Playstation Network

[Flip]

Im seriously behind on all things games and ive known this for the last 3 years, so dont reply as such because i know this is old news... asses.

I finally got wi-fi back in my house. I hadnt had it for the last year (since i moved from VA to DC) because the place i found to live in has magically working basic cable TV that we dont get charged for. As to not mess up a good thing, i didnt want to call comcast and ask about internet package deals or anything. My lesbian roommate is never home and she said she didnt care about Internet access at home so it was up to me to find a way online, which i did by getting a USB satellite doohicky through Sprint. I get a company discount with Sprint which makes the whole thing (packaged with my cell phone plan) super butt cheap. The downside was that only my laptop could access the internet. That all changed when i was at best buy and found a router that works with USB satellite doohickies for about $100 bucks. It was as easy as plugging them in and boom instant wi-fi like with a cable internet router. In fact, i think my Internet runs faster through the router than it ever did with the Sprint guy directly hooked up to the laptop, which i think is odd...

Regardless, that means now the PSP can have Internet again, woo! I downloaded the latest firmware update and browsed the super fun Sony Store. I bought Patapon 2 and looked at some of the PS1 titles i could get, too. I'm very impressed with this feature, to say the least. I know the Wii and PS3 have had this forever, but id never seen it until last night. My finger twitched above Castlevania:SotN and Street Fighter Alpha because i really wanted to buy them and think i probably will get SF:A the next time i have a minute to do so.

For someone who doesnt play a ton of games anymore, i like the idea of only spending 5-10 dollars for older games i never got around to playing (not SotN, i did play and beat that one) or for twitch ones that will entertain me for 15 minutes. The PSP, to me, is still beautiful in this manner and im happy that i will use it much more again, like when i first got it. To be able to download movies, games, and updates on the go is a nice way to insure that i wont ever get bored or that the PSP will not become obsolete. Does the new DSi let you download content?

[Kupek]

The DSi does let you download content, but there's not too much up right now that's worth downloading. They're giving out the equivalent of $10 in DSi Ware points with new DSis, so I grabbed Dr. Mario Express for what would have been $5. There's another simple puzzle game that's worth a download (from what I've read), and an old-school arcade style game that I've heard is decent.

There's a few other things, but none that seemed worth it to me. There's a web browser available for free, but the resolution on the DS is too low for it to be anything but a novelty.

I hope that GBA games will become a download option in the future. It's feasible, since it doesn't require emulation - the DSi's processor is the same architecture as the GBA. Emulating NES and GB games probably wouldn't pose a problem for the hardware, but SNES and above might be too much. SNES emulation might be possible, but not N64. They ported Super Mario 64 to the DS, but I doubt it could handle emulating N64 games.

[Zeus]

yeah, the Virtual Console / XBLA / WiiWare / PSN stuff is great. Not everyone wants a 100+ hour epic anymore and the games on those networks fill in the need nicely.

I think it's only a matter of time before the GBA stuff becomes available on the DSi. We may hear about it as early as E3. Most games are 32MB at most and the thing has 256MB built in with an SD expansion slot. As popular as the Virtual Console has been, it's a logical and likely inevitable step for Nintendo to take. Drop those games into the $8 to $10 range and it'll be a cash cow for them. Certain ones likely will not be possible (Yoshi's Touch and Go and Wario Ware Twisted come to mind; too bad, Twisted is the best of that series) but the vast majority of the games should be easily available.

[Blotus]

Be sure to get Pixeljunk Monsters when it becomes available for the PSP. Or, if you have one, get it for the PS3. It's an excellent tower defense game either by yourself or with a partner.

[Lox]

Be sure to get Pixeljunk Monsters when it becomes available for the PSP. Or, if you have one, get it for the PS3. It's an excellent tower defense game either by yourself or with a partner.

I have that, but I need to play it more. I can only play it by myself though because my friends are freaking experts and never let me make decisions.

[Flip]

Be sure to get Pixeljunk Monsters when it becomes available for the PSP. Or, if you have one, get it for the PS3. It's an excellent tower defense game either by yourself or with a partner.

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/04/29/pixel ... this-fall/

Looks like a fall release for the PSP with all the stuff in the original, expansion, and more.

[Flip]

Hmm, the more i look into things the more i see that a new PSP may be announced at this years E3 next month. One without a UMD drive, more internal storage, and all games going to download only through the Sony Store. You can convert your current UMD games to your device through kiosks placed in game stores. The new PSP and 100 new downloadable titles will release at the same time. Some really good games to be expected.

I like the idea, but it again may flop since it is too radical. The new PSP will probably be expensive and a lot of people still like their disks and may be afraid to change their habits.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/164057/n ... _june.html

[Zeus]

I like the idea, but it again may flop since it is too radical. The new PSP will probably be expensive and a lot of people still like their disks and may be afraid to change their habits.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/164057/n ... _june.html

It's not about changing habits, it's about the value proposition being changed with downloadable-only games. There are many people, including myself, who simply see downloadable-only games as less valuable than physical-media games and are not willing to pay the same price.

I don't want to get into the argument as to whether it is or not, I just want to point out an alternative to your "habit" assumption.

[Kupek]

Zeus, I think you're over-estimating how many people think about it the same way you do.

[Flip]

One of the commentators in that article makes a good point that Sony continues to push hardware at its customers. The PS3 is the best console in terms of raw power, but the market doesnt care. Downloadable games is the wave of the future as wi-fi and hot spots continue to blanket the globe, but again, the people may not be ready to adopt it.

I, on the other hand, like when technology pushes the envelope and am willing to embrace it, but thats in the minority. Developers simply go where the money is.

[Mental]

Every major console has downloadable games. I regularly download titles for my 360 and Wii all the time. As far as the power goes, I don't think it's the consumers so much as the developers who are hamstrung by the console requirements. It takes a lot of money to develop for a console that powerful. And finally, remember that not everyone can afford the PS3, which has a lot more to do with their market share than how demanded the system is. I'd have one if the price range were competitive with the other systems, so would a lot of people but I can't justify it the way it is.

[Zeus]

Zeus, I think you're over-estimating how many people think about it the same way you do.

Did I not post an article here showing a study where 75% thought the same way I do? The vast majority of people I know, including many "hardcore" gamers, value the physical media over the virtual one. Forget about the reasons why, we're only arguing whether or not I'm overestimating the percentage that agree with me.

Also, would you have paid $40 for Chrono Trigger downloadable as you did for the cart?

Whether you guys want to believe it or not, the reason digital distribution is being pushed so fucking hard by the publishers is not just to cut costs (there's strong arguments to be made to spend the little extra as it can generate a lot more coin potentially) it's also to cut out the used sales and to finally realize their dream of limited-use purchases (ie. you "buy" a DVD but can only use it for 3 months). The companies have been fighting used sales in courts for many, many years and lost - badly - all over the world (do you guys remember the court battles in Japan about 5 years ago the game companies got pwnd on? That also happened in the US). They see each used sale as a lost full sale. Yes it's completely delusional, but that's how they view it. So what they're doing is trying to come up with alternative methods of realizing the "true potential" of their game sales (rather than, say, proper pricing structures for games appealing to different demographics or even based on appeal within genres, a strategy which is being employed now out of necessity but is only in its infancy).

So they're trying to push this technology on you not only to save costs but also to more fully control the use and distribution of their product. This isn't an opinion, this is fact. You think they like it when I sell Panzer Dragoon Saga for $150 on Ebay? Ignoring the fact that they can re-release anytime, they still don't want me to have that ability to resell their product. That's "stealing" in their eyes too since someone other than them is making money off of their product. They want me to pay for the use of it on their terms.

They've been trying this forever and digital distribution is the new method of trying to get this done.

[Mental]

I don't see game companies as moving towards a limited-use model, but pay-to-play and DLC are moving in fast.

Pay-to-play can be done well or badly. The PtP models that I shun are the ones that confer serious in-game advantage to players who pay more...I don't mind a flat rate as I understand server costs can be high.

DLC can also be done well or badly. I don't mind paying for episodic content. I *do* mind when I feel like I'm being denied part of the game mechanics because I didn't pay an extra fee - i.e., special characters or classes that you have to pay extra to download. Final Fantasy: My Life As King on the Wii did that, and I just felt so much like a second-class player that it infuriated me. I'd already paid fifteen dollars for a game I felt was worth about that much, and they wanted me to pay 40 to actually unlock the content that made the last part fun.

It has to do with whether or not the game is deliberately crippled if you don't pay extra, or if it's a real value-add. I'll pay for a value-add. But if I pay for a crippled game and feel I'm being asked to pay extra for a less crippled game, I'm going to avoid that publisher in the future.

[Julius Seeker]

Micro-expansions is just a new take on large expansions that have existed for a while. Maxis and Blizzard familiarized everyone with those... You could have spent 50 bucks on the Sims basic pack, or $280 for the full experience; or take the expansions you want. I guess more recently would be Guitar Hero and Rock Band. I am fine with games done this way personally.

As for download only systms. You have the iPhone which has had over a billion downloads since it lauched the app store last Summer; people have become rich off of it for developing their own games. I could see this becoming the way of handhelds very soon.

As Zeus pointed out though; a lot of traditional gamers are fairly ignorant about the value of data based on where it is stored. With downloadability, applications can be even cheaper than used games as you're cutting a LOT of cost without releasing a cheaper product.

[Zeus]

I don't see game companies as moving towards a limited-use model, but pay-to-play and DLC are moving in fast.

Pay-to-play can be done well or badly. The PtP models that I shun are the ones that confer serious in-game advantage to players who pay more...I don't mind a flat rate as I understand server costs can be high.

DLC can also be done well or badly. I don't mind paying for episodic content. I *do* mind when I feel like I'm being denied part of the game mechanics because I didn't pay an extra fee - i.e., special characters or classes that you have to pay extra to download. Final Fantasy: My Life As King on the Wii did that, and I just felt so much like a second-class player that it infuriated me. I'd already paid fifteen dollars for a game I felt was worth about that much, and they wanted me to pay 40 to actually unlock the content that made the last part fun.

It has to do with whether or not the game is deliberately crippled if you don't pay extra, or if it's a real value-add. I'll pay for a value-add. But if I pay for a crippled game and feel I'm being asked to pay extra for a less crippled game, I'm going to avoid that publisher in the future.

Capcom announced the MM9 "add ons" before the game was released. That's the bullshit I think you're referring to which I definitely will never reward a company for.

On a little side note: you are denied the multiplayer games on 360 if you don't pay the extra fee. It's like including a part of the game on the disc but forcing you to pay to use it (hello, NFS Carbon). Same shit, different pile as your little "crippling" beef above. But enough of that, don't highjack this thread going off on this topic again.

Hey, episodic content is great. I think Telltale's model with Sam and Max is awesome. You pay what, $8 for 4 or 5 hours and you get a different one every 2-3 months? Ain't nothing wrong with that. The problem is when the companies are trying to tack it on to an antiquated business model. You can't charge $60+ for a game AND expect these add-ons to sell on top of it all the time. It's only for the AAA titles. And some games just ain't worth $60. How well do you think Katamari Damacy would have sold if it was any more than $20?

Pay-to-play is OK as well...if the value is right. I don't believe in paying $60 for a full game then paying $15 a month to play it. That's bullshit (*stares at Blizzard*). But if they give me the game for free and I have to spend a couple bucks here and there to do some things, that can be OK. As long as it's not too ridiculous.

I think before the misconception goes too far, I need to clear something up: I don't hate DLC or digital distribution. I think it's all fine. It just doesn't have the same value proposition as physical media, that's all.