@torus: Well, I have some good news for you.
@Lashe: is any it harder to read? I read a tweet from John Brownlee, talking about contrast issues making things illegible. Might only be for people with really bad eyesight, though.
@coopdegra: The point of calling out that it's a false equivilency is that you can't base logic a false premise. Being similar "in some base way" doesn't actually make it right.
On that note:
To clear that last point up: I fully understand what you've said, I just don't agree with it.
Also, I watched the videos, and regardless of whether or not Jim is a troll, I still argued against Jim's points. He may be a prominent figure, but that doesn't make his position justified by default (Fun fact: arguing this point is the 'appeal to celebrity' fallacy).
Also, Gamestop's definition of "used" is "the box was opened". It doesn't mean it was ever installed. They did this after they got caught selling used games as new. It's all just marketing.They haven't sold actually used PC games for ages.
Nuts and Bolts vs. Brink:
Wouldn't you as a publisher want more people buying your game when it comes out, rather than waiting weeks for it to drop in price and then making less money off of it.
So in the situation of:
Banjo Kazooie Nuts and bolts comes out at 40 bucks, a game you can see the effort and care put into
...Isn't that exactly what you want?
As for Brink? You didn't like it, others did. But they thought people would pay more, so they priced it higher, and sold 2.5 million worldwide, for $140 millionish total in that "launch window". I'm not sure how a good business plan translates to justifying used games sales, though.
Have fun with Minecraft.
It was a simple metaphor likening one thing to another, are they exactly the same, no of course not, but a similar logic applies,
That's what a false equivalency is, though. You're saying things are equal, when they aren't. You're making connections that don't actually translate.
As HKZ says above me, why should they get money perpetually for something that has already been paid.
Because you don't own it. The xbox one model is about buying a license that grants access to content. The terms of that license dictate the use, and they control the process of transferring that license to another person. You paid for access. You used that access. Why should you recoup anything from that? Just because you used to be able to?
i was trying to say that, games could widen their availability by having flexible pricing.
Games are already bigger than ever, and cheaper than they've ever been. I don't understand why they need to be cheaper, other than someone not wanting to pay as much.
Yeah sure games used to be more expensive, but that is mostly because of the process of making the cartridge, and some would argue a better quality of game.
Games cost MILLIONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to make. Have you seen the credits in games now? Big bidget games are made by thousands of people, all over the world. Games are way more expensive to produce now.
I don't think there will be a monopoly, but once it goes all digital, whats stopping microsoft from charging whatever they want?TImeshift, a game from 2007 is still 30 bucks on there, how is that competitive, when i can buy it on amazon for like 9 bucks. They aren't the only place for games on the xbox as of now, but in a few years?
First, You don't think there will be a monopoly, but then you propose a situation where you think it'd be a monopoly? Also, they'll be stopped by anti-trust laws.
Second, just because they aren't the lowest price on a single title doesn't mean they aren't competitive. They charge what they think they can get. They may just not care about that product enough to put it on sale. Competition, economically, means offering the most favorable terms. It isn't always about the lowest price - it can also just be the easiest to find, or being the easiest to acquire and play.
Third, Microsoft isn't going to cut out third party retailers. There's nothing that even suggests that, and I don't know why you're even implying it.
look at steam, they have tons of deals, and while it is drm, you dont care because it doesnt really hinder the consumer.
cant you trade games on steam now?
You can trade only unused games and gifted games. There are no used games sales on steam. PC gaming has been without a used market for 10 years, and that's not going to change any time soon.
Like Microsoft and this announcement, people hated steam when it came out. It's had a decade to build the trust and userbase it has now. We don't know how Microsoft is going to market and sell xbox one games, but we do know that they've learned from steam. Hell, they already have XBLA game sales similar to steam. Their DRM check-in is similar to steam. They've even proposed a used sale model that's better than steam, because it's going to actually have used game sales.
So if you think steam is the example others have to emulate, then Microsoft must already be on the right path.
@coopdegra: It's a false equivalency because it's oversimplifying the situation. For one: the argument presumes you own a game. But it doesn't presume own a parking meter's spot. (Or if it does, it grossly misunderstand how parking meters work.)
I mean, I could easily say the following:
When you put money in a parking meter, you've bought a period of time in that spot where you can't be fined. Someone can park there after you leave, but you can't sell them that spot, because you don't own it. You just bought time. You can't transfer your time to another friend's spot, because you don't own that time. They'll have to buy whatever time they need. There are no refunds for wasted time, but everyone parks in a spot knowing this.
When you buy an xbox one game, get the disc (if you buy in-store) and a license to content. Anyone can play the game on your account/console, but you can't sell the game when you're done with it, because you don't own it. You own a license to access it. Your friend can buy a license, though. And there are no refunds for bad games, but everyone buys them knowing this.
Which makes it sound like the parking lot model is similar to my argument. But the truth is, it's just not the same thing. The comparison doesn't actually work. A parking spot is a dollar. A game is $60. That gap in price creates different consumer attitudes towards each situation. It's not like people will ever be up in arms about the "sudden end of used parking lot sales".
The launch window is the primary purchasing time for games. Because the majority of your customers will buy your games in that period, you to charge the highest price you can get away with. After that launch window, the price drops according to supply and demand. That's just business 101.
I don't understand how preorders and impulse purchases by customers are the publishers fault, though? Maybe I'm misreading. Because I feel like if someone gets burned even once on preorders, they should learn their lesson and stop doing that shit? It's not like the no-returns policy is new or anything.
As long as there are multiple consoles (and PC games, frankly) then Microsoft will be competitive. And let's be clear: Microsoft isn't the only access point for all games. They'll only control the price of first party games, like any other publisher. They've even established that each publisher determines the "used game" price. So no worries - there won't be a monopoly.
Also, while the number of dollars required to buy a game is higher, it's actually WAY cheaper now to be a gamer compared to 20 years ago.
edit: speeling is hard.
@darkdragonsoul99: you do have a choice - you don't use the site/service/etc?
Edit: Also, I don't think the "by using [product], you agree" has ever been overturned in court. Generally it's the term being agreed to (the "x,y,z" in this case) that's challenged, not the method of agreement.
@darkdragonsoul99: I'm honestly not sure what you're trying to say. But you should know that plenty of ToS use a phrase along the lines of "by using this, you agree to x,y,z". Tested.com has it too. You might be conflating legal with consumer-friendly?
@lane: Yeah, I edited my post to state that it's all in the context of xbox one's used game market, and not the entire used game market.
@coopdegra: Jim Sterling is kind of a troll, but eh.
Edit: I'm assuming these videos were all presented within the context of the Xbox One and its used game market.
The first video operates on a false premise that you can sell the license as if it was a physical thing. It's a contract between two parties, where party A grants access to material to party B. Also, like it or not, it's the terms of the license that dictate how the content can be used and distributed. Calling it a "crock" isn't a strong counter-point.
The rest seems to go on false assumptions that people must buy new/within the launch window, that there aren't people who review games and inform consumers, or that the market hasn't established a no-returns policy for nearly a decade on games. How do you avoid a bad purchase? Don't buy on impulse.
Oh, and he uses a lot of false equivalencies to parking meters.
The second video isn't providing much of an argument for used games, just stating a lot of desire for cheaper games. While used games ARE cheaper games, they are by no means the only way to play these games cheaply.
The third video is extremely back and forth on the issue of games, and profits. Publishers are bad, and retailers are good, depending entirely on who's making more money. Sometimes he says the market reacts to pricing, sometimes he says the market won't. I honestly don't really know what his argument is in this one, other than "I don't like thing."
I think the issue here is a matter of perspective. Microsoft hasn't taken away your ability to sell games. They've just removed their value.
You can still sell the disc. That's the part you own: the medium of delivery. The game itself is a license, which you pay to have access to. You don't own the license, so you can't sell it. Just because you pay money to access something, doesn't mean you have the full rights to it. Which is a really hard thing to wrap your head around! Especially after generations where we could sell games all we wanted, because there was nothing in place to stop us.
It doesn't help that the product itself is transforming: It's a transition of a physical thing, to a digital thing. From an enduring object, to a consumable one. Basically, Microsoft has stopped selling wax fruit, in favor of real fruit. You can do what you want with it, but once an apple has been used, the value drops off.
Sure, reselling a used apple is possible. However, you'll probably only find buyers of questionable taste.
But regardless of how accurate you are in your terminology, people are still going to be upset. Because for the chunk of the market that relies on used games, prices will effectively rise around 50% to 100%.
Chiming in with a desire for 420p/360p. Makes lunchtime watching at work way easier.
Or maybe a toggle per user? Defualt to 720 to look nice, but let me designate my own preferred quality in my profile?
@HoboZero: All mailto:-based hacks are inherently busted. It's sadly the nature of the beast. The Gmail.app jailbreak was removed because it broke too much stuff.
EDIT: ignore the old stuff here. It seems they changed some of that. It's still throwing unique UI code, though.
@Brewster: I had the same issue with skype. Download a mod called xCon in Cydia, and you're golden.
@SLUSHIE: the card for public transport appears when you're at a bus station, apparently.
@AwesomeAndy: mine shows me sports scores, nearby "photo opportunities" (which seems to mean "parks"), nearby restaurants, the weather, and my commute time.
From what I can tell, some of it is based on your location, and some of it is based on what you're googling for. I'd like to be able to pin a card from a search result in there.
Also, the location thing doesn't seem to be draining my battery any more than usual, but I have noticed it being on all the time. If it doesn't run in the background or push notifications, that seems like a waste.
@will: Sadly, no.
Apparently mailto: links result in a special kind of UI code that the gmail app simply doesn't use. And they can't just do a browser app request (where you just change the url prefix, like with chrome and other browsers). Google would have to rebuild the mail app for that to work. :/
I just turned all apple mail notifications off, and fetch/push to manual.
I use a 'Pilot Precise V5 RT' which makes a $1 pen sound really fancy. (Though amazon is charging $8 for a three-pack? Jebus. Maybe they lose all profit on shipping.)
Has anyone here tried this?
I'm tempted to give it a shot over lunch, if I can find the pens and refills nearby. Amazon has them, but the refills are pricier than this guide suggests. Not that $20 for a $200 pen is the worst, but if my whole goal is to be stingy? I'm not sure how much money is worth throwing at the idea.
I already do most of these, but didn't realize Siri would pass on directions to Google maps with opener. Fantastic!
I think I'm using almost the entire google suite of apps on my phone/tablet as the default at this point. Which felt a little weird, until I realized I don't really use any of the stock apps on my home desktop (OS X) or work desktop (Windows).
@neo1piv014: It *is* weird. I assume part of it is that they don't want to delude the customer experience (not everything running gingerbread is going to have the best hardware), and part of it is pushing the OS adoption rate forward.
Gingerbread is kind of like the windows XP of phones.