Epic: Xbox 720 needs to kill our "over-reliance" on "pieces of spinning plastic"

[Soldier 95B]

And to all the people advocating for day 1 retail game downloads, do you really think Sony/MS/Nintendo have the resources and bandwidth to allow the downloading of games by hundreds of thousands (possibly millions) of gamers in a short span of time (pre downloads like steam does) around release?

Sony already does it.

And since its likely MS will adopt blu-ray with the next xbox, games sizes should increase as well.

I doubt that. I think they are going to avoid the old legacy formats of optical for a new medium.

[MATRIX 2]

Sony already does it.



I doubt that. I think they are going to avoid the old legacy formats of optical for a new medium.

Ok, and how many people take up sony on that offer? Just imagne what would happen with exclusive pre order content/bonuses offered to people who downloaded the games off of PSN/XBL.

Sure a few people may elect to DL the games online, but the vast majority buy physical copies.

And we've been over the blu-ray thing. It isn't cost effective for MS not to use an optical disc like blu-ray and MS isn't one to ignore industry standards, like Blu-Ray.

[Soldier 95B]

Ok, and how many people take up sony on that offer? Just imagne what would happen with exclusive pre order content/bonuses offered to people who downloaded the games off of PSN/XBL.

Sure a few people may elect to DL the games online, but the vast majority buy physical copies.

And we've been over the blu-ray thing. It isn't cost effective for MS not to use an optical disc like blu-ray and MS isn't one to ignore industry standards, like Blu-Ray.

Opinion noted. Agree to disagree.

[radgamer420]

Opinion noted. Agree to disagree.

lol

[Soldier 95B]

lol

rofl

[radgamer420]

rofl

lmao

[MATRIX 2]

Opinion noted. Agree to disagree.

I don't get how you see it any other way.

The cheapest flash media @ 64Gb that has read speeds that can match the top end for Blu-Ray (60MB/s) is ~$80.

Even if SONY/MS paid 1/5 that cost, they would still shell out ~$20.

The cheapest 50GB blu-ray disc available is $5.99 per disc.


Even at retail that is just over 1/3 rd the cost, never mind paying 1/5th of that (~$1.20)


It is even worse for flash memory when you try to match it to BD XL sizes. (100GB and beyond)

[admartian]

I don't get how you see it any other way.

The cheapest flash media @ 64Gb that has read speeds that can match the top end for Blu-Ray (60MB/s) is ~$80.

Even if SONY/MS paid 1/5 that cost, they would still shell out ~$20.

The cheapest 50GB blu-ray disc available is $5.99 per disc.


Even at retail that is just over 1/3 rd the cost, never mind paying 1/5th of that (~$1.20)


It is even worse for flash memory when you try to match it to BD XL sizes. (100GB and beyond)

I absolutely agree. And not because I am unable to partake in a wholly DD games industry.

Personally, I would love to be able to purchase movies, TV shows, music and games alike; all online. However, both the NZ government AND US companies (i.e. Netflix) are playing hardball with us consumers and giving $h1tty excuses as to not to provide us this services. But this could take a whole other thread.

Anyway, I don't see how companies can suddenly have these magic servers that don't strain and are cheap to run.

Sony does it now, but only with Plus subscribers. And not many people do that in itself. So it's a fraction of a fraction of fraction, of the entire gaming industry that partakes in full retail game downloads.

[keefy]

Ok, and how many people take up sony on that offer? Just imagne what would happen with exclusive pre order content/bonuses offered to people who downloaded the games off of PSN/XBL.

Sure a few people may elect to DL the games online, but the vast majority buy physical copies.

And we've been over the blu-ray thing. It isn't cost effective for MS not to use an optical disc like blu-ray and MS isn't one to ignore industry standards, like Blu-Ray.

All this bandwidth and netspeed nonsense was debated in 2003 and back then we all had far worse internet than we do now and even then it was doomed to fail.

[MATRIX 2]

All this bandwidth and netspeed nonsense was debated in 2003 and back then we all had far worse internet than we do now and even then it was doomed to fail.

Last I checked, Comcast didn't have data caps in 03. They do in 2012. That's nearly 20 million people with internet connections that can potentially limit what they can do with them. And that's just one example.

There are also a ton of people in the US with relatively slow DSL connections.

It goes on and on.

Another thing people forget, is that DRM is an even bigger issue with digital files. You pretty much have to hope that the companies don't screw thing up. (like requiring a persistent internet connection for the games to run)

[Vulgotha]

Yea, here in the US we're getting screwed hard by ISP's. I'm with Matrix and co on this.

Additionally, you guys need to realize that we are NOT repeat NOT going to get a 'fair shake' with this. I mean from a consumer point of view.

Case in point, look at the cost of XBL titles on "Games on Demand"- even old ones. It's stupid. Most of them are far more expensive than their physical counter parts at various outlets (amazon, gamestop, etc) and in no way should they be.

Even with the PS Vita and how it runs a hybrid system- DL and physical copies- the discount for consumers who buy it off PSN is pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. If you actually do the math (the cost of storage per GB on the Vita cards and the fee for buying it online) you find out that simply buying the physical cart at a local store is cheaper.

They screw you coming and going. And this is besides the ISP nonsense.

Bandwidth is actually quite cheap. But most people don't know that, especially in the US. For various reasons Internet deals here in the US are complete rubbish, same with smart phone plans. The major players dominate the market and the average consumer is too stupid to know any better. I'm sure that the ISP's would LOVE for gaming and HD movies to go download only- they'd make an absolute killing. Or, possibly (not sure how likely), users will realize the raw deal they're getting and demand increases in service.

Either way they rob us blind in the mean time and in the short term.

So until we resolve this bullshit I'm against pure digital.

[J3ff3]

exactly. less flexibility, less choice and likely more cost. yay DD!

[Soldier 95B]

Give me either DD or start releasing games on a Flash format. I'm done with disks and their slow load times


BBK. Tapatalking.

Yup that is what I am talkin bout. Hellz yeah. Tired of this legacy crap. Might as well just have games on 8 track, lol.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Vulgotha]

Actually what I wrote has been turned into an article I decided to pump out due to my endless amount of love for writing:

The Rantings of a Mildly Perturbed Futurist


Here in the US we're getting screwed hard by ISP's. Period.


Consumers need to realize that they are NOT repeat NOT going to get a 'fair shake' with this.


Case in point, look at the cost of XBL titles with their "Games on Demand" service - even old ones. It's stupid. Most of them are far more expensive than their physical counter parts at various outlets (amazon, gamestop, etc) and in no way should they be. Only a handful are actually competitively priced.


Even with the PS Vita and how it runs a hybrid system- DL and physical copies- the discount for consumers (10%) who buy it off PSN is pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. If you actually do the math (the cost of storage per GB on the Vita memory cards and the fee for buying it online) you find out that simply buying the physical cart at a local store is cheaper. Which of course makes no sense, especially given the relative expense of using carts (as opposed to optical storage).


They screw you coming and going. And this is besides the ISP nonsense with their rates and datacaps.


Bandwidth is actually quite cheap. But most people don't know that, especially in the US. For various reasons Internet deals here in the US are complete rubbish, same with smart phone plans. The major players dominate the market and the average consumer is too stupid to know any better. I'm sure that the ISP's would LOVE for gaming and HD movies to go download only- they'd make an absolute killing. Or, possibly (not sure how likely), users will realize the raw deal they're getting and demand increases in service.


Either way they rob us blind.


So until we resolve this nonsense I remain a skeptic of a "Digital Only" model. Not to mention the fact that without an internet connection the utility of your computer is fairly limited under such a model, as you can be quite certain that there will be DRM in place for these download titles. Honestly I think it will be fairly unlikely that you simply purchase a movie from the Fox Universal store as "Prometheus.AVI" and shove it in a folder. No, they would never allow this. More than likely you'd see a specific program required to play it and verify the machine it's on, which requires an internet connection, and/or a constantly online DRM policy. Meaning if you're not online you don't get content. This has already been done with Activision Blizzard for their MMORPG World of Warcraft, and have a similar system in place with Starcraft II, COD, (no offline LAN gaming). Diablo 3 ,which will hit shelves next Tuesday (woot!), will also have to be connected online 24/7 to work. Also we can't forget the huge debacle Ubisoft had with their online-only policy for the PC version of Assassin's Creed 2- their servers went offline for awhile and users could literally not play the game they shelled out cash for. Whoops! So think on it, because I promise that your best interest mean absolutely nothing to the players pushing this model.


Above: How you should feel after reading this

[admartian]

Actually what I wrote has been turned into an article I decided to pump out due to my endless amount of love for writing:

The Rantings of a Mildly Perturbed Futurist


Here in the US we're getting screwed hard by ISP's. Period.


Consumers need to realize that they are NOT repeat NOT going to get a 'fair shake' with this.


Case in point, look at the cost of XBL titles with their "Games on Demand" service - even old ones. It's stupid. Most of them are far more expensive than their physical counter parts at various outlets (amazon, gamestop, etc) and in no way should they be. Only a handful are actually competitively priced.


Even with the PS Vita and how it runs a hybrid system- DL and physical copies- the discount for consumers (10%) who buy it off PSN is pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. If you actually do the math (the cost of storage per GB on the Vita memory cards and the fee for buying it online) you find out that simply buying the physical cart at a local store is cheaper. Which of course makes no sense, especially given the relative expense of using carts (as opposed to optical storage).


They screw you coming and going. And this is besides the ISP nonsense with their rates and datacaps.


Bandwidth is actually quite cheap. But most people don't know that, especially in the US. For various reasons Internet deals here in the US are complete rubbish, same with smart phone plans. The major players dominate the market and the average consumer is too stupid to know any better. I'm sure that the ISP's would LOVE for gaming and HD movies to go download only- they'd make an absolute killing. Or, possibly (not sure how likely), users will realize the raw deal they're getting and demand increases in service.


Either way they rob us blind.


So until we resolve this nonsense I remain a skeptic of a "Digital Only" model. Not to mention the fact that without an internet connection the utility of your computer is fairly limited under such a model, as you can be quite certain that there will be DRM in place for these download titles. Honestly I think it will be fairly unlikely that you simply purchase a movie from the Fox Universal store as "Prometheus.AVI" and shove it in a folder. No, they would never allow this. More than likely you'd see a specific program required to play it and verify the machine it's on, which requires an internet connection, and/or a constantly online DRM policy. Meaning if you're not online you don't get content. This has already been done with Activision Blizzard for their MMORPG World of Warcraft, and have a similar system in place with Starcraft II, COD, (no offline LAN gaming). Diablo 3 ,which will hit shelves next Tuesday (woot!), will also have to be connected online 24/7 to work. Also we can't forget the huge debacle Ubisoft had with their online-only policy for the PC version of Assassin's Creed 2- their servers went offline for awhile and users could literally not play the game they shelled out cash for. Whoops! So think on it, because I promise that your best interest mean absolutely nothing to the players pushing this model.


Above: How you should feel after reading this

Nice post.

I'm sure this translates worldwide (at least first world) just tovarying degrees.

I certainly agree with that.

[$Greatness$]

Yea, here in the US we're getting screwed hard by ISP's. I'm with Matrix and co on this.

Additionally, you guys need to realize that we are NOT repeat NOT going to get a 'fair shake' with this. I mean from a consumer point of view.

Case in point, look at the cost of XBL titles on "Games on Demand"- even old ones. It's stupid. Most of them are far more expensive than their physical counter parts at various outlets (amazon, gamestop, etc) and in no way should they be.

Even with the PS Vita and how it runs a hybrid system- DL and physical copies- the discount for consumers who buy it off PSN is pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. If you actually do the math (the cost of storage per GB on the Vita cards and the fee for buying it online) you find out that simply buying the physical cart at a local store is cheaper.

They screw you coming and going. And this is besides the ISP nonsense.

Bandwidth is actually quite cheap. But most people don't know that, especially in the US. For various reasons Internet deals here in the US are complete rubbish, same with smart phone plans. The major players dominate the market and the average consumer is too stupid to know any better. I'm sure that the ISP's would LOVE for gaming and HD movies to go download only- they'd make an absolute killing. Or, possibly (not sure how likely), users will realize the raw deal they're getting and demand increases in service.

Either way they rob us blind in the mean time and in the short term.

So until we resolve this bullshit I'm against pure digital.

And that's all I got to say about that!

[acryllicaltair]

rarely play online, rarely go online with the console, i just like having a good time with friends when they come over. So when they start saying a console has to be online to be used, thats when i question. I pay for the data i use because it is cheaper than getting a tonne of data i dont need to use, and i dont see why it is i should have a console and have to be online to use it. not at current moment

[Blacksite]

The majority of people won't adopt a pure digital download model. And it's not just because of internet speeds but that most people, including myself, simply enjoy purchasing a physical copy. That's how we grew up playing video games. Even Steam allows you to play your video games offline, provided you tweak the settings. Maybe Epic should spend less time talking about the future of the industry and more time talking about their games.

[btbam]

They cant be rid of disks until people have a strong and stable connections to download. I live in the county...internet speeds cap out about 12mbs. Ina house with 4 people the str is diluted more. If they only offered downloadable games I could not play a majority of games. Theyd eliminate a number of customers that way. It needs to be a hybrid system u.til everybody has a stable connection.

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk

[faaeng]

I can see a hybrid model working out. Release physical media while also offering a DD at a discounted price.

DD only wouldn't work. Atleast not for me and many others. If I want to buy a new game, should I drive 15min away to grab a disk or download a 10/20/30+gb file that will take hours before Its finished downloading... then waiting for it to install too..... Physical disk can be taken to friends houses, sold, given away, loaned out to friends. You cant do any of that with a DD only model.

Also, they seriously need to do something about the prices. I see older games available on PSN that are MORE then how much they are new in retail stores... o_O?

Then theirs storage. How much storage would these devices have? What do you do when your out of space? What if your hdd crashes? Here's a big one for me. What happens to all of those games a few years after the next console? If you need/want to redownload a game you previously purchased. Can you? They won't be hosted online forever...

Once Console gaming goes DD ONLY, I'm done with it. I've other hobbies I can put my money towards instead.

[D3seeker]

^^ This! this is every concern everyone should have when it comes to DD only

[btbam]

I can see a hybrid model working out. Release physical media while also offering a DD at a discounted price.

DD only wouldn't work. Atleast not for me and many others. If I want to buy a new game, should I drive 15min away to grab a disk or download a 10/20/30+gb file that will take hours before Its finished downloading... then waiting for it to install too..... Physical disk can be taken to friends houses, sold, given away, loaned out to friends. You cant do any of that with a DD only model.

Also, they seriously need to do something about the prices. I see older games available on PSN that are MORE then how much they are new in retail stores... o_O?

Then theirs storage. How much storage would these devices have? What do you do when your out of space? What if your hdd crashes? Here's a big one for me. What happens to all of those games a few years after the next console? If you need/want to redownload a game you previously purchased. Can you? They won't be hosted online forever...

Once Console gaming goes DD ONLY, I'm done with it. I've other hobbies I can put my money towards instead.

I dont think you can charge a lower price for digital download. Youd basically give discounts to people who have stable connections which is a de facto price hike for those who dont. I know my state at least has laws preventing charging people different prices based on immutable characteristics.

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk

[MATRIX 2]

The majority of people won't adopt a pure digital download model. And it's not just because of internet speeds but that most people, including myself, simply enjoy purchasing a physical copy. That's how we grew up playing video games. Even Steam allows you to play your video games offline, provided you tweak the settings. Maybe Epic should spend less time talking about the future of the industry and more time talking about their games.

What games

/rimshot

They should rename epic games to Epic Game Engines.

I dont think you can charge a lower price for digital download. Youd basically give discounts to people who have stable connections which is a de facto price hike for those who dont. I know my state at least has laws preventing charging people different prices based on immutable characteristics.

Sent from my AT100 using Tapatalk

Pretty sure they could claim the discount based on the lack of physical media, shipping, distribution and insurance costs.

Assuming they ever pass on the discount to consumers of DD games.

[maltrophstitan]

And we've been over the blu-ray thing. It isn't cost effective for MS not to use an optical disc like blu-ray and MS isn't one to ignore industry standards, like Blu-Ray.

MS has been at the forefront of digital media into the living room. MS might look at Blu-ray as an unnecessary competition to that service and decide to go with an hd-dvd like disc format for games next generation.

[Blacksite]

What games

Exactly.