For games that have been out for a couple years, I found that gamestop is actually competitive with the online used market.
I just picked up some gamecube games to play on my new Wii.
Pikmin was $10. Amazon's lowest used price is $15. Animal Crossing was $16, Amazon's lowest used price is $14. Factor in the fact I got it the same day, and that I didn't pay shipping, and that's a win too. Lego Starwars was $17, and it's $16.50 on amazon. Another win.
All in all, I don't regret buying any of those games there. They all run fine, and their prices were the best I could find. Of course, if you buy 3rd party on amazon, 75%+ of your money is going to the guy selling his used game, whereas gamestop is probably giving less than 25% of your money to the guy who sold them the game. So as a seller, I'd recommend selling on amazon.
Excuse me if I'm wrong in my interpretation of this but you're saying if I bought my own cellphone outright that my phone bill will only be half of what it is today? I've never heard of this before.
The option isn't actually available to Americans now, no. But who do you think is paying for the $200 phone you get for "free"? How do you think the pizza delivery boy gets paid when delivery is "free"?
You're paying for it elsewhere. If the market wasn't so satisfied -- no, demanding -- that we be provided these "free" things, these costs wouldn't be hidden. In some European countries, the delivery fee for a pizza is about $10. Here in the US, people will throw a fit over $2, as if "free" delivery is a right.
What does it mean for the rest of us? Those of us who manage to keep a single phone intact for a few years are overpaying to subsidize other people's free phones, and when you go to the store to pick up a pizza, you're paying part of someone else's delivery.
Most americans aren't willing to pay *anything* up front for a cellphone. But we will accept a two year contract at double the normal rate, as long as we get the phone for "free".
So they'll do the same thing with the iPhone that they do with every other phone. They'll offer 'em at half the price, and charge you an arm and a leg every month for 24 months or more. And most Americans will thank them for it.
That, and employers will buy them for their employees. So yes, only 1% of those surveyed would pay $500, but in the end, more than 1% of those surveyed will end up with an iPhone.
I DRTFA, but I just wanted to note that just because the Gamecube is no longer being produced does not mean that there will be no more Gamecube games, thanks to the backwards compatibility on the Wii.
I did RTFA, and it ends with this:
BIZ: My point is that from a first-party perspective, just like Microsoft doesn't put out new original Xbox games, Nintendo is no longer supporting GameCube. Can you confirm that?
PK: Right, that's correct.
There will be no more 1st-party games for the gamecube. There *may* be 3rd party games in the works, but:
BIZ: "Third party support is at a trickle it would seem"
The fact that game cube was really the loser of the last generation of consoles probably isn't going to aide its longevity.
CRPGs have the leveling treadmill/grind, because people *like it*. I loved that shit from age 8 to 18. You're constantly rewarded, and it can give you a sense of accomplishment.
Now, that game mechanic bores me. So I don't play those games anymore.
I guess the real point to be made here is that there are really two subgenres of CRPGs:
Those that focus on the leveling grind, and those that actually focus on "role playing". Some people like one, some like the other. That's pretty much all there is to it.
How, then, would you explain the raging success of "The Sims"?
I think the important point is that sandboxes *alone* are not fun. You need the right tools/content available. "The Sims" had them. There probably hasn't been an MMO yet that was comparably equipped.
You can pay $1300 for a mac...or you can spend $700 for a PC
That may be true for desktops, but it certainly isn't for laptops.
It's damn hard to find a windows laptop for $1099 that matches the performance, features, and robustness of a macbook. Believe me, I tried. Just bought one for the first time a week ago. It's a hell of a lot better than the $900 HP it replaced.
What people seem to forget is that we were doing word processing, vector graphics and all that on old school Mac IIs in the mid to early 80s. Those programs certainly didn't require hundreds of megabytes of ram or gigabytes of disk space
Those applications also did far less. There's still a comparably light-weight word processing application on every PC. It's called notepad.
I'm personally impress with efficiency not bulkyness. Write me a competent word processor that fits on a floppy disk. That'd be a hoot.
By sacrificing efficiency, you can develop software faster, cheaper, and with more features. The market at large has opted for this over efficiency. We want all the bells and whistles, we want them now, and we want them for $19.95. We don't give a damn if it fits on a floppy. Hell, Apple hasn't even sold a computer with a floppy drive in the better part of a decade.
Efficiency isn't free. And most people aren't willing to pay for it.
There are other, better, solutions to the client server paradigm.
And how many of them run inside a sandbox that every single web user is already familiar with, and has an installed copy of?
Web apps work because everyone already has client application installed (the browser), and uses it regularly.
I'm sure you *could* come up with a better "universal client". I'm sure there are already some out there. But the browser's already installed on every PC out there, and users don't want to install new software. Frequently, they *can't* install new software (when on PCs away from home -- in the office, school, library, hotel...).
I use yahoo's mail web app because I can use it anywhere, without having to install or configure any software. Not because it's better than desktop apps.
I agree wholeheartedly -- we need a better "universal client" application than the browser. But until that application is installed on every PC on the planet, and Joe Sixpack is comfortable using it, the web app is here to say.
When discussing computer memory, a "Word" is usually either 16, 32, or 64 bits. For the intel x86 architecture, a "word" is 16 bits. So in ASCII, "it" (being two ASCII bytes) fits in a "word". The ascii representation of the word "string" would require 3 "words". (neglecting a null character for string termination)
Okay. It will need a video chipset to drive at least a 1024x768 display.
Sure. I had a card that could do that in the nineties with 2 meg of VRAM.
At least 256megs of ram.
Why? The stated example involves visiting yahoo.com, amazon.com, and ebay.com. We did all of this in the nineties with 32 meg of ram or less. The fact that you don't need to run a full OS greatly reduces memory usage.
Wifi.
Why? We're talking about a cellphone. It's already got wireless connectivity.
USB controller.
Sure. No problem. They sell these things as single chips for a couple bucks a pop.
Local storage of say 4 gigs minumum. A decent OS. Apps.
Why? Again, the stated example requires no no significant local storage, nor any sort of OS more complicated than your average cell already has, nor any apps beyond the web browser.
We're talking about an internet appliance that differs from a cellphone *only* in that we're adding usable display and input devices. Just about every phone on the market today already has enough RAM, processing power, software, and the OS features necessary for web browsing.
Anyone with a copy of even the most basic video editing software could completely obliterate any identifying information in the file simply by cropping off the first 15 seconds, and converting the file to AVI or MPEG.
Developing games for Vista/Xbox is considerably easier than any other platform in history.
Back in the day, I developed state-of-the-art games for the Nascom Computer in under a week. You would need a team of a hundred to do that on Vista/Xbox. Developing games gets harder with every new platform.
And today, you can develop a game that would have been state of the art for the Nascom in a day (Flash is an amazing tool for writing applications of that level of complexity). Development has gotten easier. It's the "state of the art" that's changed so drastically.
a decent used guitar costs only a little more than Guitar hero... I'm only saying that if you spent the exact same amount of time that you put into playing GH into playing a real guitar, you would have a vastly more genuine and rewarding experience
You might as well ask why people with driver's licenses play the vast multitude of driving sims that have been available since the dawn of video gaming.
Personally, I drive a real car, play real guitar, play driving games, and play guitar hero. I don't really do any one of those things in lieu of any of the others, and I find them all rewarding in distinct ways.
Guitar Hero may not be your cup of tea, but please, stop telling people to stop doing things they enjoy. Recreation is recreation.
They are minors, and minors don't particularly need to be playing offensive games. If their parents don't have a problem with it, then the parent can easily purchase the game for their child.
There's a huge difference between "minors don't particularly need X" and "we need the government to prevent children from getting X with legislation and regulation!"
Minors don't particularly need to be seeing movies like Kids either, but there's no push for laws to regulate the movie/theater industry. They self-regulate instead.
Now, one thing I've learned about MMORPGs like World of Warcraft & Ultima Online is that the client needs to be protected.
If the client end of your client server app needs to be "protected", your security model is already terribly flawed. The first rule of client/server app development is simple: Never trust the client.
If you never take input from the client at face value, then you don't need to "protect" it (a war you'll never win, by the way).
Raph Koster knows it. Why other MMO developers have historically ignored this rule over and over again, I'm not sure.
Blizzard has had a terrible track record of violations, however: numerous Diablo 1 hacks, map hacks in their RTSes, up to and including WC3, etc. Frankly, I'm stunned WoW hasn't had any major hacks to date -- maybe they finally learned:)
While the system can absolutely be self-supporting, as you've argued, humanity as a whole would be a lot better off doing something else with their time, other than manufacturing goods that kill their users, and then doing everything they can to keep those people alive.
There are some good arguments for not trying to ban smoking (such as the inevitability of a black market forming, and the right to personal choice), but I'm not sure the one you've presented is one of them.
Slashdot Mirror
For games that have been out for a couple years, I found that gamestop is actually competitive with the online used market.
I just picked up some gamecube games to play on my new Wii.
Pikmin was $10. Amazon's lowest used price is $15.
Animal Crossing was $16, Amazon's lowest used price is $14. Factor in the fact I got it the same day, and that I didn't pay shipping, and that's a win too.
Lego Starwars was $17, and it's $16.50 on amazon. Another win.
All in all, I don't regret buying any of those games there. They all run fine, and their prices were the best I could find. Of course, if you buy 3rd party on amazon, 75%+ of your money is going to the guy selling his used game, whereas gamestop is probably giving less than 25% of your money to the guy who sold them the game. So as a seller, I'd recommend selling on amazon.
The option isn't actually available to Americans now, no. But who do you think is paying for the $200 phone you get for "free"? How do you think the pizza delivery boy gets paid when delivery is "free"?
You're paying for it elsewhere. If the market wasn't so satisfied -- no, demanding -- that we be provided these "free" things, these costs wouldn't be hidden. In some European countries, the delivery fee for a pizza is about $10. Here in the US, people will throw a fit over $2, as if "free" delivery is a right.
What does it mean for the rest of us? Those of us who manage to keep a single phone intact for a few years are overpaying to subsidize other people's free phones, and when you go to the store to pick up a pizza, you're paying part of someone else's delivery.
Most americans aren't willing to pay *anything* up front for a cellphone. But we will accept a two year contract at double the normal rate, as long as we get the phone for "free".
So they'll do the same thing with the iPhone that they do with every other phone. They'll offer 'em at half the price, and charge you an arm and a leg every month for 24 months or more. And most Americans will thank them for it.
That, and employers will buy them for their employees. So yes, only 1% of those surveyed would pay $500, but in the end, more than 1% of those surveyed will end up with an iPhone.
I did RTFA, and it ends with this:
There will be no more 1st-party games for the gamecube. There *may* be 3rd party games in the works, but:
The fact that game cube was really the loser of the last generation of consoles probably isn't going to aide its longevity.
More or less my sentiments.
CRPGs have the leveling treadmill/grind, because people *like it*. I loved that shit from age 8 to 18. You're constantly rewarded, and it can give you a sense of accomplishment.
Now, that game mechanic bores me. So I don't play those games anymore.
I guess the real point to be made here is that there are really two subgenres of CRPGs:
Those that focus on the leveling grind, and those that actually focus on "role playing". Some people like one, some like the other. That's pretty much all there is to it.
Not to be confused with the space-based MMO by the same name.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jumpgate:_The_Recons
It seems the winning strategy is to check the ad for your local store at 8 AM on Sunday morning. If it says they'll have Wiis in stock, they mean it.
How, then, would you explain the raging success of "The Sims"?
I think the important point is that sandboxes *alone* are not fun. You need the right tools/content available. "The Sims" had them. There probably hasn't been an MMO yet that was comparably equipped.
That may be true for desktops, but it certainly isn't for laptops.
It's damn hard to find a windows laptop for $1099 that matches the performance, features, and robustness of a macbook.
Believe me, I tried. Just bought one for the first time a week ago. It's a hell of a lot better than the $900 HP it replaced.
Efficiency isn't free. And most people aren't willing to pay for it.
You forgot:
* Already installed on every internet-connected desktop.
Web apps work because everyone already has client application installed (the browser), and uses it regularly.
I'm sure you *could* come up with a better "universal client". I'm sure there are already some out there. But the browser's already installed on every PC out there, and users don't want to install new software. Frequently, they *can't* install new software (when on PCs away from home -- in the office, school, library, hotel...).
I use yahoo's mail web app because I can use it anywhere, without having to install or configure any software. Not because it's better than desktop apps.
I agree wholeheartedly -- we need a better "universal client" application than the browser. But until that application is installed on every PC on the planet, and Joe Sixpack is comfortable using it, the web app is here to say.
Wow, you can write a basic calculator in only 300 lines of xforms code! That's so much better than the 30 lines of javascript it'd take!
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/XForms/Calculator
I can't wait!
When discussing computer memory, a "Word" is usually either 16, 32, or 64 bits. For the intel x86 architecture, a "word" is 16 bits. So in ASCII, "it" (being two ASCII bytes) fits in a "word". The ascii representation of the word "string" would require 3 "words". (neglecting a null character for string termination)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_(computing)
Even easier: format shift.
Anyone with a copy of even the most basic video editing software could completely obliterate any identifying information in the file simply by cropping off the first 15 seconds, and converting the file to AVI or MPEG.
And today, you can develop a game that would have been state of the art for the Nascom in a day (Flash is an amazing tool for writing applications of that level of complexity). Development has gotten easier. It's the "state of the art" that's changed so drastically.
Is there any reason to believe that these guys aren't just responsible for the PS3 port of GH2?
They're talking about trying to knock out 3 ports of GH2 this year, and GH3 by the end of the year as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if that's just too much for Red Octane/Harmonix to tackle without a little outsourcing.
Road Trip is probably a better example. If I could go back and edit my post, I'd put that in. I just used the first NC-17 rated film I could think of.
:)
The point wasn't the film itself
You might as well ask why people with driver's licenses play the vast multitude of driving sims that have been available since the dawn of video gaming.
Personally, I drive a real car, play real guitar, play driving games, and play guitar hero. I don't really do any one of those things in lieu of any of the others, and I find them all rewarding in distinct ways.
Guitar Hero may not be your cup of tea, but please, stop telling people to stop doing things they enjoy. Recreation is recreation.
There's a huge difference between "minors don't particularly need X" and "we need the government to prevent children from getting X with legislation and regulation!"
Minors don't particularly need to be seeing movies like Kids either, but there's no push for laws to regulate the movie/theater industry. They self-regulate instead.
If the client end of your client server app needs to be "protected", your security model is already terribly flawed. The first rule of client/server app development is simple: Never trust the client.
If you never take input from the client at face value, then you don't need to "protect" it (a war you'll never win, by the way).
Raph Koster knows it. Why other MMO developers have historically ignored this rule over and over again, I'm not sure.
Blizzard has had a terrible track record of violations, however: numerous Diablo 1 hacks, map hacks in their RTSes, up to and including WC3, etc. Frankly, I'm stunned WoW hasn't had any major hacks to date -- maybe they finally learned
imagine if HTTP and FTP had been mandated at the application layer. Would we have ever had Bittorrent?
Yes. There's always a higher layer. You can encapsulate anything in HTTP, if you really have to. People do it all the time, for firewall evasion.
An example: http://sebsauvage.net/punching/
That argument smells a bit like a broken window fallacy.
While the system can absolutely be self-supporting, as you've argued, humanity as a whole would be a lot better off doing something else with their time, other than manufacturing goods that kill their users, and then doing everything they can to keep those people alive.
There are some good arguments for not trying to ban smoking (such as the inevitability of a black market forming, and the right to personal choice), but I'm not sure the one you've presented is one of them.
It's worth noting that this is a blog entry, not an edited article. Hence the blatant error.