I just have this fear that the next generation with cloud gaming may be like a Library of Alexandria, once those different servers are gone, a ton of stuff will be lost forever.
We could prevent this, but not if game systems cant play used or a friends copy. Emulation will take forever to achieve perfectly.
Im being all doom and gloom, but I think more people should be about this kind of stuff.
In other words, record that footage! It is vital in order to be able to study and simulate these experiences via means of free fangames.Originally Posted by Leo_A
[quote name='Shidou Mariya' date='Nov 17 2010, 10:05 PM' post='4889940']
I'm a collector, but only to a certain extent.
Not as extreme as Rickstilwell though.[/quote]
Thia is a huge issue that doesn't get enough attention. If people are coming close to or exceeding their monthly data usage with things like streaming movies and downloading music, can you imagine how fast people will be eating up their data streaming and/or downloading massive game files!? Speed is another issue as well, as I have a fairly fast cable Internet connection, but my download speeds are all over the place, and I still have Youtube videos buffering from time to time lol. Infrastructure is not even close to where it needs to be to support a totally digital video game industry. Until ISP's get rid of these fucking data usage caps and servers can handle the streaming/downloading of games, physical games will still be the go to medium for me and many others.Despite the growth of broadband, the infrastructure still isn't there for 100% digital distribution. A lot of people are knocking on bandwidth limits as it is just by being an avid user of things like Netflix.
Until internet infrastructure improves enough and ISP's evolve their policies to adapt (Which is the biggest technical hurdle but not the only problem or thing that needs to change for us to move to 100% digital distribution), retail distribution will still dominate the console landscape. And with the server infrastructure that will be needed just to support a big game launch or two during the course of a year and a few other days like around Christmas, I'm not sure they will ever go all digital. Imagine all the expense and equipment needed for just a handful of day's that probably wouldn't even be working at 10% capacity for 350 days of every year.
My concern at least for the next generation or two is with the removal of our control and freedom over our own disc. A future where I can't insert any disc into any console and fully enjoy the offline experience since there are things like unlock codes to open up access to a single player game and so on stinks just as much as an all download future.
If anything, it's even worse. You'd have physical media with none of the traditional benefits of physical media (Beyond the joy geek's get with lining their bookcases with DVD cases) and also none of the advantages that the digital route offers (Not having to change discs, faster loading times, less wear and tear on your console, no clutter, etc.).
That's much more my concern for the next 10 years or so than any worry about publisher's ceasing to ship console game's on optical disc to retailers. Digital got its start in the last generation, has become a popular secondary form of distribution this generation, and will likely be on a even footing the next with competitive pricing and same day digital releases for virtually all software.
Then I'd expect at least another generation where retail distribution is an important secondary form of distribution before it disappears completely.
I've never really got these data usage caps that people keep going on about. Either my Comcast service doesn't have one or it's some absurdly high number that I'll never reach, as I'm using my connection to stream crap from Justin.tv every night for several hours (I'm doing it right now, in fact), sometimes with someone playing PS3 in one room while someone else is playing WoW in another (both of which are happening right now). The supposedly huge amount of data I use per month makes me feel that it's not as big of an issue as it is being made out to be.
Yeah, I regularly double my Comcast bandwidth cap and I've never heard a peep about it.
There's an article on the Verge today where the former head of the FCC admits that data caps have nothing to do with bandwidth, and everything to do with maximizing profits for ISPs. Surprising no one.
As I'm typing this, I'm playing SFIV online, streaming SoCal Regionals on 720p, and watching ONI safe jump set ups on YouTube. I should also mention I live in the sticks of Michigan. Bandwidth is not the problem; confused executives struggling to deal with the new realities of broadband demand is the problem. It'll get better over time. There's money involved.
Not everyone has great internet like you guys. I finally was able to pay for internet with some of my christmas money, its a good service now. But before that I had to use a free connection from a hotel near me and oh my fucking god, theres no way I could play online with it, streaming youtube is terrible. You do need fast internet to download things, and you need reliable connections so your file isnt lost or broken.
The internet only gaming route cuts off poor people from accessing new games more than before. Not only will newer games be idolized with its better graphics, cheaper old games or emulating will be seen as poor peoples alternatives to rich brats at school. Itll be like if the rich and cool kids played NEO GEO AES while everyone else were losers for having a SNES. Yeah Im making that comparison.
They aren't aiming for the poor people, they're aiming for the people with money who'd be willing to buy games for full price without a second thought. Being a loser for having a SNES? I wouldn't shed a tear for losing that battle. If it was years later and you were stuck with just an N64 or Dreamcast, then I'd be upset.
You don't really need a fast connection for Youtube, even with a 5Mbps download speed it's more than enough to stream video without problems. That's the speed I have last I checked, unless they recently upgraded it without telling us(when would an ISP upgrade anything for free?). Would I bother downloading full massive games all the time when they're several GBs large? No way would I pay for games like that, I can do without them.
I wouldn't use Youtube as a measure of connection quality.
It can suck terribly on even the best connection.
Gaming is not a welfare or government funded entitlement. Private companies are going to go the route that will net them the most customers and the most profit. Targeting the poor is not the greatest business strategy for gaming because poor people don't have the money to spend on games or expensive entertainment.
Gaming can be a very expensive hobby. it's not exactly the best pick for those in financial strain. And call me old fashioned, but I would have never though about using a gaming system as a mark of social class. The greatness of a system is not determined by the power of its hardware but the games that are made for it.
At least if gaming does go south because of new business models, there are so many old systems with large libraries now (going on 41 years worth) that it would probably be impossible to finish all console and handheld games within one's lifetime. That makes me wonder how long it would take just to beat every English console and handheld RPG to date. Unlike the crash of '83 where there wasn't very much to go back to, nowadays there's a treasure trove of confirmed good games on almost all systems. Even the systems that lost to competition back then are getting praised now because they're offering gamers new experiences more similar to the ones they were familiar with than what current gen systems are putting out.
I bet some new games going forward will really tease us and make us want to play them though. Look how many people are sucked into Diablo III even though it's online only. It's going to suck for them if Blizzard ever pulls the game. I don't expect them to for a long time though if they are still selling Diablo Battle chest though.
[quote name='Shidou Mariya' date='Nov 17 2010, 10:05 PM' post='4889940']
I'm a collector, but only to a certain extent.
Not as extreme as Rickstilwell though.[/quote]
The free internet I was lucky if I had 100kbps....at night. New gaming is very expensive, maybe thats a problem it doesnt want to admit itself to.
I hope if games are download only they arent $60. It really seems though this generation gaming did become about making bigger money than before. The PS3 was originally going to be $600! Game companies are making DLC that costs money when the content is actually on the disk. Gaming companies have to spend a lot more to make their games look like their apart of this generation and not PS2 era. Gaming is expensive, but I think this next generation its going to get worse. In 3d world countries only rich kids have gaming consoles. It doesnt have to target the poorest people, but shouldnt gaming want a lot of people to be able to afford it? If games some games were $40 new theyd sell really well. If the marketing was right at least. This industry is becoming too bloated, if you dont have the best graphics then most people wont give your game a second look. Unfortunately that means trying to look "real" so a ton of money has to be poured into making games with characters that will look terrible in 5 years. I wish more 2D games were made still and given good marketing behind them. The gaming industry is trying too hard to be like Hollywood, why cant anyone be the Troma?
And another thing, Im not a fan of the PS3 like I was PS2, too many things I dont care about outside of the online ability. It and the 360 are basically really cheap bad computers, and thats not good to me. I hate the browser and I find theres too many distractions from playing on it. In the past you bought your console and you played, you didnt even have to wait to play while a patch or feature downloaded. Can you imagine the N64 kids waiting for the WII U update???? I know that things made with only one feature wont be a good tech toy to have, but I wish the consoles would have had a mode minimal thing to them. PS3 would have been better if it just played Blu Ray and you could play against people on fighters and fps's, no browser or netflix. Id say all these extra features is whats leading to them dieing so soon, those consoles have become too advanced for their own good.
Last edited by IHatedSega; 01-21-2013 at 03:07 AM.
When this happens (and I fully expect it to), I officially switch to 100% piracy.
Itll be interesting to see how hackers will adapt with this, I kinda expect copying games to be really easy, but playing them outside of a PS or Xbox will be tricky. WHo knows.
I also wish PS3 had memory cards, theyre so simple and perfect. Plus if I go to a friends house its better to just bring a card than anything else.
They're plenty of games on android, ios, and windows metro that fit the inexpensive criteria, and some of these games area really good. Gamevil makes quite a few titles that are very high quality and the games themselves are only around $3.99. The problem is that people are getting deeper and deeper into the entitlement mentality. People want top notch, high res realistic graphics, production quality sound and voice acting, along with solid gameplay that rivals everything. And of course, they want it all for next to nothing because gaming should be for everyone and nobody should be making any money off game development. People don't work for free. Those salaries have to be paid, the bills have to be paid, and the corporation itself has to be paid.
I would love to see some $40 MSRP games on the shelves like it was 2 generations ago, but inflation has it's hands in everything. If you look at the past, in the NES and SNES era, games were around the same price, if not more, than they were today. If you adjust for inflation around a normalized graph, you'll see that games are cheaper today then they were in the past. You only think games were cheaper in the past because our parents bought the games for us and its much easier to ignore the cost when someone else is footing the bill.
For a sample of a comparison for inflation adjustment, here's a graph that details it.
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1...p#.ufiwcpyw_aq
You are correct with your final statement - the more you add and put into one device, the more difficult it is to maintain, and the more things that can go wrong. However, advancement often requires difficult problem solving and well thought out architectures to support the demand.And another thing, Im not a fan of the PS3 like I was PS2, too many things I dont care about outside of the online ability. It and the 360 are basically really cheap bad computers, and thats not good to me. I hate the browser and I find theres too many distractions from playing on it. In the past you bought your console and you played, you didnt even have to wait to play while a patch or feature downloaded. Can you imagine the N64 kids waiting for the WII U update???? I know that things made with only one feature wont be a good tech toy to have, but I wish the consoles would have had a mode minimal thing to them. PS3 would have been better if it just played Blu Ray and you could play against people on fighters and fps's, no browser or netflix. Id say all these extra features is whats leading to them dieing so soon, those consoles have become too advanced for their own good.
Last edited by Zthun; 01-21-2013 at 12:16 PM.
Hell yes, and it's also wildly unpredictable.
I've got about 25-35MBPS downstream on most days and just got out of a period of two solid weeks where whatever YouTube servers were available to my ISP wouldn't pre load/stream the sub-240 resolution stuff at all. It would totally choke on nearly every video.
Diagnosed my modem and router hardware to death (passed all of the functionality and speed benchmark testing - and all other streaming video sites ran like butter), Then, poof, one day YouTube is back to normal and a 720P stream will load 50-60% of a 30 minute video in SECONDS.
Like all other things, YouTube sometimes has bizarro problems on THEIR end that make the end user feel like something is wrong with their hardware.
"And the book says: 'We may be through with the past, but the past ain't through with us.'"
Just the Playstation 2 alone has enough quality software available for it to last a lifetime. So it's not really a matter of possibly someday not having something new to play and enjoy.
It will still suck though to miss out on things from the future due to one's distaste of the business model. I doubt even I'll disappear but I'll certainly be extremely cautious with what licenses I rent (And I'm very skeptical that I'd ever pay full price) and I'll certainly be finding instances of a game I'd of loved that slipped by me or that I waited too long to pull the trigger on.
Good riddance to overpriced memory cards with a paltry amount of space in them in the console world. Wish Sony would leave behind that idiocy in the handheld world.
What you want is easily accomplished with cloud saves.
Last edited by Leo_A; 01-21-2013 at 08:16 PM.
"I also wish PS3 had memory cards, theyre so simple and perfect. Plus if I go to a friends house its better to just bring a card than anything else"
can't you just use a normal usb drive and transfer the save there?
It was $15 for 2 official sony ps2 memory cards in 02 or early 03. And if your PS3 dies you have all your game data on them, so you wouldmt have to lose everything or need to do a transfer.
While transfers do suck sometimes, trust me when I say that hard drives are much better than having to juggle multiple memory cards. Do you know how many memory cards I had for PS1? Ten active and four on standby. With large hard drives I no longer had to guess which card had which game saves on them(and those little slips they gave you could never fit all the save info you would need to write on them for 15 blocks worth of stuff).
ALL HAIL THE 1 2 P
How about just doing what the Sega CD or Saturn did? Have built in internal memory with optional memory cards being available for purchase separately. It's not like you'd be limited to sizes too small to be useful anymore, memory is cheaper than ever before. PS2 memory cards were first available at 8MB back when it was still common to be using 1.44MB floppy discs for PCs, now USB drives or SD cards lower than 2GB are almost considered useless compared to what's currently available.
Even with PC games you could copy save files to floppy discs to transfer to another computer, back before everyone had portable laptops.
Posting Permissions
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from eBay, Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present of Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
