Publishers have to pay for their 1-800 support lines, multiplayer servers, online community, etc. Have you played a Live! enabled game yet? The goal is to provide value to the player long after the sale of a game is made.
1) I can call an EA support line without owning any EA game.
2) Any hint lines are almost always 900-type numbers.
3) Any promised multiplayer support would have to be promised to the original owner anyway, whether or not they are using it.
4) I can join the BioWare forums (to pick a name at random. I hate their games.) without owning a BioWare game anyway.
They need to provide all this to every copy of the game anyway. If enough people don't buy a certain game, a publisher feels it has the right to terminate any or all of these benefits at will. Exactly why should we suddenly be concerned with their plight after we have been screwed so many times.
You could either vote for the "tax and spend" Liberals, or the "spend" Republicans. Under the circumstances, I'd like to elect the politicians that intend to pay for their programs, rather than throwing our country into the dark chasm of debt.
The US is a mixed economy, inhabiting the grey area between socalism and capitalism. This is not inherently a bad thing. Every country with a position of power (in other words, every country) has the oppertunity for corruption regardless of their economic model. The US is corrupt, most certainly, but to blame an innocent economic model is missing the point.
Geez, maybe they will have a button or series of buttons that can calibrate it on the fly. On the Gamecube controller it is holding X, Y, and start for 3 seconds.
You do not understand the level of control this offers. You see only the motion aspect. Think about the pointing possibilities, and imagine the kinds of games that could benefit from such control.
Let me put it this way, I think that one of the genres that will benefit most from the revolution controller is traditional sports games. The pointing will be the key.
Your average family won't be replacing their old DVDs even after they get HD sets and HD DVD/Blu-ray players
I have to say that this confuses about the HD media push. It is very likely that HD DVD and Blu-Ray players will still support standard DVDs. The big money boom of the DVDs was the replacement of VHS movies. The studios got to charge their customers again. If it is less likely for the customers to buy thier old DVD movies again, is there anything to be gained by a hard push for the media?
Also, I've heard rumblings that the Blu-ray drives that Sony might incorporate into the PS3 might have slower data transfer speeds than their DVD brothers. If that is the case, the load times might be oppressive.
Ha, you know what ? I don't doubt it for a second. I even have publishing world connections, what am I thinking? I guess I'm thinking that writing isn't going to get me the big bucks... am I wrong? Should I write prose instead of code?
The big bucks are made by those who touch a popular nerve. That is much harder to quantify than, say, a Microsoft certification. That isn't to say that you can't do some freelance work on the side. Many writers have a day job, because it is hard to support yourself on writing alone in the beginning. With any occupation that might be considered an art, you really need to love it to be successful. Work is sometimes spotty. Pay is sometimes bad. Through all that, you'll need to find it worthwhile on a different level to keep going.
Here's the rub though: the smaller developer and more limited shops have to recognize their limitations as a business.
Heh, that's true of any business. The biggest challenge I see for the small developer is marketing. If companies like Nintendo are really serious about helping them, they have to provide a way to make smaller games known.
Snow and ice are rather reflective of optical light. At least more so than dirt and rocks. The Sun's light peaks in the optical (roughly 500 nm, which is yellow light). Greenhouse gasses absorb in the infrared, but are much more transparent in optical wavelengths.
The greenhouse effect, therefore, is dependant on the optical light being absorbed by the soil, grass, trees, and other things and re-emitted in the infrared.
So if the Earth is more reflective of optical light, less of the Sun's radiation can be trapped by the greenhouse gasses. Thus, you have the opportunity for a lower average temperature on the planet Earth even with higher levels of greenhouse gasses.
I think it is a bigger risk for Nintendo than you do. The concept of the controller is very sound, but if the technology behind it isn't perfected, the Revolution will be a huge flop. I also think Nintendo is targeting a more broad demographic than they (or anyone else in the game's industry) ever have before. If it pays off, they could make a ton of money.
Neither of them really see a problem with making only a little money on their respective ventures when counted in terms of pure hardware sales, they both intend to make money 'selling blades', so to speak.
I'm sure Microsoft is prepared to take massive losses again, but Sony has big problems. If the PlayStation brand loses its luster, investors may start to bail. Sony doesn't have a lot of other products making profit for them. The high definition media war that they are trying to start is pointless now. It feels pushed like digital media was with the laser disc. Sure, some will want HD movies for their HD living rooms, but I can't imagine many people paying so much extra for the equipment and the media when they are satisfied with what they have.
Then again, I didn't believe anyone would buy a UMD movie for $20. I've been wrong before.
The only real difference between Charlie and I ( besides that he's getting stories published and I'm just posting on slashdot )
Trust me. It is not that hard to get published. If I can do it, you can do it.
He's sure right that game publishers are going to continue to be under pressure for a few years, though...
Yeah. At least the Nintendo handhelds are still relatively cheap to develop for. Hopefully some smaller firms can survive there. Who knows, maybe Live Arcade or the Revolution will support the smaller guys. Nintendo execs talk about a broad price range for the Rev every so often, and Xbox Live arcade seems to have worked for at least one developer.
What about Iwata? He's been saying this for years. That is why Nintendo appears to be taking so many risks.
For the record, game sales in Japan are shrinking.
The writing is on the wall. Sony and Microsoft are looking at dueling losses in the next generation, each trying to pave they way to what they see as the ultimate profits in the next next generation after their foes have been vanquished. How long can they both keep their respective business models? There is a tipping point to this game of corporate chicken. Will one back down before they crash?
Is another crash going to happen? I don't know. Depends on how the industry can adapt. Depends on who bothers to see the pattern. Nintendo is visibly distancing themselves from their competitors, and I'm sure they will still be standing no matter what happens this generation. They do good business and have a solid foundation. Hell, Microsoft's monopoly might be invincible, supporting the weight of the current business model indefinately. There are a ton of factors.
But there is a problem. Too little profit is made by certain companies. Likely some will adapt and leave others behind, but if too many people are too stupid the market will go to hell again.
So as a result, I'm expecting that every developer besides Nintendo will simply expect you to have the stick in nunchuck configuration, which to me defeats the whole purpose.
I don't see it that way. I'm sure there were some that had a grand vision for the single handed wand, but more practical heads demanded a little more control. The important thing is that the additional control the wand allows is not sacrificed in the "nunchuck" configuration.
The "classic shell" will be the vehicle for the 3rd party sellout not the nunchuck.
First of all because they have made a profit every single quarter of its release. Secondly, the Gamecube is only about 5% behind the XBox in worldwide install base.
No, they lost one quarter, the one that ended Dec 31, 2003. It was their frist and only losing quarter in the fifty years they have been publicly traded.
I'm sure the poster is speaking about Sony's and Microsoft's game divisions. Let me put it to you this way. Microsoft has lost so much money on the Xbox that I have made more money than Sony's and Microsoft's game divisions combined over the past four years.
And no, Sony is not doing as well as you surmise. The GameCube sells a lot of software per console sold. Since they don't subsidize their console, software profit is actual profit. Sony has a 70% stake in the home console business and they regularly report quaterly losses. Nintendo has reported one quarterly loss in fifty years of public trading. The GameCube is profitable. Not super ultra mega profitable, but it makes them money.
Sony's business model is based on the assumption that they are the far-away leader. Ask yourself this, if Sony does not capture 70% of the market in the next generation, will they turn a profit?
Sony is the worlds 2nd largest electronics manufacturer. They have movie and music studios and are a major force in the traditional entertainment industry. Nintendo is almost solely a video game company, and they manage to make more than half the profits (overall) of the Sony behemoth.
Nintendo is a tightly run ship. They know how to make money, and they do it by the truckload.
Their attempts rebuild their image amongst hardcore gamers has fallen largely on deaf ears, and it's not financially feasible for them to battle it out head to head with the titans like Sony and Microsoft.
Nintendo keeps more money than Microsoft lost on the Xbox in its entirety liquid. That's right. They have more than 4 billion dollars cash on hand to invest quickly (7.5 billion is the number I could find). Nintendo could play the game that Sony and Microsoft has started, but what would be the point? Sony and Microsoft might both lose money in the next generation. Nintendo doesn't care to play a game that no one might win.
Nintendo is on forcast. This is a 21% drop in profits from the same time the previous year. Game sales overall are lower, so everyone is expected to make less profit. Nintendo lowered their forcast this year 3 months ago based on the delay of Zelda. Other than that everything is going smoothly.
Last year was a really good year for Nintendo's profits and they are expecting to make about 4/5th of that this fiscal year in a transitional period for their home console business. Not too bad. Also remember that they are considering all the R&D for the Rev that they are paying for.
So no, there is nothing for a Nintendo fan to worry about. The game media simply loves blowing anything remotely negative for Nintendo out of proportion.
No, Nintendo doesn't. Both the GameCube and the DS were sold at more than cost at launch. This does not mean there was not some initial investment to make them. However, the systems were profitable very quickly. This is how a company runs a tight ship.
Sony could subsidize the PS2 last generation, because they managed to claim such a huge marketshare. The problem is that they still had multiple losing quarters. (Nintendo had one, the first in 50 years of public trading.)
The question that needs to be asked is will anyone other than Nintendo eke out a profit this time? If Sony can't, they are in BIG trouble. Microsoft continuously dumps the funds gouged from Windows users into their Games division (which is very close to being illegal). Sony's Games division, on the other hand, is keeping the entire company afloat. If it's profits fall flat, Sony as we know it now may crumble.
Prediction: if Sony does start to fall, expect an anti-trust suit from them.
Nintendo will simply coast along, money in hand. They have far too many assets and are far too well run to fall into this pit.
I'd get your hands on it yourself before you pass judgement. I've been playing it for a solid week and the buttons config is as comfortable as any racer I've ever played.
I would not be able to choose between the original Mario Kart or Wipeout 1 or 3. Then again I like games of many different asthetics. Nintendo makes and Psygnosis made games with a certain care that is too often overlooked.
Oh yeah, that was a great one. The game I use to demonstrate the DS to others is the trampoline mini-game from the same title. I've burned out my battery multiple times on that one.
Slashdot Mirror
But because they are the ones with the money and lawyers, just as unlikely to ever be stopped.
Welcome to the Microsoft and Sony world of videogames!
For only 49 cents extra, you can get some video game programming with your stupid ass show about cars!
Sadly, most of the independant canidates are worse than their major party competition, because they are too idealistic (see Ralph Nader).
I'm not as jaded as you think. I think there are good people to elect. Most of those who call themselves Republicans are not these people.
Anyway, I apologize for the overuse of the word, "anyway."
Publishers have to pay for their 1-800 support lines, multiplayer servers, online community, etc. Have you played a Live! enabled game yet? The goal is to provide value to the player long after the sale of a game is made.
1) I can call an EA support line without owning any EA game.
2) Any hint lines are almost always 900-type numbers.
3) Any promised multiplayer support would have to be promised to the original owner anyway, whether or not they are using it.
4) I can join the BioWare forums (to pick a name at random. I hate their games.) without owning a BioWare game anyway.
They need to provide all this to every copy of the game anyway. If enough people don't buy a certain game, a publisher feels it has the right to terminate any or all of these benefits at will. Exactly why should we suddenly be concerned with their plight after we have been screwed so many times.
Unfortunatly game players can't get off their chairs.. :)
They wouldn't have to. EB and Ebay will take the matter to court for them.
You could either vote for the "tax and spend" Liberals, or the "spend" Republicans. Under the circumstances, I'd like to elect the politicians that intend to pay for their programs, rather than throwing our country into the dark chasm of debt.
The US is a mixed economy, inhabiting the grey area between socalism and capitalism. This is not inherently a bad thing. Every country with a position of power (in other words, every country) has the oppertunity for corruption regardless of their economic model. The US is corrupt, most certainly, but to blame an innocent economic model is missing the point.
Geez, maybe they will have a button or series of buttons that can calibrate it on the fly. On the Gamecube controller it is holding X, Y, and start for 3 seconds.
But that's crazy talk!
You do not understand the level of control this offers. You see only the motion aspect. Think about the pointing possibilities, and imagine the kinds of games that could benefit from such control.
Let me put it this way, I think that one of the genres that will benefit most from the revolution controller is traditional sports games. The pointing will be the key.
Your average family won't be replacing their old DVDs even after they get HD sets and HD DVD/Blu-ray players
I have to say that this confuses about the HD media push. It is very likely that HD DVD and Blu-Ray players will still support standard DVDs. The big money boom of the DVDs was the replacement of VHS movies. The studios got to charge their customers again. If it is less likely for the customers to buy thier old DVD movies again, is there anything to be gained by a hard push for the media?
Also, I've heard rumblings that the Blu-ray drives that Sony might incorporate into the PS3 might have slower data transfer speeds than their DVD brothers. If that is the case, the load times might be oppressive.
Ha, you know what ? I don't doubt it for a second. I even have publishing world connections, what am I thinking? I guess I'm thinking that writing isn't going to get me the big bucks... am I wrong? Should I write prose instead of code?
The big bucks are made by those who touch a popular nerve. That is much harder to quantify than, say, a Microsoft certification. That isn't to say that you can't do some freelance work on the side. Many writers have a day job, because it is hard to support yourself on writing alone in the beginning. With any occupation that might be considered an art, you really need to love it to be successful. Work is sometimes spotty. Pay is sometimes bad. Through all that, you'll need to find it worthwhile on a different level to keep going.
Here's the rub though: the smaller developer and more limited shops have to recognize their limitations as a business.
Heh, that's true of any business. The biggest challenge I see for the small developer is marketing. If companies like Nintendo are really serious about helping them, they have to provide a way to make smaller games known.
Ice age = More snow and ice
Snow and ice are rather reflective of optical light. At least more so than dirt and rocks. The Sun's light peaks in the optical (roughly 500 nm, which is yellow light). Greenhouse gasses absorb in the infrared, but are much more transparent in optical wavelengths.
The greenhouse effect, therefore, is dependant on the optical light being absorbed by the soil, grass, trees, and other things and re-emitted in the infrared.
So if the Earth is more reflective of optical light, less of the Sun's radiation can be trapped by the greenhouse gasses. Thus, you have the opportunity for a lower average temperature on the planet Earth even with higher levels of greenhouse gasses.
SCIENCE!
I think it is a bigger risk for Nintendo than you do. The concept of the controller is very sound, but if the technology behind it isn't perfected, the Revolution will be a huge flop. I also think Nintendo is targeting a more broad demographic than they (or anyone else in the game's industry) ever have before. If it pays off, they could make a ton of money.
Neither of them really see a problem with making only a little money on their respective ventures when counted in terms of pure hardware sales, they both intend to make money 'selling blades', so to speak.
I'm sure Microsoft is prepared to take massive losses again, but Sony has big problems. If the PlayStation brand loses its luster, investors may start to bail. Sony doesn't have a lot of other products making profit for them. The high definition media war that they are trying to start is pointless now. It feels pushed like digital media was with the laser disc. Sure, some will want HD movies for their HD living rooms, but I can't imagine many people paying so much extra for the equipment and the media when they are satisfied with what they have.
Then again, I didn't believe anyone would buy a UMD movie for $20. I've been wrong before.
The only real difference between Charlie and I ( besides that he's getting stories published and I'm just posting on slashdot )
Trust me. It is not that hard to get published. If I can do it, you can do it.
He's sure right that game publishers are going to continue to be under pressure for a few years, though...
Yeah. At least the Nintendo handhelds are still relatively cheap to develop for. Hopefully some smaller firms can survive there. Who knows, maybe Live Arcade or the Revolution will support the smaller guys. Nintendo execs talk about a broad price range for the Rev every so often, and Xbox Live arcade seems to have worked for at least one developer.
What about Iwata? He's been saying this for years. That is why Nintendo appears to be taking so many risks.
For the record, game sales in Japan are shrinking.
The writing is on the wall. Sony and Microsoft are looking at dueling losses in the next generation, each trying to pave they way to what they see as the ultimate profits in the next next generation after their foes have been vanquished. How long can they both keep their respective business models? There is a tipping point to this game of corporate chicken. Will one back down before they crash?
Is another crash going to happen? I don't know. Depends on how the industry can adapt. Depends on who bothers to see the pattern. Nintendo is visibly distancing themselves from their competitors, and I'm sure they will still be standing no matter what happens this generation. They do good business and have a solid foundation. Hell, Microsoft's monopoly might be invincible, supporting the weight of the current business model indefinately. There are a ton of factors.
But there is a problem. Too little profit is made by certain companies. Likely some will adapt and leave others behind, but if too many people are too stupid the market will go to hell again.
So as a result, I'm expecting that every developer besides Nintendo will simply expect you to have the stick in nunchuck configuration, which to me defeats the whole purpose.
I don't see it that way. I'm sure there were some that had a grand vision for the single handed wand, but more practical heads demanded a little more control. The important thing is that the additional control the wand allows is not sacrificed in the "nunchuck" configuration.
The "classic shell" will be the vehicle for the 3rd party sellout not the nunchuck.
Make that 43 years. Duh.
My bad, 42 years.
1962 - In January, listed stock on the second section of the Osaka Stock Exchange and on the Kyoto Stock Exchange.
When they were not publicly traded, they were not required to report earnings or lack thereof. So it is not a matter of public record.
First of all because they have made a profit every single quarter of its release. Secondly, the Gamecube is only about 5% behind the XBox in worldwide install base.
No, they lost one quarter, the one that ended Dec 31, 2003. It was their frist and only losing quarter in the fifty years they have been publicly traded.
I'm sure the poster is speaking about Sony's and Microsoft's game divisions. Let me put it to you this way. Microsoft has lost so much money on the Xbox that I have made more money than Sony's and Microsoft's game divisions combined over the past four years.
And no, Sony is not doing as well as you surmise. The GameCube sells a lot of software per console sold. Since they don't subsidize their console, software profit is actual profit. Sony has a 70% stake in the home console business and they regularly report quaterly losses. Nintendo has reported one quarterly loss in fifty years of public trading. The GameCube is profitable. Not super ultra mega profitable, but it makes them money.
Sony's business model is based on the assumption that they are the far-away leader. Ask yourself this, if Sony does not capture 70% of the market in the next generation, will they turn a profit?
Sony is the worlds 2nd largest electronics manufacturer. They have movie and music studios and are a major force in the traditional entertainment industry. Nintendo is almost solely a video game company, and they manage to make more than half the profits (overall) of the Sony behemoth.
Nintendo is a tightly run ship. They know how to make money, and they do it by the truckload.
Their attempts rebuild their image amongst hardcore gamers has fallen largely on deaf ears, and it's not financially feasible for them to battle it out head to head with the titans like Sony and Microsoft.
Nintendo keeps more money than Microsoft lost on the Xbox in its entirety liquid. That's right. They have more than 4 billion dollars cash on hand to invest quickly (7.5 billion is the number I could find). Nintendo could play the game that Sony and Microsoft has started, but what would be the point? Sony and Microsoft might both lose money in the next generation. Nintendo doesn't care to play a game that no one might win.
Nintendo is on forcast. This is a 21% drop in profits from the same time the previous year. Game sales overall are lower, so everyone is expected to make less profit. Nintendo lowered their forcast this year 3 months ago based on the delay of Zelda. Other than that everything is going smoothly.
Last year was a really good year for Nintendo's profits and they are expecting to make about 4/5th of that this fiscal year in a transitional period for their home console business. Not too bad. Also remember that they are considering all the R&D for the Rev that they are paying for.
So no, there is nothing for a Nintendo fan to worry about. The game media simply loves blowing anything remotely negative for Nintendo out of proportion.
The rules change when you have a monopoly.
No, Nintendo doesn't. Both the GameCube and the DS were sold at more than cost at launch. This does not mean there was not some initial investment to make them. However, the systems were profitable very quickly. This is how a company runs a tight ship.
Sony could subsidize the PS2 last generation, because they managed to claim such a huge marketshare. The problem is that they still had multiple losing quarters. (Nintendo had one, the first in 50 years of public trading.)
The question that needs to be asked is will anyone other than Nintendo eke out a profit this time? If Sony can't, they are in BIG trouble. Microsoft continuously dumps the funds gouged from Windows users into their Games division (which is very close to being illegal). Sony's Games division, on the other hand, is keeping the entire company afloat. If it's profits fall flat, Sony as we know it now may crumble.
Prediction: if Sony does start to fall, expect an anti-trust suit from them.
Nintendo will simply coast along, money in hand. They have far too many assets and are far too well run to fall into this pit.
I'd get your hands on it yourself before you pass judgement. I've been playing it for a solid week and the buttons config is as comfortable as any racer I've ever played.
Hell, use the single cart multiplayer function.
I would not be able to choose between the original Mario Kart or Wipeout 1 or 3. Then again I like games of many different asthetics. Nintendo makes and Psygnosis made games with a certain care that is too often overlooked.
Oh yeah, that was a great one. The game I use to demonstrate the DS to others is the trampoline mini-game from the same title. I've burned out my battery multiple times on that one.