There may be no urge for an increase in speed for now, but distance is a big gain for most people. I don't know what it's like elsewhere, I don't get around too much, but at these ranges you can have access practically anywhere.
They haven't "served" (done) anything more than if the first guy had kept the DVD, and you conveniently didn't mention that even the first person might not have bought the DVD at 10 bucks if he hadn't had the possibility of resale.
What I meant with "served" was that 10 people were able to enjoy the movie, their copyrighted material. As for the first person not buying it if he couldn't resell, well that's his thing. But he probably would.
$1 isn't alot to make from one sale, even less when counting publishing costs and the retailers cut, so the industry dies. As said before, the DVD production costs are minimal, and movie studios rely on income based on how many people enjoy their work. In this situation they would probably be happy to sell the DVDs for $3 if everyone bought it new.
And the way games stores sell used games means that alot of money is going to middle-men instead of the copyright holders. If every dollar they made from used sales went to the publishers, prices could be lower.
They may lose money on consoles, but for systems they have already produced, they can only win back their money. The way they'd lose the most money is if nobody bought one, and they were left sitting on 10 million consoles that cost them $800 each to produce.
There is a fundamental difference between games and say furniture. Furniture is used permanently, as long as somebody needs it to be comfortable. Nobody will say "I've sat on that sofa all month, and now I'm boared" and get rid of it. Music is similar, as people listen to music over and over, not just once or twice.
Games are usually the kind of one-use thing, that after you competed it once or twice, you've lost interest. It hasn't got any value to you anymore. So alot of people resell.
On the other hand, sombody who makes furniture for a living knows that anybody who sells their chair will need to buy another.
What's made this possible is the mass production and distribution mediums of recent years. The main costs aren't in printing the DVD, but in developing the game. After they've finished development, the price of each DVD is insignificant. Now they rely soley on the profit made in retail. If only half the people intersted buy it, and the other half buy it from the first half used, they've lost half the market.
no-one is cheated, because goods are priced according to value
That doesn't hold for the kind of masss production in the entertainment industry. There is no real "value" for artistic work, apart from the media it's printed on, which is minimal.
And the way games and DVDs are enjoyed today means that there is a very short time-based value for the consumer.
As an extreme characterisation of the problem, imagine this: A DVD retails at $10.00. Person a) buys it, watches it, and sells it to person b) for $8. b) watches and sells to c) for $7 and so on, until it reaches $1. This means that the studio would sell 1 DVD, despite having served 10 people.
Of course, it's not quite that extreme, as most people wouldn't be fussed about selling something for under $5. But some estimates for games put the resale numbers at 30-40% of the market, which is a signifigant number.
As far as games go, they are practically rented because nobody really wants to play them after the 2nd completion at most.
So a customer who pays full price isn't getting any more from the game than somebody renting it.
The Industry can't "price their products accordingly" because higher prices would encourage more resale if anything, and nobody could afford to keep the games they like.
This may be true with alot of cases, but I've seen alot of "research" where they compared the value of different portions of fries and sodas. And in most cases, the difference was negligable, and sometimes the medium sizes were better value. Just goes to show.
In Europe they only market flat-screen HDTVs. No CRTs. The best offer I've seen sofar (although I haven't looked around too much) has been a 720p LCD for 799 Euros.
That's just speculation. I think Nintendo confirmed it to be wrong aswell. The fact is that we don't know anything about the Wii processor, other than the fact that it's codenamed "Broadway".
The whole point about this speculation is that noone knows what the Wii's specs are going to be. All of this socalled "insider information" about the Wii just being an overclocked GameCube have been confirmed to be false.
All we have had officially confirmed is that Nintendos partners for the GameCube, IBM and ATI, will be developing Wii's CPU and GPU, codenamed Broadway and Hollywood, and that they will be new, and more advanced.
The point is that it's apparent Sony won't be delivering the 20 year leap they originally promised. They said that this new chip would revolutionize every aspect of gaming including graphics. It turns out that it's not going to be used for that, and even if the visuals are impressive, it's basically what's being developed by Nvidia for PCs too.
Slashdot Mirror
There may be no urge for an increase in speed for now, but distance is a big gain for most people. I don't know what it's like elsewhere, I don't get around too much, but at these ranges you can have access practically anywhere.
One dissapointment after another :-P
They haven't "served" (done) anything more than if the first guy had kept the DVD, and you conveniently didn't mention that even the first person might not have bought the DVD at 10 bucks if he hadn't had the possibility of resale.
What I meant with "served" was that 10 people were able to enjoy the movie, their copyrighted material.
As for the first person not buying it if he couldn't resell, well that's his thing. But he probably would.
$1 isn't alot to make from one sale, even less when counting publishing costs and the retailers cut, so the industry dies.
As said before, the DVD production costs are minimal, and movie studios rely on income based on how many people enjoy their work.
In this situation they would probably be happy to sell the DVDs for $3 if everyone bought it new.
And the way games stores sell used games means that alot of money is going to middle-men instead of the copyright holders.
If every dollar they made from used sales went to the publishers, prices could be lower.
We do get a two-year standard warranty on all goods aswell.
They may lose money on consoles, but for systems they have already produced, they can only win back their money.
The way they'd lose the most money is if nobody bought one, and they were left sitting on 10 million consoles that cost them $800 each to produce.
There is a fundamental difference between games and say furniture. Furniture is used permanently, as long as somebody needs it to be comfortable.
Nobody will say "I've sat on that sofa all month, and now I'm boared" and get rid of it.
Music is similar, as people listen to music over and over, not just once or twice.
Games are usually the kind of one-use thing, that after you competed it once or twice, you've lost interest. It hasn't got any value to you anymore. So alot of people resell.
On the other hand, sombody who makes furniture for a living knows that anybody who sells their chair will need to buy another.
What's made this possible is the mass production and distribution mediums of recent years.
The main costs aren't in printing the DVD, but in developing the game. After they've finished development, the price of each DVD is insignificant.
Now they rely soley on the profit made in retail. If only half the people intersted buy it, and the other half buy it from the first half used, they've lost half the market.
no-one is cheated, because goods are priced according to value
That doesn't hold for the kind of masss production in the entertainment industry. There is no real "value" for artistic work, apart from the media it's printed on, which is minimal.
And the way games and DVDs are enjoyed today means that there is a very short time-based value for the consumer.
As an extreme characterisation of the problem, imagine this: A DVD retails at $10.00. Person a) buys it, watches it, and sells it to person b) for $8. b) watches and sells to c) for $7 and so on, until it reaches $1.
This means that the studio would sell 1 DVD, despite having served 10 people.
Of course, it's not quite that extreme, as most people wouldn't be fussed about selling something for under $5. But some estimates for games put the resale numbers at 30-40% of the market, which is a signifigant number.
As far as games go, they are practically rented because nobody really wants to play them after the 2nd completion at most.
So a customer who pays full price isn't getting any more from the game than somebody renting it.
The Industry can't "price their products accordingly" because higher prices would encourage more resale if anything, and nobody could afford to keep the games they like.
http://phrontistery.50megs.com/longpig/dead.html
Karma Whoring
Which is why it's all about "E3 Awards", and not about final games. It just shows which games have impressed the critics the most with their show.
This may be true with alot of cases, but I've seen alot of "research" where they compared the value of different portions of fries and sodas. And in most cases, the difference was negligable, and sometimes the medium sizes were better value. Just goes to show.
In Europe they only market flat-screen HDTVs. No CRTs. The best offer I've seen sofar (although I haven't looked around too much) has been a 720p LCD for 799 Euros.
100 Hz "double scan" is basically the PAL version of the "pregressive scan" NTSC format.
That's just speculation. I think Nintendo confirmed it to be wrong aswell. The fact is that we don't know anything about the Wii processor, other than the fact that it's codenamed "Broadway".
Interesting. I remember them saying early on that the Wii would be able to be connected to a computer monitor.
The whole point about this speculation is that noone knows what the Wii's specs are going to be.
All of this socalled "insider information" about the Wii just being an overclocked GameCube have been confirmed to be false.
All we have had officially confirmed is that Nintendos partners for the GameCube, IBM and ATI, will be developing Wii's CPU and GPU, codenamed Broadway and Hollywood, and that they will be new, and more advanced.
That is all we know right now.
Will they be using this as the interface software?
Could this be the one you're looking for
True in some cases, but I think it's something we tend to take for granted alot. Developers haven't been too good at using its potential either.
Oh yeah?
What about this?
I sincerely doubt the true emphasis was on the "open". Most players can't play open formats, and it doesn't make a huge difference for consumers.
Apples lossless format is free and easy to use.
Tried playing with a mouse sitting on a couch?
BD and HDDVD both use 405 nm lasers. And even today, you need different llenses and lasers to read CDs and all the recordable formats.
The point is that it's apparent Sony won't be delivering the 20 year leap they originally promised.
They said that this new chip would revolutionize every aspect of gaming including graphics. It turns out that it's not going to be used for that, and even if the visuals are impressive, it's basically what's being developed by Nvidia for PCs too.
Small company?
Have a look at "key partners" just to the left of the Forbes.com square.