The Japanese aren't willing to jump on the PS3 just because it's from their country. Many think the console is over priced(a Famitsu poll I think showed it around 70%). From what I've read, polls and Nikko Citigroup, most people are predicting that the Wii is going to be the market leader in Japan. The XBox360 is a non issue over there so if Sony is hoping to have a chance for market dominance in Japan a price drop to a reasonable level will have to be it. I really wouldn't be surprised if they anounced a price drop here. After a string of bad news coming from Sony, they need something to show that they aren't completely inept.
You're right. This all or nothing idea is stupid. The Japanese market for the next gen consoles is practically handed to Nintendo, the only concern for them is how they do in the states. As I've said before, Nintendo is still making money off their console no matter how they do; whether they dominate the entire market isn't an issue.
Nintendo is shooting for a market beyond what Sony and MS are shooting for. A market of causual game players not interested in spending alot of money for the latest and greatest in technology. Hardcore gamers will probably buy one or two consoles anyway. Most likely one of them will be a Wii, even if it is for novelty, as it will be some thing different.
Re:still supprised at the $250 price tag.
on
The Wii Takes NYC
·
· Score: 1
On top of that, I think Wii Sports was chosen for its mass appeal.
They explicitly said today they're aiming at a market that isn't just hardcore gamers. They're also aiming at people who are confused by modern video game controllers, people that aren't hardcore gamers. Almost everybody knows the rules of bowling, tennis, baseball. What better way to entice people than with games that everyone is instantly familar with? Combined with an intuitative way of playing the games with the WiiMote, I think Nintendo has come up with an idea where they can't fail.
Re:before people complain
on
The Wii Takes NYC
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Ok, I'll bite...
To use your comparison
Wii (w/game, controller, built in WiFi, and memory card access) - $250 3 Extra Wiimotes - $120 1 Extra Nunchuk - $20 2 Retro Controllers - $40 Zelda - $50 2000 points for the VC - $20
Or...a $500 PS3 and controller with no games, no WiFi, no memory card access, and no HDMI port(which defeats the point of having BluRay on there in the first place)
...I wouldn't rely too much on this list. Not to descredit the entire article--most of it is pretty reliable--but there are questionable entries on that list. Even the article itself notes, "Due to a general lack of commonly agreed-upon genres or criteria for the definition of genres, classification of games are not always consistent or systematic and sometimes outright arbitrary between sources." That certainly seems the case for "Maze game", a genre noted in Chris Crawford's The Art of Computer Games but really isn't applicable these days. Looking at the article entry for "Artillery games", you can see the link it refers to doesn't talk about "Artillery games" as a genre, but rather a generic type of game called Artillery. Under that classification "Snake game" should be a genre.
Depending on how you want to describe "genre", there can also be some other inaccurates. There's some entries that sound like descriptions. Is "Arcade game" genre? An arcade can be a fighting game or a first person shooter. If it is a genre, shouldn't "Console game" be a genre too? There are other entries that describe more game mechanics than "genres." For example "Stealth games," there are FPSs (see Goldeneye 007), as well a 3D person action games (see MGS), and Action Adventure games (see Beyond Good and Evil) that use a stealth mechanic as gameplay. So does that make it more a game mechanic or a genre itself?
The problem with TFA's thinking, though, is that Sony is in a completely different position from Microsoft and Nintendo. Nintendo spent relatively little developing the Wii, they will probably sell the console at a small loss if any, and their existing console has almost no momentum at all. From this position, if Nintendo captures 30% of the market they will have achieved a massive success.
No loss, profit (assuming around a $200 console cost). On top of that, it going to pretty cheap to develop a Wii game compared to the competion. Let's see, it's profitable for Nintendo and cheaper for both developers and gamers. Regardless of each companies position right now, I'd say Nintendo is sitting in a good position right about now.
No there aren't. There are massive problems with most of Wikipedia, but there aren't enough editors to give a shit.
You didn't hear his whole sentence. He didn't say, "there are dumbfoundingly few problems." He said, "For Wikipedia's size, traffic, and number of contributors, there are dumbfoundingly few problems." If the problems were that massive(to the point were it made the whole project worthless), then I should be able to hit a random article and have the majority of its content wrong.
To make my point I was going to go to a random article to verify it's claims. The article I came across, Billiard Techniques is just happens to be something I know a little about as a amauter pool player. The article has a lot of problems(facts needed verfication, external links would be nice, etc.) but article does contain correct information about Draw and Follow, English, and massé techniques. Not enough to give it much authority, but enough to where someone who didn't know anything about the techniques would understand them after reading it.
It might be tough for you to believe that the Wikipedia can work. I sometimes do myself. I mean, who believe a huge number of self-centered, semi-rational, animals that have been fighting with each other for thousands of years would have created something as beautiful as civilization?
Um, ok? Let's say your numbers were true, since we have no idea were they came from. 3.5 Billion shouldn't be that much of a hit for 30 million consoles. If the average XBox360 gamer just buys 2 games and a controller(at the cheap price of $50 each and controller for $25) Microsoft has already made their money back. Of course, I'm leaving a few details out but since we're talking arm chair economics here, but who's counting? There's no mystery here. Video gaming is worth billions of dollars a year. It's worth the hit of a few billion dollars if it means a piece of the pie that's worth billions a year.
I think there's a misinterpretation of the facts. The article I was citing said that the lost per console system sold (not an "average" lost) was $126. This means for every console sold MS is giving you those assembled parts at a cost that is $126 cheaper than what it cost them. I've never seen any figures stating MS's "average lost per console" that includes sales from games, peripherals, etc. How would you calculate something like that? I suppose if the XBox division post a lost of X dollars you could divide it by Y # of XBox360s sold to get some average figure of loss, but that still wouldn't be accurate since the XBox division doesn't just spend money on making 360 consoles.
It's pretty simple. They lose money on selling individual game console boxes (the system, a controller, wires, whatever is packed with it) so that the entry cost doesn't seem that high to the consumer. However, they make a huge amount of money off of seperately packaged controllers, memory cards (example: Sony's PS2 memory card still costs ~$25 for 8MB even though 8MB of flash memory costs next to nothing these days), extra AV wires (huge markup, it cost only a few dollars to make a $25 AV cable), and of course their bread and butter game licensing. Not to mention the XBox Live service is probably making a good amount of money with subscriptions and downloads.
Also keep in mind that MS (and Sony), unlike the gaming companies of old, has many different divisions in their company. Thus, the hugely profitable MS Office division can subsidize the XBox division until they've gained enough marketshare to be in the black.
The idea has so much traction because it's true. From the link:
An up-close look at the components and other materials used in the high-end version of the Xbox 360, which contains a hard drive, found that the materials inside the unit cost Microsoft $470 before assembly. The console sells at retail for $399, meaning a loss of $71 per unit -- and that is just the start.
Other items packaged with the console -- including the power supply, cables, and controllers -- add another $55 to Microsoft's cost, pushing the loss per unit to $126. These estimates include assumptions that Microsoft is getting a discount on many components.
I have better, more accurate, proposition. Games that very popular, or good, tend to be pirated more. Consoles that have a lot of good games tend to be very popular. Piracy and popularity might be slightly corelated but one doesn't neccesarily causes the other. This is coming from someone who has purchased an XBox for the sole purpose of modchipping it for emulators and XBox Media Center and also owns a PS2 with an installed hard drive that game images run off of. The XBox is much easier to pirate games for in my experience than the PS2. Yet, the PS2 has about 3 times the number of consoles as the XBox.
Seriously, this is worthless about.com article is not worth posting on Slashdot.Choice quote from this artice:
Interesting Fact:
* Honestly, Doki Doki Panic is just a bad name. Nobody likes it. It sounds better as Mario 2.:)
Uh, that's an opinion not a fact. Seriously, if anyone doesn't know about the history of US/EUR SMB2 check out the links already posted by users. They are much better than this drivel.
That blurb is misleading; it sounds as if the article is talking about how the video game medium is represented in other media like TV and film. The topic is how the gaming industry is covered by the big news media(e.g. CNN, Wall Street Journal, etc.) compared to other entertainment industries that make just as much money as the video game industry.
The underlying assumption here is that if the gaming industry makes as much money as the movie industry it should be covered in the news as much as that other industry. Of course that's not the whole picture. People in big media report things that are important, but they also have to report things that people want to hear about. There is a huge audience that want to hear what Brad Pitt's new movie is, who's playing in the World Cup today, what Microsoft's business plans for future are, and what is going on in Capital Hill. The audience that wants to hear what John Carmack's new game engine will do is small.
Also, just because the gaming industry makes as much money as the movie industry doesn't mean it reaches as many people. The entry level cost to get into gaming is much higher. The learning curve is much steeper too, especially if you've never grown up with videogames. However, the time that can be spent on game(vs. a book, movie, or tv show) is much higher. In short, gaming has a significantly-sized, time-dedicated audience compared to other entertainment media; however, other media have a much larger audience and probably always will(unless you make video gaming cheaper and easier to learn). Thus, the gaming industry will never be covered in big news media as much as other entertainment industries.
Unfortunately for your position, Gandhi was not an anarcho-capitalist. Look, I do not claim to an expert on Anarcho-capitalism or Gandhi(I did a report on him once in high school), but I do know that he never claimed a anarcho-capitalist. Throughout your multiple posts on Gandhi and Anarcho-capitalism you have provided no research, no refrences, only opinions. That's nice that some of the stuff Gandhi said and did fits in your grand scheme of anarcho-capitalist philosphy. He did a lot of great things that many people agree with. But you're attributing a philosphy to him--and his actions-- that, as far as I can tell with a little research, he wasn't even aware of.
If you want to discuss the definitions and meanings of another word I suggest we start next with revisionism.
The word violence has many definitions, "an act of agression" is one of them, but "an act of aggression" is not the most relevant one in this case. The reason I included the wiki linkwas for the context of Gandhi's quote. From the article:
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. There are many causes I am prepared to die for but no causes I am prepared to kill for.
Under the context of his quote, the "eye for an eye" sentence makes much more sense when we're talking about violence as a "physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing"(like killing) not as an "act of an agression".
Patents(something MPAA isn't concerned with BTW) and copyrights are not violence; they are laws. Laws can be used violently but they are not violence. If we used your reasoning we could say laws against murder are violent because they are an "act of agression" against murders.
Here we see an eye-for-an-eye. Gandhi said if we followed that rule the whole world would be blind.
You know that when Ghandhi said that he was talking about the endless cycle of violence that killing for causes(e.g. Israel's and Palestine's seemingly endless violent squable over territory). I doubt even the fiercest MPAA/RIAA hating slashdoters would advocate violence for something as petty as this. With that in mind, using the MPAA's own tactics against them is perfectly fine; it might be the only way to stop their underhanded tactics.
That's probably because we're talking about two different media center programs. I didn't even know MS made a media extender for the original XBox until today. I'm surprised the offical MS media extender makes you run the software from the CD. I'd figured MS would have the program would update the dashboard to enhance its functionality.
Anyway, I thought you were talking XBox Media Center or some homebrew app for modded XBoxes. XBMC is pretty much the standard for media playing programs on the XBox. It supports most common video/audio/picture formats(more than the XBox360 supports), allows python scripting to allow internet audio/video functionality(among other things), runs a FTP/HTTP for remote access, plus other little goodies. In my mind, it's much more useful than what the XBox360 is capable of when it comes to media center capabilities.
Outside it being the term MS uses for media playing products(set top boxes, XBox, XBox360), Media Center Extender and Media Center are synonymous. What media program where you running on your XBox? I was thinking you might of had problems if you were loading it if off a CD-ROM. A lot of homebrew XBox apps assume the ability to write to the directories that the executable is located in. I know XBMC writes to some it's files upon running(logging, DB updates, etc.).
MS themselves have said before that they're no longer going to make any new software for the console. And it's been said they're soon going to halt production of the original XBox. It's no surprise that other 3rd parties are following suit as they prepare for the very pricy next-gen change.
I imagine MS is much more eager than other console makers to jump to the next-gen because they know the original XBox has hacked wide open. They've done their research with the 360 and they know it's going to long while before someone really cracks the 360 open.
As for me, I'm quite content with the original XBox. It isn't a great game box, but it's a fantastic media player/emulation box.
I'm no expert on computer networking, I've taken one class, but I would say overhead. IP multicasting is out there for LAN usage(it involves assigning a specific type of IP address. But once you leave the realm of LANs onto an internet, the problem is vastly greater. To quote wikipedia:
"The IP Multicast model requires a great deal more state inside the network than the IP unicast model of best-effort delivery does, and this has been the cause of some criticism. Also, no mechanism has yet been demonstrated that would allow the IP Multicast model to scale to millions of senders and millions of multicast groups and, thus, it is not yet possible to make fully-general multicast applications practical in the commercial Internet. As of 2003, most efforts at scaling multicast up to large networks have concentrated on the simpler case of single-source multicast, which seems to be more computationally tractable."
Slashdot Mirror
The Japanese aren't willing to jump on the PS3 just because it's from their country. Many think the console is over priced(a Famitsu poll I think showed it around 70%). From what I've read, polls and Nikko Citigroup, most people are predicting that the Wii is going to be the market leader in Japan. The XBox360 is a non issue over there so if Sony is hoping to have a chance for market dominance in Japan a price drop to a reasonable level will have to be it. I really wouldn't be surprised if they anounced a price drop here. After a string of bad news coming from Sony, they need something to show that they aren't completely inept.
You're right. This all or nothing idea is stupid. The Japanese market for the next gen consoles is practically handed to Nintendo, the only concern for them is how they do in the states. As I've said before, Nintendo is still making money off their console no matter how they do; whether they dominate the entire market isn't an issue.
Nintendo is shooting for a market beyond what Sony and MS are shooting for. A market of causual game players not interested in spending alot of money for the latest and greatest in technology. Hardcore gamers will probably buy one or two consoles anyway. Most likely one of them will be a Wii, even if it is for novelty, as it will be some thing different.
On top of that, I think Wii Sports was chosen for its mass appeal.
They explicitly said today they're aiming at a market that isn't just hardcore gamers. They're also aiming at people who are confused by modern video game controllers, people that aren't hardcore gamers. Almost everybody knows the rules of bowling, tennis, baseball. What better way to entice people than with games that everyone is instantly familar with? Combined with an intuitative way of playing the games with the WiiMote, I think Nintendo has come up with an idea where they can't fail.
Ok, I'll bite...
To use your comparison
Wii (w/game, controller, built in WiFi, and memory card access) - $250
3 Extra Wiimotes - $120
1 Extra Nunchuk - $20
2 Retro Controllers - $40
Zelda - $50
2000 points for the VC - $20
Or...a $500 PS3 and controller with no games, no WiFi, no memory card access, and no HDMI port(which defeats the point of having BluRay on there in the first place)
...I wouldn't rely too much on this list. Not to descredit the entire article--most of it is pretty reliable--but there are questionable entries on that list. Even the article itself notes, "Due to a general lack of commonly agreed-upon genres or criteria for the definition of genres, classification of games are not always consistent or systematic and sometimes outright arbitrary between sources." That certainly seems the case for "Maze game", a genre noted in Chris Crawford's The Art of Computer Games but really isn't applicable these days. Looking at the article entry for "Artillery games", you can see the link it refers to doesn't talk about "Artillery games" as a genre, but rather a generic type of game called Artillery. Under that classification "Snake game" should be a genre.
Depending on how you want to describe "genre", there can also be some other inaccurates. There's some entries that sound like descriptions. Is "Arcade game" genre? An arcade can be a fighting game or a first person shooter. If it is a genre, shouldn't "Console game" be a genre too? There are other entries that describe more game mechanics than "genres." For example "Stealth games," there are FPSs (see Goldeneye 007), as well a 3D person action games (see MGS), and Action Adventure games (see Beyond Good and Evil) that use a stealth mechanic as gameplay. So does that make it more a game mechanic or a genre itself?
No loss, profit (assuming around a $200 console cost). On top of that, it going to pretty cheap to develop a Wii game compared to the competion. Let's see, it's profitable for Nintendo and cheaper for both developers and gamers. Regardless of each companies position right now, I'd say Nintendo is sitting in a good position right about now.
No there aren't. There are massive problems with most of Wikipedia, but there aren't enough editors to give a shit.
You didn't hear his whole sentence. He didn't say, "there are dumbfoundingly few problems." He said, "For Wikipedia's size, traffic, and number of contributors, there are dumbfoundingly few problems." If the problems were that massive(to the point were it made the whole project worthless), then I should be able to hit a random article and have the majority of its content wrong.
To make my point I was going to go to a random article to verify it's claims. The article I came across, Billiard Techniques is just happens to be something I know a little about as a amauter pool player. The article has a lot of problems(facts needed verfication, external links would be nice, etc.) but article does contain correct information about Draw and Follow, English, and massé techniques. Not enough to give it much authority, but enough to where someone who didn't know anything about the techniques would understand them after reading it.
It might be tough for you to believe that the Wikipedia can work. I sometimes do myself. I mean, who believe a huge number of
self-centered, semi-rational, animals that have been fighting with each other for thousands of years would have created something as beautiful as civilization?
Um, ok? Let's say your numbers were true, since we have no idea were they came from. 3.5 Billion shouldn't be that much of a hit for 30 million consoles. If the average XBox360 gamer just buys 2 games and a controller(at the cheap price of $50 each and controller for $25) Microsoft has already made their money back. Of course, I'm leaving a few details out but since we're talking arm chair economics here, but who's counting? There's no mystery here. Video gaming is worth billions of dollars a year. It's worth the hit of a few billion dollars if it means a piece of the pie that's worth billions a year.
I think there's a misinterpretation of the facts. The article I was citing said that the lost per console system sold (not an "average" lost) was $126. This means for every console sold MS is giving you those assembled parts at a cost that is $126 cheaper than what it cost them. I've never seen any figures stating MS's "average lost per console" that includes sales from games, peripherals, etc. How would you calculate something like that? I suppose if the XBox division post a lost of X dollars you could divide it by Y # of XBox360s sold to get some average figure of loss, but that still wouldn't be accurate since the XBox division doesn't just spend money on making 360 consoles.
It's pretty simple. They lose money on selling individual game console boxes (the system, a controller, wires, whatever is packed with it) so that the entry cost doesn't seem that high to the consumer. However, they make a huge amount of money off of seperately packaged controllers, memory cards (example: Sony's PS2 memory card still costs ~$25 for 8MB even though 8MB of flash memory costs next to nothing these days), extra AV wires (huge markup, it cost only a few dollars to make a $25 AV cable), and of course their bread and butter game licensing. Not to mention the XBox Live service is probably making a good amount of money with subscriptions and downloads.
Also keep in mind that MS (and Sony), unlike the gaming companies of old, has many different divisions in their company. Thus, the hugely profitable MS Office division can subsidize the XBox division until they've gained enough marketshare to be in the black.
I have better, more accurate, proposition. Games that very popular, or good, tend to be pirated more. Consoles that have a lot of good games tend to be very popular. Piracy and popularity might be slightly corelated but one doesn't neccesarily causes the other. This is coming from someone who has purchased an XBox for the sole purpose of modchipping it for emulators and XBox Media Center and also owns a PS2 with an installed hard drive that game images run off of. The XBox is much easier to pirate games for in my experience than the PS2. Yet, the PS2 has about 3 times the number of consoles as the XBox.
Uh, that's an opinion not a fact. Seriously, if anyone doesn't know about the history of US/EUR SMB2 check out the links already posted by users. They are much better than this drivel.
The cartridge is actually what _helped_ Nintendo, not hurt it. They are damn near copy proof (within reason)...
Were they really now?
That blurb is misleading; it sounds as if the article is talking about how the video game medium is represented in other media like TV and film. The topic is how the gaming industry is covered by the big news media(e.g. CNN, Wall Street Journal, etc.) compared to other entertainment industries that make just as much money as the video game industry.
The underlying assumption here is that if the gaming industry makes as much money as the movie industry it should be covered in the news as much as that other industry. Of course that's not the whole picture. People in big media report things that are important, but they also have to report things that people want to hear about. There is a huge audience that want to hear what Brad Pitt's new movie is, who's playing in the World Cup today, what Microsoft's business plans for future are, and what is going on in Capital Hill. The audience that wants to hear what John Carmack's new game engine will do is small.
Also, just because the gaming industry makes as much money as the movie industry doesn't mean it reaches as many people. The entry level cost to get into gaming is much higher. The learning curve is much steeper too, especially if you've never grown up with videogames. However, the time that can be spent on game(vs. a book, movie, or tv show) is much higher. In short, gaming has a significantly-sized, time-dedicated audience compared to other entertainment media; however, other media have a much larger audience and probably always will(unless you make video gaming cheaper and easier to learn). Thus, the gaming industry will never be covered in big news media as much as other entertainment industries.
I second that notion, they're are a lot of good points made in this thread getting ignored compared to the overrated original post.
Unfortunately for your position, Gandhi was not an anarcho-capitalist. Look, I do not claim to an expert on Anarcho-capitalism or Gandhi(I did a report on him once in high school), but I do know that he never claimed a anarcho-capitalist. Throughout your multiple posts on Gandhi and Anarcho-capitalism you have provided no research, no refrences, only opinions. That's nice that some of the stuff Gandhi said and did fits in your grand scheme of anarcho-capitalist philosphy. He did a lot of great things that many people agree with. But you're attributing a philosphy to him--and his actions-- that, as far as I can tell with a little research, he wasn't even aware of.
If you want to discuss the definitions and meanings of another word I suggest we start next with revisionism.
The word violence has many definitions, "an act of agression" is one of them, but "an act of aggression" is not the most relevant one in this case. The reason I included the wiki linkwas for the context of Gandhi's quote. From the article:
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. There are many causes I am prepared to die for but no causes I am prepared to kill for.
Under the context of his quote, the "eye for an eye" sentence makes much more sense when we're talking about violence as a "physical force exerted for the purpose of violating, damaging, or abusing"(like killing) not as an "act of an agression".
Patents(something MPAA isn't concerned with BTW) and copyrights are not violence; they are laws. Laws can be used violently but they are not violence. If we used your reasoning we could say laws against murder are violent because they are an "act of agression" against murders.
Here we see an eye-for-an-eye. Gandhi said if we followed that rule the whole world would be blind.
You know that when Ghandhi said that he was talking about the endless cycle of violence that killing for causes(e.g. Israel's and Palestine's seemingly endless violent squable over territory). I doubt even the fiercest MPAA/RIAA hating slashdoters would advocate violence for something as petty as this. With that in mind, using the MPAA's own tactics against them is perfectly fine; it might be the only way to stop their underhanded tactics.
That's probably because we're talking about two different media center programs. I didn't even know MS made a media extender for the original XBox until today. I'm surprised the offical MS media extender makes you run the software from the CD. I'd figured MS would have the program would update the dashboard to enhance its functionality.
Anyway, I thought you were talking XBox Media Center or some homebrew app for modded XBoxes. XBMC is pretty much the standard for media playing programs on the XBox. It supports most common video/audio/picture formats(more than the XBox360 supports), allows python scripting to allow internet audio/video functionality(among other things), runs a FTP/HTTP for remote access, plus other little goodies. In my mind, it's much more useful than what the XBox360 is capable of when it comes to media center capabilities.
Outside it being the term MS uses for media playing products(set top boxes, XBox, XBox360), Media Center Extender and Media Center are synonymous. What media program where you running on your XBox? I was thinking you might of had problems if you were loading it if off a CD-ROM. A lot of homebrew XBox apps assume the ability to write to the directories that the executable is located in. I know XBMC writes to some it's files upon running(logging, DB updates, etc.).
To Nintendo's credit, they didn't make the Power Glove Mattel did.
MS themselves have said before that they're no longer going to make any new software for the console. And it's been said they're soon going to halt production of the original XBox. It's no surprise that other 3rd parties are following suit as they prepare for the very pricy next-gen change.
I imagine MS is much more eager than other console makers to jump to the next-gen because they know the original XBox has hacked wide open. They've done their research with the 360 and they know it's going to long while before someone really cracks the 360 open.
As for me, I'm quite content with the original XBox. It isn't a great game box, but it's a fantastic media player/emulation box.
If you want to be picky about it, since it's neither modifying software or hardware but firmware, you could call it a firmmod.
I'm no expert on computer networking, I've taken one class, but I would say overhead. IP multicasting is out there for LAN usage(it involves assigning a specific type of IP address. But once you leave the realm of LANs onto an internet, the problem is vastly greater. To quote wikipedia:
"The IP Multicast model requires a great deal more state inside the network than the IP unicast model of best-effort delivery does, and this has been the cause of some criticism. Also, no mechanism has yet been demonstrated that would allow the IP Multicast model to scale to millions of senders and millions of multicast groups and, thus, it is not yet possible to make fully-general multicast applications practical in the commercial Internet. As of 2003, most efforts at scaling multicast up to large networks have concentrated on the simpler case of single-source multicast, which seems to be more computationally tractable."