actually trying to say? That there are best selling video games? Sure. Is the size of the market the same? No. Thats my only point in regards to higher pricing, and you've yet to address it.
At $10 a ticket, that's like every single person with a modern console buying a particular game. Currently, 1M copies is great for a title. Many titles don't even print that many. The best titles of all time have sold maybe 10-15M.
Scale it back further. Say a "great" opening weekend for some movies is 40M. Thats 4 Million people on opening weekend alone, in the first three days of release. That's not counting overseas or all the other distrubution channels.
(BTW, spiderman barely cracks the top 10. Titanic took 1.6B)
What else will it take for you to see that the potential target audience for gaming is much much smaller and justifies the higher cost?
100 million tickets? Spiderman? Star wars? We're talking worldwide here. What does "comparable on paper" mean? No one is selling 100 million games because there aren't enough people to buy them. The installed "user base" for movies is much higher, thus if a percentage of the moviegoers that see a movie is the same percentage of users that buy a game, the movie makes much more money because...drum roll...there are a lot more movie goers than gamers!
Only hardcore fans buy DVDs now.
Completely untrue. DVD/VHS sales/rentals make up a large amount of a movie's take. Its a big market. I don't understand how you compare internet gaming and MMORPGs to HBO/PPV. They aren't delivering the same content again after taking in large amounts from traditional sales. They're introducing new content who's primary sale is via the internet.
My point is that you cannot compare the size of the moviegoing audience to the size of the gameplaying audience and the amount of potential revenue to be garnered from each. You argued that they're virtually identical and should ideally charge the same price.
The market for movies and games are in no way the same. Movies are generally accessable by all. Blockbusters will be seen on thousands of screens by hundred of millions of people worldwide. When you make a console game, you're competing for marketshare in a very limited pool (50 million worldwide for the PS2). If all 50M bought every game, that'd be fine, but generally just a fraction are going to buy your game. Therefore you need to price it higher.
Movies on the otherhand have hundres of thousands of screens to show on, and that's _before_ you take it to DVD to squeeze every last dollar out. (Not to mention off to HBO, Pay-per-view, airplanes, then the networks, then on to syndication on TBS.) Most movies will eventually break even through video, DVD sales, merchendizing and TV rights. Most games fail because once you sell it, that's it. So you have to take the $50 up front from the much smaller market.
And game prices have come down, at least in real dollar values. Nintendo & Super Nintendo games were sometimes as high as $70 in the early ninetys, now everything is $40-$50 after inflation.
Revenge is sweet tho; all these big jocks are MBA's now and pay big $$$ for their websites, etc. Of course, my *own* sites are free...:D
Yeah, and they probably have to pay someone to fix that expensive Porche they have! And look at the money you saved by not buying breast implants for your trophy wife!! I guess the joke is on those losers!
All you guys that were going to get out because of DMCA are cancelling your reservations? Don't worry, the US won't let a bunch of Brits top us. They'll build a super-DMCA? We'll build a Super- DOOPER-DMCA!
Read the warnings...placed by...the good people that made the item? Oh, the one the government made them put there?
I'm assuming these devices will undergo the same type of saftey checks, etc. And again, sitting in front of a continuous radiation emitter (i.e. your monitor) is what you really should worry about if your concerned with such things.
Hahah, no sorry. Just a programmer here. I'm sure you'd like there to be a conspiracy though. (I wouldn't want to work in the industry as they'd probably track my paycheck to the bank!!!)
And who is doing the complaining? You didn't even respond to my question? What "radio waves" are you talking about?
Of course, this conversation is a bit stale, so I won't be surprised or offended if you don't respond.
???
This is FUD if I've ever heard it. What will these fields do? Will they have anymore effect than color television or my computer monitor? How about background radio waves from outerspace? The sun? My television? Anything the FCC regulates?
Puh-leeze, pure FUD.
"Here are reasons why these RFID labels will not work properly:
...
Barcodes are better and heres why
...
They cannot be read from a distance without the use of a laser whereas RFID could be read from wihtin your package as you walk wthin a mall, or store, and even from one vehicle to another with the right equipment."
So which is it? Are they kludgy failures that won't work, or the harbringer of Big Brother? Argue one or the other, but not both. I personally will like not having to wait so long in a checkout line while the nitwit at the cash register tries to find the UPC code on the box of orange juice I have in my cart.
Exactly. WTF does the government want to know where you and your POS Gremlin are going?
(Actually, I can infer wherethe grandparent poster is probably going: a) to the doctor, b) from the doctor, c) to the park to sleep, or d) Down to the gun store at the command of the radio voice they put in his head).
Everytime I see an RFID article I do an automatic rolleyes to prepare myself for the first comment. You are already trackable via credit card and cell phone, and the gov't hasn't bothered you yet....
Or are they?
Dun dun dun!!!
From my grandfather, who worked at a gas station about 20 miles from the "landing site"
He said of all the people that stopped at the station that night, half were leaving to get away from the aliens, and the other half were driving towards it!
Slashdot Mirror
This being Slashdot...Yes, yes I do.
After all 640K addresses should be enough for anyone! Uhhh...I mean 2^32. Sorry. Please don't put limitations on what you think the world will need 30-40 years from now.
Sorry if I find your argument rediculous, but the only reason its ok to talk about spiderman or star was now is because they both just had huge thearetical releases with amazing special effects. If the movies wern't out, you would still be beaten up.
Isn't that what I said? What once was "nerdy" is now accepted as "popular" culture because of ease of access or general mass acceptance (in this case because of the films). I think the point of the discussion is these things are _now_ becoming mainstream when before they probably would have stayed on the sidelines. Computers were around and popular when I was in high school, but if you spent lots of time with them, you were odd. Now its commonplace. Its not so much that nerds have been accepted as their culture has been assimilated.
I disagree.
I've actually thought about this topic a bit, and to show how fast things change ("internet speed" as it were), I'll compare my brother and myself. My brother went to high school 4 years after I did, so I graduated 1996 and he started fall of that year.
During my high school days, AOL had _just_ gotten the web so not too many people were on it (and there were only a few local ISPs cropping up). BBS's were almost done, but they had been my major "online time". Liking Star Wars (even though I wasn't into it) would have been extremely nerdy, etc.
Fastforward three years.
My brother talks to all his friends, hell, the whole school, on IM, in chat rooms, on the web, etc. A large amount of people spend their time downloading things (porn, music, games) off the internet, just like I used to off BBSs. Star Wars is back in style.
Liking Spiderman 4 years ago would have gotten your ass kicked. Now you'll just be one of many. I think all of this applies most aggresivly to the high school and younger crowd, because they're the ones to apply the labels to exclusion.
Hi there! Here's the deal: A system you envision would require thousands of readers in a local area to even get just the major chokepoints in a moderate sized metropolitan area. This is going to require a dedicated group of workers to maintain these buggers (power, networking, and eventual breakage from exposure to the elements because unlike velcro the aliens didn't give the tech to us) Thats a bunch of people. I'll tell you what: I go outside on MY street and I see a bunch of freaking potholes in the street. Traffic is congested all over the place, and nonstop construction doesn't keep pace with population growth in the area.
So you're telling me that the good people of the land are going to vote this system in? Ahead of say a new lane on the bottleneck highway or perhaps some new pavement so we don't all actually reaquire H2s to navigate the streets?
Who's paying for this tinfoil technology? Not the state governments, that's for sure. You seem to forget that despite the wild slippery slope theories people come up with, no one really looks at the practicality of making such a system work. Embedding millions of RFID tags nation wide at the cost of billions and billions of dollars to build and operate just doesn't seem like something people want.
But don't worry, this is just FUD. I work for THEM, and now that you're onto us Mr. Slashdot #ID 710711, we're going to have to shut you up. After all, we know where you are! (Cue creepy music)
I'm moving to...
wait, where is this again? Canada?
Shit. I better like tacos.
Nip/Tuck Sopranos The Shield I'm doubting PCness is on anyone's mind when making television that sells. If anything they're playing off the Lara Croft type female James Bond thing that's cropped up in recent years.
Why can't I? If you expect only a certain percentage of a market will buy a certain item, then you have to price it accordingly. Many games typically only expect to sell a few hundred thousand copies. To recoup the 5M or so they spent on development, plus try to gain some profit, companies have to price it higher. What we don't see in the game industry (and I'll agree its a problem) is pricing more popular games at a cheaper rate. Some games have to go higher to meet limited demand, but WCIII coming out the gate at $60 is a little excessive.
Game prices have come down as the market has grown, and I expect they will continue to do so. If Playstation3 sells 150 million units worldwide, I'd expect to see AAA titles start cracking the $30 mark.
The real question is, why do movie prices continue to exceed inflation in terms of rising costs?
This has nothing to do with the size of the potential gaming audience. Those buying the games are repeat buyers, and further more those games are sequels (just as Starwars movies are sequels) Each mario game is completely redone from the last (Madden may carry over stuff between years, but there's a lot of added content). Hundreds of millions? Now you're the one doing the hyperbole. There aren't even "hundreds of millions" of systems sold. What are you trying to prove with this statement anyway? Its one thing to argue facts, but what are you actually trying to say? That there are best selling video games? Sure. Is the size of the market the same? No. Thats my only point in regards to higher pricing, and you've yet to address it.
Ok, I'll concede the point. Its $800M. (Check for yourself)
At $10 a ticket, that's like every single person with a modern console buying a particular game. Currently, 1M copies is great for a title. Many titles don't even print that many. The best titles of all time have sold maybe 10-15M.
Scale it back further. Say a "great" opening weekend for some movies is 40M. Thats 4 Million people on opening weekend alone, in the first three days of release. That's not counting overseas or all the other distrubution channels.
(BTW, spiderman barely cracks the top 10. Titanic took 1.6B)
What else will it take for you to see that the potential target audience for gaming is much much smaller and justifies the higher cost?
100 million tickets? Spiderman? Star wars? We're talking worldwide here. What does "comparable on paper" mean? No one is selling 100 million games because there aren't enough people to buy them. The installed "user base" for movies is much higher, thus if a percentage of the moviegoers that see a movie is the same percentage of users that buy a game, the movie makes much more money because...drum roll...there are a lot more movie goers than gamers!
Only hardcore fans buy DVDs now.
Completely untrue. DVD/VHS sales/rentals make up a large amount of a movie's take. Its a big market. I don't understand how you compare internet gaming and MMORPGs to HBO/PPV. They aren't delivering the same content again after taking in large amounts from traditional sales. They're introducing new content who's primary sale is via the internet.
My point is that you cannot compare the size of the moviegoing audience to the size of the gameplaying audience and the amount of potential revenue to be garnered from each. You argued that they're virtually identical and should ideally charge the same price.
The market for movies and games are in no way the same. Movies are generally accessable by all. Blockbusters will be seen on thousands of screens by hundred of millions of people worldwide. When you make a console game, you're competing for marketshare in a very limited pool (50 million worldwide for the PS2). If all 50M bought every game, that'd be fine, but generally just a fraction are going to buy your game. Therefore you need to price it higher.
Movies on the otherhand have hundres of thousands of screens to show on, and that's _before_ you take it to DVD to squeeze every last dollar out. (Not to mention off to HBO, Pay-per-view, airplanes, then the networks, then on to syndication on TBS.) Most movies will eventually break even through video, DVD sales, merchendizing and TV rights. Most games fail because once you sell it, that's it. So you have to take the $50 up front from the much smaller market.
And game prices have come down, at least in real dollar values. Nintendo & Super Nintendo games were sometimes as high as $70 in the early ninetys, now everything is $40-$50 after inflation.
Ummm...he is. Those were initial speculations, but this seems like more in depth findings.
Yeah, I tried to tell myself that too in 6th grade. Didn't seem like it at the time.
Revenge is sweet tho; all these big jocks are MBA's now and pay big $$$ for their websites, etc. Of course, my *own* sites are free... :D
Yeah, and they probably have to pay someone to fix that expensive Porche they have! And look at the money you saved by not buying breast implants for your trophy wife!! I guess the joke is on those losers!
And to think nerds once held the internet as a private refuge.
All you guys that were going to get out because of DMCA are cancelling your reservations? Don't worry, the US won't let a bunch of Brits top us. They'll build a super-DMCA? We'll build a Super- DOOPER-DMCA!
Don't trust the government.
Read the warnings...placed by...the good people that made the item? Oh, the one the government made them put there?
I'm assuming these devices will undergo the same type of saftey checks, etc. And again, sitting in front of a continuous radiation emitter (i.e. your monitor) is what you really should worry about if your concerned with such things.
Please provide a reference where RFID transmitter emmisions violate safety standards, or did you just guess? Thanks.
Hahah, no sorry. Just a programmer here. I'm sure you'd like there to be a conspiracy though. (I wouldn't want to work in the industry as they'd probably track my paycheck to the bank!!!)
And who is doing the complaining? You didn't even respond to my question? What "radio waves" are you talking about?
Of course, this conversation is a bit stale, so I won't be surprised or offended if you don't respond.
??? This is FUD if I've ever heard it. What will these fields do? Will they have anymore effect than color television or my computer monitor? How about background radio waves from outerspace? The sun? My television? Anything the FCC regulates? Puh-leeze, pure FUD.
"Here are reasons why these RFID labels will not work properly:
...
Barcodes are better and heres why
...
They cannot be read from a distance without the use of a laser whereas RFID could be read from wihtin your package as you walk wthin a mall, or store, and even from one vehicle to another with the right equipment."
So which is it? Are they kludgy failures that won't work, or the harbringer of Big Brother? Argue one or the other, but not both. I personally will like not having to wait so long in a checkout line while the nitwit at the cash register tries to find the UPC code on the box of orange juice I have in my cart.
Exactly. WTF does the government want to know where you and your POS Gremlin are going? (Actually, I can infer wherethe grandparent poster is probably going: a) to the doctor, b) from the doctor, c) to the park to sleep, or d) Down to the gun store at the command of the radio voice they put in his head). Everytime I see an RFID article I do an automatic rolleyes to prepare myself for the first comment. You are already trackable via credit card and cell phone, and the gov't hasn't bothered you yet. ...
Or are they?
Dun dun dun!!!
No, they definately wanted to go take a look a the spacemen (they probably turned off the radio before the shooting started ;).
From my grandfather, who worked at a gas station about 20 miles from the "landing site" He said of all the people that stopped at the station that night, half were leaving to get away from the aliens, and the other half were driving towards it!