Jimquisition: Sony's Begging For Piracy

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

I'm more pissed at how they basically abandoned the Xperia play.

That thing would be completely useless if it wasn't for emulators.

immortalfrieza:

-|-:

By your ridiculous definition literally everything is a monopoly apart from the most generic of products.

Again, yet another person confusing what I said to mean Sony has a monopoly on the entire gaming industy when I said nothing of the sort.

PLEASE everybody, actually read and understand what I wrote before coming up with an argument against what I wrote, since apparently a ridiculous number of people continue to argue against a point I NEVER ACTUALLY MADE!!!

Actually it was against the point you made. But whatever - go ahead and use word meanings that aren't universally understood. Invent your whole language. Go on. DO IT!!!

ThatGuy:
How can a company have a monopoly on its own products? Does Apple have a monopoly on the iPhone as well?

Nope, because there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

ThatGuy:

You're saying Sony should allow other companies to produce and sell their systems. Why would they do that? There is no obligation for them to license their original IPs for cloning. Also, that would probably be worse for the consumer, since you'd have to do background research to find out which "type" of PS3/Vita you want to buy, which manufacturers make the best quality hardware, which ones offer warranties, which ones offer the best price, etc.

That would be BETTER for the industry, not worse! It would mean that Sony and companies like it would have to ensure that their products function better and have better prices than the knockoffs their competition is producing, and their competition would have try to do the same, in order to draw customers to prefer their version over anothers, or whoever didn't make enough profits would either have to abort production and switch to producing a more profitable product or close it's doors, whichever came first. It would mean better quality and cheaper prices across the board for the entire video game industry. Sure, it would be more of a pain for the consumer, but no less so than any other industry (the video game industry is the only industry to my knowledge that has this kind of monopoly on it's IPs, or rather the only one that exploits this monopoly for all it's worth.)

ThatGuy:

The products that Sony has made are proprietary hardware and software that they developed themselves. In the case of MiniDisc (another proprietary Sony tech), Sony licensed the tech to other manufacturers. That's why you could buy differently-branded MiniDisc players. But in the case of PS3/Vita, Sony has no incentive (or obligation) to license the tech. That doesn't mean they have a monopoly on it, though.

It's a monopoly because the only ones that can legally make and sell a console capable of playing a PS3 game are Sony, ONLY Sony. I can't play, say, Infamous on any other platform except the PS3 and nobody will ever be able to make a console that is also capable of playing the PS3 exclusive except those with Sony's permission until the patents dry up, which they probably never will. THAT is a monopoly.

immortalfrieza:
... there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

...

It's a monopoly because the only ones that can legally make and sell a console capable of playing a PS3 game are Sony, ONLY Sony. I can't play, say, Infamous on any other platform except the PS3 and nobody will ever be able to make a console that is also capable of playing the PS3 exclusive except those with Sony's permission until the patents dry up, which they probably never will. THAT is a monopoly.

iPhone is the only phone capable of running Apple apps (some of which are exclusives, and some of which are also available on Android). PS3 is the only device capable of playing PS3 games (some of which are exclusives, and some of which are also available on other gaming platforms). But according to your definition, PS3 is a monopoly, and iPhone isn't. These two examples are actually analogous. Think about it: Apple is the only company that can legally make and sell a phone capable of running Apple software, just like Sony is the only company that can legally make and sell a system capable of running PS3 games. Whether or not the software/games are multiplatform is a separate issue.

i'll be honest i didn't think the ps1 => vita debacle was that big a problem you had to go through the same shit with the psp so i guess you can chalk that up to getting a 6 month old piece of tech to work with a 6 year old piece of tech.

yeah the proprietary cards suck, i admit that but when you look at how piracy on psp started out (using save glitches in games like GTA LCS) you can see why, the prices are complete BS though 60 quid ($90) for a 16gb stick .... fuck off.

finally the vitas release problem isnt the release quality, its the frequency. if they had spaced some of their launch line up over this year we wouldn't be bitching as much.

peace out bitches i'm off to play grandia on my week old vita

immortalfrieza:

ThatGuy:
How can a company have a monopoly on its own products? Does Apple have a monopoly on the iPhone as well?

Nope, because there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

I'm sorry, I had to jump back on this again. You acknowledge that Apple doesn't have a monopoly on the iPhone because other companies make things that are similar to iPhones. By that logic Sony doesn't have a monopoly on the PS3 because the Xbox 360 is basically the same thing. Sure there's "exclusives" but there are also apps available only on the iPhone that aren't available for the Android.

Now I GUESS the going by your strict definition Sony DOES have a monopoly on the "Vita" and any game for it because the 3DS is at a lower tier technologically so you can't have ports. However it really is only a problem if you exclusively bought Sony products. The Vita doesn't exist in a vacuum, even though its so different, people do have the option to by a 3DS, and Sony can learn from Nintendo's success, which is more or less the same as if other people were allowed to make knock-off Vitas with better service.

I have always hated Sony for their shitty customer experience. They just shuffle their feet until you get impatient and give up. Truly, one can feel the Japanese spirit in every Sony product due to their attitude.

immortalfrieza:

Entitled:

jklinders:
Without a concept of intellectual property there is no incentive to create anything.

And that's why mankind didn't create any worthwile art before 1710.

Exactly! Back then people made things because there was a need to be filled, or for the love of the craft, or simply out of curiousity, NOT for money, and when anybody produced anything they had to try and make and sell it cheaply and ensure it worked flawlessly. With the monopoly that is intellectual property? Nope. Now they just make it barely functional and sell it for as much as they possibly can get away with.

Because as anyone who knows art can tell you, Micheallangelo never painted for money - every single thing he did, he did for the love of painting. Yes, painting was his love, his one true love, and he made the Sistine Chapel for that one reason.

Note: In case you can't tell from the sarcasm, Michealngelo hated painting and only did the Sistine Chapel because they paid him to.

The list of starving artists who made art purely because of a yearning to, who lived before 1900, begins and ends with Vincent Van Goh. Before him, they didn't build them to a level of quality because of passion - they did it because in the old days, people who were displeased would fucking kill the artist who displeased them.

Here's a hint - if any of your statements fit into to "things are worse today" idea, they're wrong.

immortalfrieza:

ThatGuy:
How can a company have a monopoly on its own products? Does Apple have a monopoly on the iPhone as well?

Nope, because there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

ThatGuy:

You're saying Sony should allow other companies to produce and sell their systems. Why would they do that? There is no obligation for them to license their original IPs for cloning. Also, that would probably be worse for the consumer, since you'd have to do background research to find out which "type" of PS3/Vita you want to buy, which manufacturers make the best quality hardware, which ones offer warranties, which ones offer the best price, etc.

That would be BETTER for the industry, not worse! It would mean that Sony and companies like it would have to ensure that their products function better and have better prices than the knockoffs their competition is producing, and their competition would have try to do the same, in order to draw customers to prefer their version over anothers, or whoever didn't make enough profits would either have to abort production and switch to producing a more profitable product or close it's doors, whichever came first. It would mean better quality and cheaper prices across the board for the entire video game industry. Sure, it would be more of a pain for the consumer, but no less so than any other industry (the video game industry is the only industry to my knowledge that has this kind of monopoly on it's IPs, or rather the only one that exploits this monopoly for all it's worth.)

ThatGuy:

The products that Sony has made are proprietary hardware and software that they developed themselves. In the case of MiniDisc (another proprietary Sony tech), Sony licensed the tech to other manufacturers. That's why you could buy differently-branded MiniDisc players. But in the case of PS3/Vita, Sony has no incentive (or obligation) to license the tech. That doesn't mean they have a monopoly on it, though.

It's a monopoly because the only ones that can legally make and sell a console capable of playing a PS3 game are Sony, ONLY Sony. I can't play, say, Infamous on any other platform except the PS3 and nobody will ever be able to make a console that is also capable of playing the PS3 exclusive except those with Sony's permission until the patents dry up, which they probably never will. THAT is a monopoly.

You don't have a solitary fucking clue how the industry works, do you? You know no history, no economics, and nothing beyond "corporation=bad".

They tried that. That was the 3DO. No-one fucking wanted it, or wanted to make games for it. Then they tried it again, with the CD-i. No-one wanted it, or wanted to make games with it.

And since you have no concept of pattern recognition, by now you will say that the failures of those devices was unrelated to your idea of making them produced by a number of different companies. Not realising that the reason Sony have so many great games, is so they can attract people to their hardware.

Its very, very simple. If Sony were not makiung their console, Uncharted, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, LittleBigPlantet, Ratchet and Clank, Journey, God of War and The Unfinished Swan would not exist.

*Does best to ignore ImmortalFrieza's butchering of the concept of a monopoly*

Well, that's the closest I'm going to come to completely ignoring it.

As for the video, I really cannot agree with what Jim is saying about having to offer a better service than a pirate for them to stop. Namely because you just aren't going to be able to do that. Even if it comes down to having to put in credit card information and click an extra button to confirm your purchase, piracy will always have at least as good of a service in terms of software. Reason being? They can just copy whatever software the developer's using. And when it comes down to it I'm sure that a lot of people are going to look at their wallets and say "Well I could pay $60 for this game or I can spend it on something that I can't get for free and have both."

NightHawk21:
Sony could take a lesson from Valve with Steam. I know the rules of the site, but lets just say that when I was a poor, unemployed teenager I used to acquire the few comp games (namely an RTS here or there) in less than legal ways. Now that I've pretty much converted to the Church of Steam, it is literally not worth my time to pirate a game and play around trying to get it to work, than to dish out a few bucks, get the game nicely integrated into my library with achievements and constant updates. There is a reason why my PS3 has been essentially off for a year now, and is only occasionally turned on to play a DVD.

Same story here minus the PS3 (The only console I can afford is a gamecube! ). If steam managed to turn the Russian game market with the HIGHEST piracy levels in the world into their largest market in Europe you know they are doing at least one thing right!

Foolproof:

ThatGuy:
How can a company have a monopoly on its own products? Does Apple have a monopoly on the iPhone as well?

Nope, because there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

I agreed with you until here, but he does have a point, the App Store, and generally the exclusive content, makes Apple into as much of a monopoly as Sony and the rest.

Foolproof:

The list of starving artists who made art purely because of a yearning to, who lived before 1900, begins and ends with Vincent Van Goh.

then the historical times sucked significantly more than our days, because about half of the art I spent my time with in the recent years were created by people who worked on them for years, only to release them for free.

And much of the other half were copyrighted out of technical necesity to make the distribution of physical copies easier for anyone who wants one, but the artists made it clear that they don't particuarly mind piracy either, or een support it.

The remaining ones were copyrighted by publishers, and their artists worked for a salary. The only difference between that and the old patrony is, that, as Jim once said, copyright is "about already rich men getting richer" by allowing them to own what their workers created.

Starting off with the Grandia intro music? Jim, I think I love you.

Entitled:

Foolproof:

ThatGuy:
How can a company have a monopoly on its own products? Does Apple have a monopoly on the iPhone as well?

Nope, because there are products that provide the same functions as the iPhone out there, thus Apple does not have a monopoly on the iPhone product. They have a monopoly on the iPhone brand name itself, because nobody else but them can call anything an iPhone, but they do not have a monopoly upon the product.

I agreed with you until here, but he does have a point, the App Store, and generally the exclusive content, makes Apple into as much of a monopoly as Sony and the rest.

Foolproof:

The list of starving artists who made art purely because of a yearning to, who lived before 1900, begins and ends with Vincent Van Goh.

then the historical times sucked significantly more than our days, because about half of the art I spent my time with in the recent years were created by people who worked on them for years, only to release them for free.

And much of the other half were copyrighted out of technical necesity to make the distribution of physical copies easier for anyone who wants one, but the artists made it clear that they don't particuarly mind piracy either, or een support it.

The remaining ones were copyrighted by publishers, and their artists worked for a salary. The only difference between that and the old patrony is, that, as Jim once said, copyright is "about already rich men getting richer" by allowing them to own what their workers created.

Who owns the Sistine Chapel and makes money off people coming to see it, the Catholic Church or Michealangelo's bloodline descendants? Who owns the Mona Lisa, The Republic of France or Da Vinci's bloodline descendants?

Already rich men getting richer is not copyright, that's every form of a system of an economy I can think of, except maybe communism. Do you think the feudal system was not about rich land owners doing very little for the peasantry and yet getting richer?

Crono1973:

zelda2fanboy:
It's pretty bad when Nintendo is more consumer friendly and has more easily accessible content. Nintendo.

LOL, no!

Nintendo ties your games to hardware and they still don't have an account system to manage your purchases. You can now play some of your PS1 classics on your Vita along with your PSP and PS3. How many Wii Virtual Console games can be played on your DS or 3DS?

That's because the wii virtual console was made for the Wii. And the 3DS has its own virtual console where you can get NES, Gameboy, Gameboy Colour and Game Gear games for the system. And on your 3DS you can play any game you bought on the DsiWare shop with a simple system transfer and play any DS game out there. And all you need to do to transfer your DSiWare games to your 3DS is go into the menu, select system transfer and wait for the two systems to transfer data.

OT: Yep, Sony's kind of digging its own grave with the Vita. They didn't learn from the PSP, and are making the exact same mistakes again. One being making a handheld that's basically a portable console which drives up the price to ridiculous levels instead of keeping the hardware a bit less than consoles and keeping the price down. Another being forcing users to use there way of getting games, exactly like the PSP's UMD system. With the 3DS if I want to play a DS game I can just pop in the DS game into the slot at the top and play it. On the Vita if I want to play a PSP game I have to buy it again (or transfer it, which is still quite a lot), download it then install it. And considering the price of Sony's SD cards I probably wouldn't have an SD card that can fit most of my PSP games on there, so then I just can't play the games without deleting a load of other shit.

So I think in the last 5 pages no-one has asked the most important question.
Where can I find that picture of the muscular young man in his underwear?

An intelligent opinion as always, but the main thing I took away from this video is that I want to play Tomba again...

ToastiestZombie:

Crono1973:

zelda2fanboy:
It's pretty bad when Nintendo is more consumer friendly and has more easily accessible content. Nintendo.

LOL, no!

Nintendo ties your games to hardware and they still don't have an account system to manage your purchases. You can now play some of your PS1 classics on your Vita along with your PSP and PS3. How many Wii Virtual Console games can be played on your DS or 3DS?

That's because the wii virtual console was made for the Wii. And the 3DS has its own virtual console where you can get NES, Gameboy, Gameboy Colour and Game Gear games for the system. And on your 3DS you can play any game you bought on the DsiWare shop with a simple system transfer and play any DS game out there. And all you need to do to transfer your DSiWare games to your 3DS is go into the menu, select system transfer and wait for the two systems to transfer data.

Nintendo designed the Wii and 3DS VC's to be exclusive. You COULD play your downloaded SNES games on your 3DS and maybe you could have on DS but Nintendo designed it in a way where you couldn't do that. Certain NES games can be played on both but you have to buy them one time for every system you want to play them on (like Super Mario Bros). If you have two Wii's and two 3DS's and you want to play SMB on all 4 of them, you need to buy it 4 times. That's pretty shitty considering that if I buy a PS1 classic, I can play it on 2 handhelds and 2 PS3's without any sort of system transfer. Stop making excuses for Nintendo.

Yeah, Sony is fucking up but they still aren't as restrictive as Nintendo.

We get in trouble for talking about piracy, but he gets to make a video about it? Yea that's fair.

Crono1973:

ToastiestZombie:

Crono1973:

LOL, no!

Nintendo ties your games to hardware and they still don't have an account system to manage your purchases. You can now play some of your PS1 classics on your Vita along with your PSP and PS3. How many Wii Virtual Console games can be played on your DS or 3DS?

That's because the wii virtual console was made for the Wii. And the 3DS has its own virtual console where you can get NES, Gameboy, Gameboy Colour and Game Gear games for the system. And on your 3DS you can play any game you bought on the DsiWare shop with a simple system transfer and play any DS game out there. And all you need to do to transfer your DSiWare games to your 3DS is go into the menu, select system transfer and wait for the two systems to transfer data.

Nintendo designed the Wii and 3DS VC's to be exclusive. You COULD play your downloaded SNES games on your 3DS and maybe you could have on DS but Nintendo designed it in a way where you couldn't do that. Certain NES games can be played on both but you have to buy them one time for every system you want to play them on (like Super Mario Bros). If you have two Wii's and two 3DS's and you want to play SMB on all 4 of them, you need to buy it 4 times. That's pretty shitty considering that if I buy a PS1 classic, I can play it on 2 handhelds and 2 PS3's without any sort of system transfer. Stop making excuses for Nintendo.

Yeah, Sony is fucking up but they still aren't as restrictive as Nintendo.

Yes, I admit that sucks. But that doesn't make them as restrictive as Sony. Like I said, there is no way to play PSP games on your PS Vita other than buying them again on the Vita, since the Vita doesn't support UMDs. And with the 3DS you can actually just do a simple system transfer for ALL your games, including NES games and eShop games. Seriously, you're saying Sony isn't as restrictive as Nintendo when Sony literally forces you to buy their SD cards which cost way too much just to play games on the Vita because they didn't pack one in like Nintendo does with the 3DS. And like I said, you can't play UMD games on the Vita, making you either transfer any games you downloaded onto your PSP (which if you didn't get the Go would have been very little) or buy them all again. With the 3DS you can play any DS game you want without hassle.

Zeren:
We get in trouble for talking about piracy, but he gets to make a video about it? Yea that's fair.

Better that someone on this site gets to talk about it than no one. After all, it's an important issue and it needs to be discussed, not ignored.

Zeren:
We get in trouble for talking about piracy, but he gets to make a video about it? Yea that's fair.

Not talking about piracy, you get in trouble for saying "You should all pirate, I pirate too and it's awesome!". Which Jim wasn't doing, he was saying that it's Sony's own fault that so many people want to pirate Vita games. It's a pretty wide spread opinion that piracy is mostly a service problem, not the fault of anyone really but the publisher doing shitty things they shouldn't be doing.

Like I said, there is no way to play PSP games on your PS Vita other than buying them again on the Vita, since the Vita doesn't support UMDs.

Well, you can play your digitally bought PSP games on your Vita. Not including a UMD drive is something that needed to happen. How many generations should they have kept it for, it was a failure.

On the flip side, you can play your DS games on your 3DS but your downloaded DSi games can only be played if you transfer them (remove them from one system). You could have a downloaded game both on your PSP and Vita. To me, that is important considering we are moving towards downloads instead of physical copies.

Seriously, you're saying Sony isn't as restrictive as Nintendo when Sony literally forces you to buy their SD cards which cost way too much just to play games on the Vita because they didn't pack one in like Nintendo does with the 3DS

Proprietary memory cards =/= the restrictions in this discussion. Sure, it would have been better if Sony had gone with SD cards but that's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about account restrictions and you can't get worse than Nintendo who has no accounts.

And like I said, you can't play UMD games on the Vita, making you either transfer any games you downloaded onto your PSP (which if you didn't get the Go would have been very little) or buy them all again.

Well, I have the PSP 3000 and I downloaded as many games as I could because I didn't want to deal with UMD's. Turns out, I chose the correct course. Those who bought UMD's for games that were available on PSN are no worse off than those who couldn't use their N64 carts in a Gamecube. You didn't expect Sony to stick with a failed format forever did you?

With the 3DS you can play any DS game you want without hassle.

Not downloaded ones, you must remove them from one system to make them work on a new one and you can't even just re-download them from the shop. You have to waste time with the stupid transfer Pikmin tool that takes way too long for such small files. What takes that tool 20 minutes would take your PC 20 seconds.

I cracked my PSP some time ago, purely because I have a pretty decent collection of PS1 games gathering dust and figured portability was the way to go.

After all, why should I go on to PSN and run that gauntlet only to pay again for a game I already own!?! Especially when I have to ability to make that game compatible with my PSP myself! So it's not costing them any time or money to provide this to me (and thats when they even have the game I want to play <_<).

Sony really started dropping the ball when the PSP came out. They had a golden opportunity to do something special, but ruined it by just not supporting it in the same way they had the PS1 & 2.

The Vita appears to be much the same and quite frankly it's only a matter of time before some resourceful bugger cracks it wide open and then the choice will belong to the consumer. But also I hope the option possibly to put games you own on the PS1/PS2 onto the system, then I think we'll see an increase in sales of the Vita.

Damn, I would actually enjoy this show if Jim's voice wasn't so damn annoying...

Y'know, if I had to pay an equal $ price for every thing I've pirated, I'd still pirate it because of the vastly superior distribution and user interface. That's just depressing.

Daystar Clarion:

Jimothy Sterling:

Daystar Clarion:
Hey Jim, have you lost weight? You're looking a lot better man :D

Not a joke, seriously, you look like you've lost a few pounds.

Maybe! The exercise bike seen in the "Thank God for Me" episode wasn't just for show. I've been on a "Red Dwarf's worth of pretend-biking per weekday" regimen for a few months.

Thanks for noticing whatever minuscule shred of fatty-fat-fat might have disappeared as a result.

Nevertheless, it seems to be working. Keep it up :D

Could you have stumbled across a a hidden exercise technique?

Are you motivated by this ancient hymn?

Maybe this one:

"To combat piracy, your mission is clear -- provide a better service than pirates."

Too damn right, and come on, these are 10 year old games, how much exactly are Sony charging for them, along with the hour of your life you're losing to make them work?

I've got a stack of old PC games, and when they show up on a sale, on Steam, or GOG, or greenmangaming, I'll BUY them AGAIN, purely for the convenience of having them easily playable, and backed up on a service, ready to download again when I need them.

I mean, two quid to have Deus Ex when I want it? It's just not worth the effort of clicking thru to the bay. (Which btw, has been blocked by many ISPs in the UK now, causing people here exactly zero percent more trouble in accessing it. Part of me wishes politicians would do the tiniest bit of research before jumping on a bandwagon, and maybe they could have demanded an EFFECTIVE block, tho I admit my own ignorance in not knowing if it's even possible.)

Also, on my first point, Apply are knocking out games for 69p, just how many of the 100 PS1 games in Europe are 'classics' and how many are generic nonsense? I'm sure 10% are worth a few bucks each even now, but I'm a little cynical as to them being hand selected, thinking perhaps many were chosen as easy to get.

In short, as ever, make stuff easy to get, easy to use, and available to all, and we'll throw our damned money at you.

Lock it behind walls, spiked pits and deadly traps, and damn, we're not Indiana Jones, we just ain't gonna bother...

I'm amazed once more and i continue to wonder. We have a "Pandora" and a "wiz" and i continue to wonder why anyone would even bother with this or that new Device.

Some People just havn't been screwed over enough.

Mobile gaming today looks a bit like this:

Smartphones: Easy to install, download and buy and then you can fumble around with the touchscreen. You carry that thing around already, might as well get some Games.

Maybe you'll buy a Nintendo DS. Maybe even a 3DS, assuming the thing wont make your Eyes explode and you really want to blow some extra money for a gimmick.

Sony's portable Stuff? Well, they want to sell you Games you've already bought. Maybe. Eventually you may or may not be able to buy those games. If they got around to make a Port,
Oh well no one cares to read this again; you saw the Episode and know how much of a Hassle this is.

Go buy a Pandora and play ome Games there. I wouldn't take a PSvita if someone gave it to me as a Present.

Can someone please tell me what that music was in the beginning?

HE'S PLAYING GRANDIA!! BEST EPISODE EVER!!

*ahem*

Okay, now to watch the rest now that I've composed myself again.

Yeah, I agree. Sony is pretty shit when it comes to customer service and then they sit around and wonder why they get pirated from. And hacked. And why nobody wants to spend $100 on a class 4 special Vita memory card when regular class 4 micro SD cards are $20. I also never pay attention to games coming out on the Playstation Store because Sony fucks around with releasing them. Some weeks they release in the mid afternoon. Some weeks they release very late in the evening. Some weeks they release on fucking Monday?! You never know when the hell they're going to put content out. So I just gave up on paying attention to new Playstation Store releases because I'd had enough of wanting a game and becoming more and more frustrated as Tuesday went on because they had apparently decided that this time would be an "update at 9PM" day and honestly, fuck that. Pick a time and update at it consistently. I never have this problem on my 360 or PC because Microsoft promptly updates DLC early Tuesday morning before I get up and games early Wednesday morning before I get up. Steam also has a set time where they update everything so there's no waiting around wondering "Is it up yet? Is it up yet?" all day (also, hurray for pre-downloading the game before launch). But Sony? NOOOO, they want to make it as hard as possible for me to buy a brand new downloadable title or DLC that I want. Fuck you, Sony. Quiet honestly, if they didn't have piles and piles of great exclusives I want to play, I would have tossed my PS3 out on its ass a long time ago. Sony just doesn't fucking get it at a- HOLY SHIT NOW HE'S PLAYING TOMBA THIS IS THE BEST VIDEO ON THE INTERNET!!

Also, speaking of Grandia and Tomba, I still have my PS1 copies on disc. I can pop them into my PS3 right now and play them. But if I want to play on PSP, I have to buy them again? Da fuq? Same crap as UMD games for PSP. They don't care if you have the disc already, if you want a digital copy for your PSP go (hahahaha) or your Vita, you have to buy it again. But they can manage to come up with this Cross Buy program where if you buy a PS3 game that has a Vita port, you get the Vita port free? How about you Cross Buy my PS1 and PSP games too? Oh wait, here comes the piracy excuse. Thanks for reminding us about piracy Sony, because that's exactly how people are going to get their PS1 and PSP games without paying for them a second time.

Hannibal942:
Can someone please tell me what that music was in the beginning?

Also, you should go buy and play Grandia. Fuck that Final Fantasy 7 shit, Grandia is the best RPG on PS1 by FAR.

Well, a lot of the problem comes down to believe it or not, nationalism and racism. Now before anyone goes "OMG, Therumancer is going on an irrelevent rant" stop and think about something Jim himself mentioned. North America received 9 titles, Japan received 290 titles. The reason for is not just bigotry against the US, though that generally does enter into it, but also because they know the Japanese market will lap up anything they are handed by Sony. Better products aren't really an issue, because the Japanese will buy Japanese products and from Sony before they purchuse better products from other markets as a matter of national and racial pride. Very similar to how people tell you to buy American in the US, except they actually do it.

Demanding better products and services of Sony, just has them pull back into other markets, focusing on Japan where they kind of walk on water, or dealing with the European market that happily slurps up what they have handed, due to having been neglected in the past. It's easier for Sony to release an inferior produt and these crappy controls and systems to their home market (which is substantial for this) and Europe, than to deal with the standards of Americans in a market where they have more competition.

It's really a difficult kind of problem to deal with, though I do think that as a result of pulling back from the US market Sony has ultimatly been shooting itself in the foot and getting worse and worse, to the point where it's going to run out of options on the video gaming front due to the corner it's painting itself into. By retreating into markets that are less critical of them and their products, they are leaving themselves less options when competing products eventually break in, and really there are plans to try and break the racial and national barrier of Japan in the next generation, or at least try to according to some things I've read. I expect Microsoft's next gen gaming materials to be backed by an unprecedented wave of overseas advertising, of course that may or may not work because I don't think the motivating factor in the market is one that can be influanced by advertising since it's motivated by some darker cultural aspects.

A lot of people won't like what I'm saying, or agree with me, but in the end I don't think Jim's suggestion about piracy would work, as we're dealing with a company that increasingly seems to be pulling up stakes in the US Market, which is bad for gamers, as Sony still has it's moments of genius, but kind of understandable. I honestly don't think Sony plans to even try and compete with a lot of these more conveinent services, at least not for the forseeable future.

Oh nostalgia...

*dusts off PS3 and boots up Grandia*

Love that song...

So, points of interest:

1) Service and Convenience vs Legal-Technical Arm Tweaking
Needs no further evaluation. Sony went directly onto my shitlist the moment they started acting like they owned your PS3 (in all but legal title), and forced users to downgrade their systems or be locked out of future games.

I don't care how minor a loss that may look to someone; that's a ridiculous premise and a dangerous one at that. I don't know who at Sony is running their paranoid looney parade, but it's hardcore anti-piracy shit like this that lead to the major PSN breach last year.

Which is a pity, because the Vita is, at least in terms of gaming power, a GREAT potential system. But it's the managerial bullshit, and half-hearted offerings that's pissing off their customers.

2) It's not "monopoly".
Monopoly deals in market control. Absolute market control, specifically.
The correct word some of this topic is looking for is "proprietary": A form of product control, and NOT market control.
Products and markets are related, but different. Simple as.
(Though companies with monopolies might employ propriety in order to maintain their monopoly)

Sony is in a pluralist market currently, which disqualifies them as a monopoly. Perhaps not oligopoly though. Microsoft and Nintendo compete against them, and one could feasibly make a case for Nintendo not really competing against Sony as directly as they used to.

Therumancer:

Demanding better products and services of Sony, just has them pull back into other markets, focusing on Japan where they kind of walk on water, or dealing with the European market that happily slurps up what they have handed, due to having been neglected in the past. It's easier for Sony to release an inferior produt and these crappy controls and systems to their home market (which is substantial for this) and Europe, than to deal with the standards of Americans in a market where they have more competition.

That's the most insightful thing I've read in this topic, and if they are pulling back HARD to their domestics, then we're looking at a dangerous parallel between Sony and the other shrinking Japanese game publishers.

Nintendo was doing the same thing with their smaller franchises (read: not-Mario/Zelda/Pokemon), citing translation/localization costs when that isn't much of a bar for entry (both 3DS games I was looking forward to later this year: Pushed back to 2013. So once again my 3DS becomes an oversized MP3 player.)

I think the games industry is the only one that gets away with treating paying customers like utter shit, and people eagerly defending the shitty treatment they get for fear they might get even shittier.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here