I remember a bunch of posts on earlier threads saying that new systems have never sold out before -- and this was a constant trick by the company to get fence-sitters to go for it.
I couldn't afford PS2/Gamecube or PS/N64 when they were released, but is this usual? I sure don't remember any system flat selling out on release, so does Xbox 360 set the standard now?
Hey, if the rest of the company could function as a coherent organization, we wouldn't have this problem. In every job I've been to, people surf the internet because *there is no work to do.* Database down, server down, you need information/work from another department first, completed current assignment and waiting for another, roadblock and you can't find out how to proceed.
The internets provide windows of sanity in what would otherwise be one disaster after another
$75 for a glorified red bull in a crystal bottle with trading cards? No thanks.
Why do wapanese always shoot themselves in the foot with this treasure box stuff? It's either nothing, or in a version completely out of your price reach.
(See also these previous flops: replica materia, replica swords, replica accessories)
how can 'they' have the data on conversion to comment on this?
Why not simply line up the IPs of those who came to the site from one of your advertisements (you can get the last URL of a visitor, right?) Match the IPS up against whover brought from your store that day, and see the correlation.
Not perfect, i admit. It won't see people who browse one day, then purchase the next.
There have been studies done on this. Scientists in white coats and everything
99% of people that click on ads either did it by accident (it popped up over the link they were aiming for) or were tricked into it by a fake close button or something.
Though, the ad companies use the "throw a bucket of paint on a wall" analogy, arguing that 1% of the internet population is still an amazingly large number. Still, it's only clickthroughs. Can they not tie these to actual purchases, or do they simply not want to reveal how low the actual percentage is?
They always go to great lengths to point out that ad spending is increasing, yet never make any statements about how effective all this money being spent is. They're throwing cash into this black pit because everyone says to, but how many companies are actually experiences increased sales from onling ads?
Turning point indeed. In financial terms, this is called an "imminent crash."
I love how businesses always call a drop in revenue a "loss." Like they are rightfully entitled to ever-increasing profits and anything to the contrary is someone's fault.
Capitalism is, in essence "anything for money." If people crept into your house at night to kill you and steal your organs for profit -- and get away with it -- that would still be capitalism.
We've already had book burnings and banned movies. And after video games, the fundies will jump on the bandwagon against those evil holographic crystals
No, letting teh internets decide what code should be run on your machine is never a good idea.
Man up, nancy. Step up to the plate and take responsibility for keeping your PC safe by downloading your own patches.
I'm pretty sure the revised EULA allows Microsoft to draw, quarter, and finally vivisect your body in full view of the town square for license violations.
I dunno. I mean, I spent hours playing defender and saving up extra lives for bathroom breaks, days trying to figure out what the hell you were supposed to do in Earthworld and Fireworld, and still enjoy popping Adventure in from time to time.
But many games now allow you build up every aspect of your experience. Grand Theft Auto 3, Dynasty Warriors, any RPG... I've spent far more hours per cart on the newer stuff. A pretty simple benchmark for how fun it is, but applicable.
Then again, you have the angle that it didn't take much to entertain us back then because Atari was the first widespread video game. Now that we've built up an immunity, so-to-speak, games have to become even more fun to capture our attention.
Slashdot Mirror
Even assuming that such legislation were to pass, somewhere on the chain it would be overturned by the courts
Prohibition only took, what? 12 years?
And I'll bet they just went and let all the bootleggers out of jail afterwards, right?
They'll never do that. Something's gotta prevent you from just walking through the whole game to the boss.
Just say it. "We can get more money by putting advertisements in games, and it'll generate more revenue than we'll lose by alienating gamers."
I remember a bunch of posts on earlier threads saying that new systems have never sold out before -- and this was a constant trick by the company to get fence-sitters to go for it.
I couldn't afford PS2/Gamecube or PS/N64 when they were released, but is this usual? I sure don't remember any system flat selling out on release, so does Xbox 360 set the standard now?
Hmm, yes. I appears I fail :(
Thanks, now I'm actually sorta excited I'll be able to get some :)
Hey, if the rest of the company could function as a coherent organization, we wouldn't have this problem. In every job I've been to, people surf the internet because *there is no work to do.* Database down, server down, you need information/work from another department first, completed current assignment and waiting for another, roadblock and you can't find out how to proceed.
The internets provide windows of sanity in what would otherwise be one disaster after another
$75 for a glorified red bull in a crystal bottle with trading cards? No thanks.
Why do wapanese always shoot themselves in the foot with this treasure box stuff? It's either nothing, or in a version completely out of your price reach.
(See also these previous flops: replica materia, replica swords, replica accessories)
how can 'they' have the data on conversion to comment on this?
Why not simply line up the IPs of those who came to the site from one of your advertisements (you can get the last URL of a visitor, right?) Match the IPS up against whover brought from your store that day, and see the correlation.
Not perfect, i admit. It won't see people who browse one day, then purchase the next.
There have been studies done on this. Scientists in white coats and everything
99% of people that click on ads either did it by accident (it popped up over the link they were aiming for) or were tricked into it by a fake close button or something.
Though, the ad companies use the "throw a bucket of paint on a wall" analogy, arguing that 1% of the internet population is still an amazingly large number. Still, it's only clickthroughs. Can they not tie these to actual purchases, or do they simply not want to reveal how low the actual percentage is?
They always go to great lengths to point out that ad spending is increasing, yet never make any statements about how effective all this money being spent is. They're throwing cash into this black pit because everyone says to, but how many companies are actually experiences increased sales from onling ads?
Turning point indeed. In financial terms, this is called an "imminent crash."
Quaaaaaaaaid... Start the... reeeaaaaccctoooorrr....
I love how businesses always call a drop in revenue a "loss." Like they are rightfully entitled to ever-increasing profits and anything to the contrary is someone's fault.
Because they don't have to
First rule of freedom club? Everyone can do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt others.
Yeah, that would last long. At least until mommy and junior see "a/s/l?" scroll across the chat line
Of course it is.
:)
Capitalism is, in essence "anything for money." If people crept into your house at night to kill you and steal your organs for profit -- and get away with it -- that would still be capitalism.
Don't be jealous
She's doing this because of them, however. And their delicious, delicious votes.
Take a look as Wesley. It was ensigns scoring (well, at least *meeting with*) all the hot chicks!
Because it's their turn.
We've already had book burnings and banned movies. And after video games, the fundies will jump on the bandwagon against those evil holographic crystals
The single biggest reason politicians fail:
"Yes, it's illegal. Yes, I know it's been defeated before. But, goddamn it, I want it! Want want want! Rrrrr, gimme! Mine!
No, letting teh internets decide what code should be run on your machine is never a good idea. Man up, nancy. Step up to the plate and take responsibility for keeping your PC safe by downloading your own patches.
I'm pretty sure the revised EULA allows Microsoft to draw, quarter, and finally vivisect your body in full view of the town square for license violations.
Automated viruses!
Reminds me of the line "What is it? We're not saying yet, but that won't stop you from posting about it on every message board you have access to."
I dunno. I mean, I spent hours playing defender and saving up extra lives for bathroom breaks, days trying to figure out what the hell you were supposed to do in Earthworld and Fireworld, and still enjoy popping Adventure in from time to time.
But many games now allow you build up every aspect of your experience. Grand Theft Auto 3, Dynasty Warriors, any RPG... I've spent far more hours per cart on the newer stuff. A pretty simple benchmark for how fun it is, but applicable.
Then again, you have the angle that it didn't take much to entertain us back then because Atari was the first widespread video game. Now that we've built up an immunity, so-to-speak, games have to become even more fun to capture our attention.
Because the government has no reason to obey the people?