then launch the digital store in a way that makes it impossible to access from a jailbroken 3DS.
- which is a stupid strategy by the way. But when is a response to jailbreaking ever smart?
They've also got a digital store, which they're holding back with a later firmware update. I imagine the strategy is to let the system get jailbroken, get everyone comfortable with that, then launch the digital store in a way that makes it impossible to access from a jailbroken 3DS.
In any case, there's no reason for Fils-Aime to be complaining like this, since Nintendo will most likely have a much tighter hold one digital game prices in its store than Apple or Android. If they say digitally downloaded 3DS games must be at least $10 or $20 dollars, the devs must oblige (probably without complaint). So his speech is all bluster.
you shouldn't expect Zelda for $2, nor should you expect a flash game for $30.
That's reasonable, except there are a lot of free Flash games that are as big as Zelda. So what then?
Anyway, I don't know what the context is either, but I strongly suspect that he's bracing for a weak 3DS launch by finding something to blame beforehand. That way he has an excuse he can point to for his shareholders.
The fear is somewhat different here - in some genre cases it's technology which is allowing games that should be priced at least around $10 to be priced much lower by developers who aren't aware of the value of their product. In other genre cases, it's large companies feeding into this cycle by spending parts of their budget on fancier games intended to be loss-leaders for their AAA title.
The first case is less a danger to the "Ditkas" out there; it's those developers shooting themselves in the foot by devaluing their own product. As they grow, costs are going to rise while the tech they're on will stay essentially the same. Quality will go up art-wise and content-wise, but mobile game customers value gimmicks over polish, so their higher-priced follow-up game is going to be in a tight spot. With a decentralized market that has no authority behind it, it becomes very difficult for devs to just decide "okay we've enticed our customers, now it's time to sell our product for what it's worth" when that shift isn't happening around them. 'Divided we fall' and all that.
In the second case, it's bigger devs will less of a stake in this market (these are the real McD's and Burger Kings - dollar menus are loss leaders after all), helping to perpetuate a culture of devalued content. There's a reason you don't see independent burger stands that sell hamburgers for a dollar. Or I could go with a Walmart analogy or something. It's similar to that, except in this case, the small devs are too naive to realize there's a problem here yet.
Yeah, Nintendo sounds whiny here and I have little sympathy for them. This is really just them preemptively inventing an excuse for their shareholders, when it turns out the 3DS is way too expensive for the demographic it's going to be sold to. But just because Fils-Aime is full of it doesn't make the mobile game pricing problem nonexistent.
A nice explaination, but not covered by reality.
Wait wait wait. Wait wait. Hold up. Waitasec. Whoa.
...do you even know how digital things work? Gwiz's explanation covered some really basic, kindergarten stuff.
And why would that even mean they wouldn't have music newer than 2001? Do you believe artists stopped making digitally downloadable music after 2001? Have you ever been to iTunes in your life?
Well, honestly we won't know if this will make their job harder or easier. What we DO know is that these zero tolerance policies are going to make it impossible for law enforcement to figure that out either. The second they get a sense of how to handle Facebook-related prostitution, it's going to get grandstanded off the site. Which puts law enforcement right back at square one. That's the real problem.
It's true that, in taking the long view, litigation is counterproductive. But keep in mind that a lot of businessmen who sue for copyright infringement do so on principle. Having a good or bad strategy is not as important as being "right", and having a judge say so.
On the flipside, maybe they'll get lucky. If enough people agree with Google's assessment that Bing is "cheating" - a somewhat easy sell considering it's Microsoft we're talking about - then the whole social mores thing comes into play and it all works out. I'm a bit skeptical that they can simply get away with that happening, since criticism of Google has been going up in recent months, which evens the playing field between the two. But hey, if it means not having to change their public image, they might as well take the risk..
It was bluster, true. But it was childish bluster and they could've spun it better than they did. Yes the results speak for themselves, yes many people like yourself are perfectly able to look at those results sans context and recognize that Bing is ethically in the wrong (or at least at the lower spectrum between the two). That doesn't change the context of Google's response nor the perception that context will generate. Perception is reality for many. That makes it important. Google is historically terrible at recognizing this, so pointing it out to them is probably the best thing we can do.
Yeah, I feel like they missed a chance to throw an amusing and snarky jab at their competitor. "Oh, I see Bing is using our data to improve their searches. How is that working out for you Bing? Are your searches slightly better now that you're finally getting some help from us?"
Instead they come off as impetulant. Saying it's cheating in particular IS something I'd call 'odd'. I don't really have a conception of what "cheating" means in the business world. Isn't any legal tactic up for grabs? How do you 'cheat' then without breaking the law? It's silly. It doesn't help their image that there's a popular view that only the players who lose the race will accuse someone of cheating. So is Google implying that they're losing? Not a smart strategy.
But then, programmers aren't exactly the best PR people, are they? Maybe they honestly don't realize what they're saying.
From a business standpoint though, it makes more sense to side with the government that exists than the government that's just a twinkle in the peoples' eye. At least for now.
And as long as the new regime isn't psychotic, they can always timidly claim forcible coercion.
I think most judges understand the concept of murder. If a judge recognized that he didn't understand what murder was, then I would hope that judge would have the sense to remove himself from a murder case. And possible from any sharp objects or firearms for that matter.
On the post: Recording Industry Persecution Complex: Claiming EMI's Plight Is Due To File Sharing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Or does that count as stealing because the bands are shirking your system?
On the post: Nintendo President: The Free Market Is Not A Game We Like To Play
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Small correction
- which is a stupid strategy by the way. But when is a response to jailbreaking ever smart?
On the post: Nintendo President: The Free Market Is Not A Game We Like To Play
Re: Re: Re: Re: Small correction
In any case, there's no reason for Fils-Aime to be complaining like this, since Nintendo will most likely have a much tighter hold one digital game prices in its store than Apple or Android. If they say digitally downloaded 3DS games must be at least $10 or $20 dollars, the devs must oblige (probably without complaint). So his speech is all bluster.
On the post: Nintendo President: The Free Market Is Not A Game We Like To Play
Re:
That's reasonable, except there are a lot of free Flash games that are as big as Zelda. So what then?
Anyway, I don't know what the context is either, but I strongly suspect that he's bracing for a weak 3DS launch by finding something to blame beforehand. That way he has an excuse he can point to for his shareholders.
On the post: Nintendo President: The Free Market Is Not A Game We Like To Play
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The first case is less a danger to the "Ditkas" out there; it's those developers shooting themselves in the foot by devaluing their own product. As they grow, costs are going to rise while the tech they're on will stay essentially the same. Quality will go up art-wise and content-wise, but mobile game customers value gimmicks over polish, so their higher-priced follow-up game is going to be in a tight spot. With a decentralized market that has no authority behind it, it becomes very difficult for devs to just decide "okay we've enticed our customers, now it's time to sell our product for what it's worth" when that shift isn't happening around them. 'Divided we fall' and all that.
In the second case, it's bigger devs will less of a stake in this market (these are the real McD's and Burger Kings - dollar menus are loss leaders after all), helping to perpetuate a culture of devalued content. There's a reason you don't see independent burger stands that sell hamburgers for a dollar. Or I could go with a Walmart analogy or something. It's similar to that, except in this case, the small devs are too naive to realize there's a problem here yet.
Yeah, Nintendo sounds whiny here and I have little sympathy for them. This is really just them preemptively inventing an excuse for their shareholders, when it turns out the 3DS is way too expensive for the demographic it's going to be sold to. But just because Fils-Aime is full of it doesn't make the mobile game pricing problem nonexistent.
On the post: Recording Industry Persecution Complex: Claiming EMI's Plight Is Due To File Sharing
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Wait wait wait. Wait wait. Hold up. Waitasec. Whoa.
...do you even know how digital things work? Gwiz's explanation covered some really basic, kindergarten stuff.
And why would that even mean they wouldn't have music newer than 2001? Do you believe artists stopped making digitally downloadable music after 2001? Have you ever been to iTunes in your life?
On the post: EU: ACTA Is A Binding Treaty; US: ACTA Is Neither Binding, Nor A Treaty
Re: Re:
On the post: Prostitutes Have Just Moved From Craigslist To Facebook
Re: Re: Re: This will make i tharder to fight
On the post: Prostitutes Have Just Moved From Craigslist To Facebook
Re: This will make i tharder to fight
On the post: Music Publisher Discovers A Song In Its Catalog Has Been Heavily Sampled For Decades... Sues Everyone
Re: Missed opportunity
On the post: Music Publisher Discovers A Song In Its Catalog Has Been Heavily Sampled For Decades... Sues Everyone
Re:
On the post: Ryanair Shrugs Off Discovery That Others Can Edit Your Flight Booking; Says It's Your Problem
On the post: Google's Childish Response To Microsoft Using Google To Increase Bing Relevance
Re: Re: out of line
On the post: Google's Childish Response To Microsoft Using Google To Increase Bing Relevance
Re: out of line
On the post: Google's Childish Response To Microsoft Using Google To Increase Bing Relevance
Re: Re:
Instead they come off as impetulant. Saying it's cheating in particular IS something I'd call 'odd'. I don't really have a conception of what "cheating" means in the business world. Isn't any legal tactic up for grabs? How do you 'cheat' then without breaking the law? It's silly. It doesn't help their image that there's a popular view that only the players who lose the race will accuse someone of cheating. So is Google implying that they're losing? Not a smart strategy.
But then, programmers aren't exactly the best PR people, are they? Maybe they honestly don't realize what they're saying.
On the post: Google's Childish Response To Microsoft Using Google To Increase Bing Relevance
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Google's Childish Response To Microsoft Using Google To Increase Bing Relevance
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: The Impact Of Egypt Cutting Itself Off From The Internet
Re:
And as long as the new regime isn't psychotic, they can always timidly claim forcible coercion.
On the post: The Impact Of Egypt Cutting Itself Off From The Internet
Re:
On the post: The PS3 Hack Injunction Shows The Problems Of Judges Who Don't Understand Technology
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>