Friday Links!
Once again, we are positively loaded.
From Stephen Kreuch, and these are quite stunning pictures, it's
swimming with the crocodiles.
From Sirius, news of the discovery of a
possible treatment for Ebola. Also, stunning sculptures made from
vintage circuit boards. Next, and this is entirely awesome, it's
gateway to the Viking Empire discovered in Denmark.
From Brad Ruminer, a website that tracks the history of MIT students
hacking their campus.
A series of excellent links from David Byron. First, a terrific video of an excellent use for your big toe,
courtesy of Houdini (it's supposed to start at 6:25 into the clip, so don't be surprised when it does). Next, Italian authorities have cracked an
11M dollar art fraud ring. Finally, it's
Five Things You Didn't Know about John Tyler (most incredibly, that his grandchildren are still alive).
From DQ Fitness Advisor Doug Walsh, and I bet you'd never expected to see these three words in sequence, it's
Proper Opossum Pedicure. Also, this is quite spectacular, an article about
3-D images you can touch.
From Eric-Higgins Freese, and I think this is my favorite mash-up of all time, it's
Scott Pilgrim versus The Last Airbender.
From Amy Leigh, it's
15 Amazing Wii Controller Hacks and Modifications.
From David, and I think my head just exploded, it's
Hackers blind quantum cryptographers.
From the Edwin Garcia Links Machine, an astounding commercial from a bygone era:
Mattel's 1960s "Tommy Burst" t.v. commercial . It's the perfect toy for Christmas, as the "detective set" comes with the
"Tommy Burst" Tommy Gun, a snub-nose .38, and a "snap draw" shoulder holster. Epic.
From Kevin W, it's
high-speed bullet photography.
From Chris Mattos, and this is both stupidly dangerous and wonderful at the same time, it's
Wheelchair Double Back Flip (the first one ever, apparently).
From Brad Ruminer, a stunning video:
Asteroid Discovery From 1980 - 2010.
From Frank Donahue, and entirely bizarre invention:
World's most amazing subwoofer has no woofer.
From Jake Margolis, and this is utterly wonderful, it's
Sleep Talkin' Man.
From Jim, and there's no way this is real, but it's hilarious anyway:
The Ultimate Extreme Sport.
I think this might well be
the greatest headline ever.
From Keith Schleicher, and this is an outstanding way to close out the week, it's
Judy Collins sings 'Send In The Clowns' on the Muppet Show.
Elemental (again)
This is an extraordinary mea culpa from Brad Wardell. Full credit given:
forum post
Local Humor
Eli 9.1 has been changing his viewing habits in the last few months.
Before, he would come downstairs in the morning, flip on the television, and watch a Nickelodeon or Disney show.
Now, he comes downstairs, flips on the television, and watches SportsCenter.
Last night, there was a fly buzzing around the house, so I got the flyswatter out of the cupboard. I saw the fly, it landed, and I swatted it. Clean kill.
It was so unusually precise that Eli started laughing. "Boy," he said, "that's sure not going to wind up on FlyCenter's 'Top 10 Plays'."
The Right Of First Sale
Before we wade into the swamp that is the used games issue in general, I received an excellent e-mail from attorney Nhut Tan Tran concerning the Right Of First Sale doctrine.
Lost in all the emotion about used games vs. new games and purchase rights for consumers under the first sale doctrine is that you have, for software, you can override the doctrine of first sale by the copyright owner's right to restrict via a contractual relationship.The "sale" of a piece of software is a complicated transaction and those that use upon the affirmative defense of the first sale doctrine leaves themselves vulnerable to the fact the "sale relationship" opens them up to the privity of contract between the two parties.
This is what Nimmer, the pre-eminent scholar on Copyrights says (please note that I am paraphrasing his position, and that this is a quote from a much larger article from Nimmer on Copyrights):
"License agreements focus on information and informational rights. Many licenses do not involve transfer of any tangible property. In other transactions, however, the licensed information is delivered on tangible media (goods) or the intellectual property rights cover the tangible property (e.g., patented machine). In these cases, issues can arise about whether delivery of the goods pursuant to a license constitutes a first sale of the copy under copyright law, is a first sale of genuine trademarked goods under trademark law or creates a case of patent exhaustion under patent law.
In general, a transfer of ownership of goods that constitute a copy of the informational property, that are sold under a trademark or that embody the invention, does not in itself transfer ownership of intellectual property or other information-related interests.1 This theme is present in all bodies of intellectual property law. It creates an environment in which possession (even ownership) of a tangible thing does not in itself communicate much or anything about the right of the possessor to use or claim ownership of the intellectual property rights involved. The basic principle is expressed in section 202 of the Copyright Act in the following terms:Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied. Transfer of ownership of any material object, including the copy or phonorecord in which the work is first fixed, does not of itself convey any rights in the copyrighted work embodied in the object; nor, in the absence of an agreement, does transfer of ownership of a copyright or of any exclusive rights under a copyright convey property rights in any material object.
The separation of tangible and intangible property highlighted by this language is a central feature of licensing law and practice. It is also one basis for the rejection of ideas of bona fide purchaser status stemming from mere possession and control of a copy...The first-sale doctrines do not involve transfers of rights ownership. Nor do the doctrines deal with or limit the enforceability of contractual terms. Indeed, the reverse relationship exists: the terms of the contract determine when or whether a first sale or sale establishing exhaustion of the patent occurs. The first-sale rules merely set out limited defense to claims of property rights infringement, but those exemptions can be important in determining the remedies available to a licensor or property rights owner, especially with respect to claims against remote third parties."
Also, my understanding is that Congress explicitly recognized that a copyright holder can sue his direct customer for breach even if, for the very same act, he cannot sue for copyright infringement. The legislative history indicates that Congress designed the first sale doctrine as a default rule that copyright owners could override by contract. See Aymes v. Bonelli, 47 F.3d 23, 26-27, 33 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1768, 1771 (2d Cir. 1995) (noting that the CONTU Report to Congress proposing Section 117 conceded that "should proprietors feel strongly that they do not want rightful possessors of copies of their programs to [adapt software], they could, of course, make such desires a contractual matter").
Although I'm partial to gamers, as I'm one myself, I'm going to go with Nimmer's interpretation of copyright rights considering Supreme Court Justices quote him sometimes.
Now, if I'm understanding this correctly, many of the issues that Nimmer raises will be resolved with a final ruling in the
Vernor v. Autodesk case, which is currently on appeal. The ruling handed down by the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, though, was in favor of the consumer's rights:
The court held that when the transfer of software to the purchaser materially resembled a sale (non-recurring price, right to perpetual possession of copy) it was, in fact, a "sale with restrictions on use"[1] giving rise to a right to resell the copy under the first-sale doctrine.
Given how downright hostile the present Supreme Court has been to consumer's rights, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this is overruled, should it reach them (right now, it's in the hands of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit).
The interesting question is what would happen to the gaming market if it
were illegal to sell used games? Given how money from the sale of used games flows through, in many cases, to the purchase of new games, does anyone think this would be positive for the gaming market?
Here's a bizarre scenario. Let's fast forward to the future, where the Vernorcase actually has reached the Supreme Court, and the gaming industry figures out,with advanced mathematical reasoning from the future, that making the sale of used games illegal will cut their industry by a third.
That could lead to my favorite irony of all time: the ESA submitting an amicus curiae brief to the Supreme Court, urging them to keep the sale of used games legal.
Madden: The Very Smart and the Less Than Smart
Madden's two-minute A.I. is nothing short of remarkable. Considering it was crap last year, that's quite an achievement, and whoever rewrote that code should be congratulated.
Here's an example. I was watching a game yesterday where the team was ahead by three points, with twelve seconds left in the game. They had the ball on the opponent's 28 yard line, and it was fourth down. The opponent had no timeouts left.
That's a tough situation for any A.I.
The team lined up to kick a field goal, which is defensible as a decision, but then the offense drew an illegal procedure penalty. Now it would be a 50 yard field goal.
Normally, if the penalty takes the kick distance outside range, then the decision toggles to a punt. In this case, though, considering the time remaining and no timeouts for the opponent, the smarter decision would be to run a play. An outside handoff, in particular, to run a few seconds off the clock with almost no risk.
I've never seen an A.I. do that in thirty years of playing football games.
Then the offense lined up--and ran a play. An outside running play.
The opponent took over on downs, but didn't have enough time to get into position to kick a field goal.
Genius.
So the two-minute A.I. is fabulous, but in other places, the game is rough. There so many pass coverage busts that have nothing to do with reaction time (making them not adjustable by slider settings) that the number of big plays is far too high. It completely unbalances the game.
I'm confident that the pass coverage will be adjusted in a patch, but it's frustrating to have something like this crop up every year. It seems like I wait for months to actually play the finished version of this game, and by the time it is finished, I'm not interested anymore.
So I'm in the strange position of working on Madden sliders in some depth, but spending all of my actual playing time with Backbreaker.
Why You're Not Reading about Used Games Yet
I apologize for the delay in putting up this post, but the issue is huge. Everyone tends to focus on one facet of the issue, but it's multi-layered, and I really want to do it justice. Hence, the delay.
My Favorite Story
LP Miller sent me a terrific story after I posted the "Star Wars Silent Film" link last week.
Back when I was nine or so, around 1979, I was in a summer school astronomy class. Well, it was called astronomy, but the teacher was kind of a way out sci fi-nerd, seriously into UFOs and whatever. We actually went on a field trip to a UFO exhibit at one point, and listened to a lot of taped lectures about them.
At any rate, he was also a big Star Wars fan. I had seen the movie exactly once, one year after it came out, because when it first came out, we were in the process of moving from California to Minnesota.
Anyway, my teacher had a friend who had bootleg copies of sci-fi movies. One day, they set up the projector and we watched a bootleg of Star Wars.
Only it was in black and white. And it had no sound.
Instead, it was subtitled. I don't know recall the exact particulars of it - my memory tells me it had special effects, but I could be mistaken. But I distinctly remember the black and white and the subtitles, and I distinctly remember all of us waiting for the bus afterwards, discussing the merits of owning our own Millenium Falcon. I recall one of them was a tiny little girl with crazy hair and green eyes.
Years later, in my twenties, I was mentioning this to my wife. Now, I had dated my wife pretty much from the moment I met her in high school, or so I thought. As I was explaining the movie experience, she jerks upright and exclaimed "Yeah, and it was in subtitles!"
Turns out I had actually met my future wife in fourth grade sumer school. Watching a silent, black and white film called Star Wars.
Elemental Update
After I made the Elemental post last week, I received an interesting and varied assortment of e-mail.I'm going to use most of these excerpts anonymously, because I didn't ask people for permission (with one exception), but I think it gives you a window into how conflicted people are about this game.
First, as a brief discussion before we get to the game itself (which, in the end, should always be what's most important), there were a few strongly-worded e-mails about what I wrote about Brad Wardell. Two, in particular, are interesting. Here's an excerpt from the first:
The patch on the 23rd was a no-win situation for Stardock, and it's really not terribly ethical journalism to smash someone for being in a no-win situation. Best Buy, among other retailers, broke the release date by several days, and the pre-order customers were promised early access to the release version of the game as part of the pre-order deal. Stardock HAD to release the game to them early or be slammed for reneging on their promise. That mean they had to accelerate production and release of their Day 0 patch (which is the SOLE anti-piracy measure, remember) in order to get it out to those people. That's what Brad was referring to by saying that the 1.01 patch wasn't expected to be played by the public.
In other words, Stardock had to either renege on their pre-order deal (which would have gotten them slammed) or release a not-quite-ready-for-release patch (which got them slammed). And don't say "They could have just waited until they could put the patch on the gold master", because then the game would have been forced to wait until March (IIRC) of next year before it could be released. A 6 month delay for the minor issues between patch 1.01 and 1.05.whatever is NOT a reasonable request. Brad covered that issue before the August release date was finalized, several months ago; those two were their only available retail dates.
That's kind of my point, really: Brad was in exactly the kind of situation that other developers get into all the time, due to the realities of retail. He's always elevated himself above those other developers, and chided them for releasing games early.When he gets himself into one of those situations, though, he does exactly what he's chided others for doing.
However, another e-mailer sent in a comment that I think is very fair:
Let me start out by saying Brad/Stardock messed up big time here. I can talk about what (in my opinion) are many mitigating factors involved, but the bottom line is that he messed up. No argument there.
But your portrayal of him is completely unfair in my opinion.
...when he makes a mistake, watch how he responds to it in the fullness of time.
While I don't agree that my portrayal of Brad was unfair, I do think it is a fair comment to talk about "the fullness of time." Most of the time, after Brad goes gas can on someone, he eventually calms down and apologizes. That's usually true of other issues as well--he might dispute them initially, but in the end, they are generally acknowledged and resolved.
All right, let's get on to the game itself, and again, the opinions are all over the map. Instead of commenting after each one of these, I'm just going to put them all in and have discussion at the bottom.
***
The game is actually pretty great. I know they released it early as a preorder bonus and what they released was basically their beta code, but they also released two substantial patches one on day zero as they put it (the 24th) and then another one today (25th)...There are a lot of awesome ideas here (one in particular being a research branch that basically unlocks potential allies, quests, and notable discoveries) and some of the things they're doing give off a Solium Infernum vibe.
***
The game is being enjoyed by a lot of people, [even though] there are issues, and the game could be a lot more polished.
Also Stardock has a great history of thoroughly patching their games to make them better and better.
Brad does fully deserve some backlash, but I guess I have been following the game for so long (I did play a bit of the beta, but not much) and reading his journals you could see the love he and his team felt for the game.
The game is very playable with yesterdays patch. Some people do have issues, but looking around on the forums more than most are able to play with the latest patch.
***
I've got to say I must be lucky because I am not having a single problem cited in the PC Gamer article and I've put in probably 15 hours already in the campaign game. Are there some issue?...sure. But i haven't had a crash, or been unable to dig into tactical combat etc. The Day 0 patch fixed almost every issue i had with the UI and lack of a tutorial.
***
Hey Bill, I bought the game and have played up through beta to the final release where Impulse removes beta code and installs fresh. With that, since loading the release version I have not had one crash at all so I’m not one of the folks experiencing any issues.
***
What went out to distributors was a smoking crater of a game, and the Day 0 version was only marginally better. The Day 1 patch improved things enough that at least the basic save/load functionality and alt-tabbing worked, but there's still a TON of bugs in the game, and serious design problems -- for instance, magic is grossly underpowered, and trying to play a caster hero is a quick trip to the morgue. There are cosmetic bugs like multi-figure units not regenerating their figures back after damage correctly, even though they fight normally. The UI is badly confused... it's obvious that they were tacking on features as they went, and sticking the new functions wherever it seemed appropriate, with no real overarching sense of what should go where. Sometimes right-click cancels, sometimes it does nothing, sometimes it's the same as a left-click. Finding a given function is a total crapshoot of clicking random buttons and looking in random windows until you find what you want.
***
The actual state of the game once the "day one" patch was released is significantly better. The patch they released the next day improved things as well. If they hadn't done the early release, I strongly suspect that those people who are upset with the game release would be a lot less vocal right now. In fact, a lot of the criticism now in various places isn't so much about technical bugs as it is about design decisions and game mechanics, which is arguably a different issue then releasing a "beta."
***
I haven't hit the bugs others have mentioned, but I am *deeply* disappointed in how unready the game is in an equally fundamental way.
There is no useful manual. The in-game "opedia" is sketchy and useless. The UI is extremely clumsy, to the point that I had to go search the Impulse forums for how to get my avatar to actually wield the weapons I'd bought for him. (There is a tutorial hint for this, but it is clearly a last-minute hack because unlike most of the tutorial hints it isn't saved in the game log, and even if you read it carefully it is useless. It says "use the equipment button", but doesn't tell you that the "equipment button" is NOT with the other action buttons that come up for your army, it's in a special place.
Even if the game mechanics themselves were completely working, the UI is just apalling. In my (basically professional) opinion as a software engineer specializing in UI, it needs a complete review by somebody who hasn't been playing the betas and about 4-6 months of work just on the UI.
***
As you can see, those opinions are all over the map. Collectively, though, some general themes emerge:
1) there are interesting ideas in the game
2) the game has personality
3) the interface is a mess
4) program stability seems to vary widely by user
As someone who wants to play an interesting game, and isn't in any particular hurry, #1 and #2 bode well for the future.
There's also one other hopeful angle. I always talk about the best games generate the best stories. Robear on the GWJ forums wrote this jewel about the game:
I have a two city kingdom now, and an ongoing conflict with Gilden. That's where I got my second city; they had planted one right in my expansion area, so I just... took it. Their king came by a few turns later, but decided my peasants were too tough and just pretended he'd just wandered by. Yeah. I left him unconscious in a meadow with a note pinned to his shirt that said "Alle yr Cites Ar Be Long to Ye Kingge Relias". That kept him away for a while.
So I finally got my defenses in order, and set off to found a third city. Just as I was getting to a good area, what do I see but one of Gilden's pioneers! The guy decided his only hope was to build a shelter with all that new city gear, which I then promptly took off his hands. Voila! Another city, courtesy of Gilden! And I still have my pioneer. Life is good.
Then I see King Mirkin of Gilden heading purposefully in my direction with his familiar, some soldiers and a huge soulless rock *thing*. I immediately head for home, leaving the city to it's own devices, but he caught up with me. I forced him to flee, killing his soldier in the process, but his magical beasts bested me. Not only did they run me off, but they caught me after I fled, and administered another beating. In ignomy, I fled to my closest city, and am working to get the damned seal of Gilden carved into my forehead removed as painlessly as possible. (In truth, I once thought these cack-handed baboons were *scholars*, if you can imagine, but they all quake at my reasonable requests to FIX MY GODS DAMNED FOREHEAD! The peasants will administer beatings until the situation is resolved.)
Now I sit with my spellbooks, plotting revenge, sipping cheap wine (but you should smell what the peasants drink) and wondering when that damned walking rockpile will show up at my city gates. I desperately need a nasty surprise for that animate heap of gravel...
That's a terrific story, and it's enough to make me try the demo, no matter else what else gets said about the game.
Oh No, There Goes Tokyo, Go Go Godzilla
I Guess It Is True That If We Send A Man to the Moon, We Can Do Anything
I'm working on an Elemental update post for later today, but there's no way to concentrate when this kind of fabulous news keeps coming over the transom:
deep-fried beer.
Don't Bother, They're Here
Some of you are so young that you've never even heard of Judy Collins.
A little history, then.
Stephen Sondheim wrote a song in 1973 titled "Send In The Clowns." It was tremendously overwrought, but in the theatrical context it was written for (a musical), it worked brilliantly.
Folksinger/songwriter/social activist Judy Collins recorded the song in 1975. Incredibly, she managed to make it even more overwrought than the lyrics. It became a standard of the era, and the signature depression/self-pity song for women.
Have a listen:
Send in the Clowns .
In case you're wondering, men had their own depression/self-pity song of that era--"Alone Again, Naturally" by Gilbert O'Sullivan. It was wistful and understated-- to an 18-year-old, at least. Believe it or not, it's still one of my favorite songs.
Have a listen:
Alone Again, Naturally.
Thus concludes the background.
One of my friends told me on Friday that he had to go to a Judy Collins concert. "What is she, seventy?" I asked (seventy-one, actually).
He cringed. "I don't have a choice," he said."My wife is demanding that I go with her."
"Promise me one thing," I said. "If all the women join arms in a human chain and start singing 'Send In The Clowns" together, get me a picture."
I saw him today.
"How was the concert?" I asked.
"We were almost the youngest people there," he said (he's in his late fifties). "I saw old hippies using walkers."
"What about the human chain?" I asked.
"No luck," he said, "but there was a teenage couple sitting right in front of us. I think they were the only teenagers in the entire audience. At one point, I asked them why they had come, and they both looked embarrassed, then the guy slapped his forehead and said 'we had to bring our grandparents.' "
One trivia note that may be of interest to no one but me: Collins was the inspiration for the Stephen Stills song "Suite: Judy Blue Eyes," which was a sensational song and huge hit for Crosby, Stills, and Nash. And since I'm linking all over this post, listen to this one as well:
Suite: Judy Blue Eyes.
Friday Links!
Leading off, from Jarod, one of the most creative and entertaining works I've ever seen:
Star Wars Silent Picture.
Matt Sakey's Culture Clash column has new installment, and it's
here.
From Ryan Leasher,spectacular images of a pilot ejecting from a CF-18 fighter jet only
fractionally before impact.
From Steven Kreuch, and you really need to see this, it's
Fancy a ride in my shark? Simply put, it's a boat that can go both underwater and leap into the air, and it is entirely bad ass.
From Meg McReynolds, a fascinating study of geographical references in rap songs, conveniently Google-ized for your pleasure:
The Rap Map.
From Scott "Sudz" Zimmerman,
the periodic table of game controllers.
From Bryan DeyErmand, a variation on the "800 percent slowdown" technique for the Justin Bieber song. This time, it's
classic science fiction themes.
From Cliff Eyler, an urban legend comes to life:
Alligator Surfaces Beneath a Car in Queens. Next, it's
ultraviolet light reveals how ancient Greek statues really looked. One more, and it's a BBC website called
Dimensions. Here's what it does:
Dimensions takes important places, events and things, and overlays them onto a map of where you are.
From Dib O, and this is both a remarkable and mind-blowing read:
China Traffic Jam Could Last Weeks. So strange only The Onion could have written it, even though they didn't.
From the Edwin Garcia Links Machine (with corporate headquarters now relocated from Miami to Seattle), a short film that is
the story of a man who spent the last 35 winters at Yosemite. Also, it's
abandoned houses of super villains. Next, it's
Hong Kong and Macau in the Fifties. Finally, and this is a fantastic read, it's
The Most Isolated Man on the Planet.
From Frank Regan, stunning footage of one of the worst car crashes you ever see--
and the driver survived. I have no idea how, though.
Here's a fascinating story:
The strange case of solar flares and radioactive elements.
From Kevin W, an epic link to pictures of
1970s Vintage desktop and pocket calculators.
From Brad Ruminer, some truly spectacular pictures of the
Madagascar Stone Forest (other places as well-- check the menu on the left).
From John Lewkowitz, and this is very clever, it's
the Red Army performing "Beat It".
From Sirius, and this is certainly comforting:
Pac-Man hacked onto a touchscreen voting machine. Also, a story about the amazing
Scottish bagpiper Billy Millin, who walked the Normandy beaches on D-Day.
From Jeremy Connell, an amazing video from China's Got Talent (yes, such a thing exists):
a pianist with no arms.
Please Note
I'm getting excellent e-mail from you guys about both Elemental and used game sales, and I'll have updates on both posts on Monday.
3-D Update
Several of you e-mailed earlier this week to ask if I thought Sony was working on glasses-free technology for 3-D screesn. I said that they were crazy if they weren't. Based on
this, they aren't crazy:
TOKYO – Sony Corp. is working on 3-D televisions that don't need special glasses, joining a race with rival Toshiba Corp., but sees cost and technological hurdles to overcome before they can go on sale.
Toshiba said earlier this week it is working on glasses-free 3-D TVs, although no decision had been made on when they will go on sale.
..."Seeing 3-D without glasses is more convenient," Sony Senior Vice President Yoshihisa Ishida said Thursday at Tokyo headquarters. "We must take account of pricing before we can think about when to start offering them."
Also
Penny Arcade is actually what prompted me to write about the used game market--Tycho put up a
news post yesterday about the THQ interview that was interesting, as always, and it made me think about the issue in ways that I hadn't before .
What interested me most was that the response to Tycho was so passionate and so heated (Gabe notes that in the post below Tycho's, and
here's a good example).
That's another reason why I think the gaming companies are playing with fire here. It's like closing your eyes and poking a very sharp stick into an animal of unknown size and aggression. It might not eat you.
The Most Dangerous Game
I saw
this earlier in the week
Smackdown vs. Raw 2011's one-time code for online play might upset pre-owned buyers - but THQ 'doesn't care'.
That's according to the publisher's creative director for wrestling games Cory Ledesma, who told CVG that "loyal fans" who are interested in buying the game first-hand are more important:
"I don't think we really care whether used game buyers are upset because new game buyers get everything. So if used game buyers are upset they don't get the online feature set I don't really have much sympathy for them."
"That's a little blunt but we hope it doesn't disappoint people. We hope people understand that when the game's bought used we get cheated," he continued.
Hmm.
People who don't buy a game new aren't loyal? Strong words.
I mentioned this before, but I think it bears repeating: this is dynamite the game industry is fooling with.
Before we have this discussion, let me make clear that I am not talking about indie developers. There is no real used game market for their product, because almost all of it is distributed digitally. They have a huge problem with piracy, but piracy is theft, not a legitimate resale transaction.
Am I sympathetic to the notion that gaming companies are getting the short end of the stick when the product is resold and they're not getting a piece of the action? Yes. Is it just that simple? No.
First off, there's basically a used market for everything.There always has been. It's even in law, commonly referred to as the Right Of First Sale doctrine (please note: it has not yet been established whether this legally applies to goods sold digitally, although
Verner vs. Autodesk (2008) strong implies that digital goods are no different).
The sale of used games is not in shaky legal status. It's not sketchy.
When, exactly, has a used product market destroyed the associated new product market? I don't know of any examples.
Fundamentally, this is what we're dealing with. Game companies are claiming that the used game market is entirely parasitic. Gamestop and other merchants of used games are claiming that the relationship is symbiotic, not parasitic.
If there is a logical argument for the position that the relationship is entirely parasitic, I certainly can't think of one. It is far more likely that the relationship is symbiotic, and that the argument revolves around the degree of symbiosis.
Here's where we hit a wall. Anyone who claims to have an accurate analysis of how the used game market affects the size of the new game market is being disingenuous. Even if the size of the new and used game markets could be established with a remarkable degree of precision, the only way to reach an ending point is to factor in a magic number that is the percentage of used game sales that cannibalize new game sales.
Why do I call it a magic number? Because it cannot be established. We just don't know.
That's why it's so dangerous for companies to be attempting to cripple the used game market with the use of one-time online passes, etc. There's no way for them to even estimate the effect this will have on their sales. They're flying blind.
So what do we know? Well, we know that in a world where used game sales weren't permitted, that the overall size of the gaming market would decrease. There's no disputing that.
We also know that there would be fewer people around to buy DLC, because fewer people would be playing each game. Again, though, precisely tying "fewer" to a percentage is impossible.
Again, maybe that's a small number, but my point is that the gaming companies themselves don't know.
We also know that the robustness of the used game market has, to some degree, been created by the gaming companies themselves. If someone buys a $60 game and finishes the single player campaign in 10 hours or less--one or two days, in other words-- they're somehow doing something wrong if they sell the game back to Gamestop for $25 or $30?
You've got to be kidding me.
That's why this issue is so difficult to discuss with any clarity of mind. Sure, if you want to, you can call the guy who only buys used games a parasite, but what about the guy who sold his copy to get money to buy another new game? What do you call him?
You're stopping that guy, too.
Like I said, a dangerous game.
A Good Idea
Affter finishing that piece on Stardock and Brad Wardell, I thought about what Wardell could do in a PR sense to defuse this situation.
Really, there was only one option: eat his own words. I thought that was highly unlikely, given Wardell's past, but to my surprise, he made the attempt.
From
Joystiq:
In the statement to Joystiq, Wardell expressed that after a "lengthy and heated debate" over issues in the pre-launch version of the game, he spoke hastily and says, "As a result, I want to apologize to our fans for speaking so harshly. It should be said that some of the issues in question from the PC Gamer UK article, in fact, did not appear in any of our beta testing. We were surprised by these issues and, after working days on end with little sleep, I was very frustrated. I should not have engaged in an online debate about these issues, as my haste to defend what we feel is a great product only served to hurt the fans who have supported us and the team who has been so dedicated to this project."
Given his situation, I think that was a reasonable attempt to admit what everyone else had already concluded. Credit given.
Elemental And The Making Of Popcorn
The appropriate phrase here, I believe, is
"hoist with his own petard":
"Hoist with his own petard" literally means "blown up with his own mine." More generally, a "petard" is a hat-shaped device which can be be charged with gunpowder.
In 2008, Stardock released, to much self-fanfare, something called "The Gamer's Bill of Rights." Yes, that title sounds quite pretentious, but the actual
text was much worse:
Just like humanity in general, PC gamers are entitled to basic liberties...
That doesn't sound smug and self-serving at all.
Here's one specific point in the "manifesto":
2. Gamers shall have the right to demand that games be released in a finished state.
Please remember that for later. It will be fun.
Also, there's this:
We'll be judging reaction on it, and we'll be talking to developers soon. Of course, some companies won't think that this is worth their time.
If you're thinking that the excerpts sound a bit, well, arrogant, they do. That was Brad Wardell, and Wardell is the guy who's annoying even when he's right. He's always willing to dig the knife in just a little further. Like
this:
It's easy to go and say how the game is and how it should work if you're not going to walk the walk.
That should be Brad's motto:
I walk the walk, and I like to go around shouting that I'm walking the walk.
Then we come to
Elemental.
It's a new game, just released by Stardock, and it was, um, released in an unfinished state. No, I haven't played the game, but given the specific nature of the blizzard of comments by players (
this is quite specific), it's not a controversial statement.
Well, unless you're Brad Wardell (thanks to
RPS for
this link:
Also, to anyone...saying the game is like an "early beta" then well, please stay away from our games in the future. I consider it ready for release and if others disagree, don't buy our games.
I think much of the positive attention Brad Wardell has received is due to gamers believing that he is on "our" side. That's true, as as long as "our" side coincides with "his" side. Otherwise, take cover.
Wardell's biggest problem seems to be that he doesn't want to be evaluated by his own standards, because they're too high.
Mafia II Impressions (PC)
[Disclosure: I've played for two hours at this point. Based on what I've seen, though, I don't expect these impressions to change.]
Last time, it was a city square.
This time, I'm waiting for a stoplight to change, sitting with my buddy Joe, just shooting the shit, listening to the radio over the purring of the exhaust. Outside, it's lightly snowing, the streets full of cars and people.
That's when I realized, once again, that I'm not here, in my study. I'm there.
Here's the first thing you need to know about Mafia II: Daniel Vávra is the best writer in gaming today. Period. He's sitting in a room, and no one else belongs in that room. No one else is even knocking on the door.
Here's the second thing you need to know: the voice-acting is almost as good as the writing. The banter between characters, in particular, is the most natural-sounding I've ever heard.
Here's the third thing you need to know: the city is wonderful. It's functional. It's coherent.
Like the original game, Mafia II does a spectacular job of creating a sense of time and place. The WWII-era radio announcements, the period posters and propaganda, and the story itself evokes an era that only exists in documentaries today. It's a living documentary, in essence.
Also in the sense of living, this game breathes. It's not hyper-manic. You don't have to shoot someone every fifteen seconds. The subtle touches of this development team, so often on display in Mafia, are once again in full throat here. I was driving to the mission, wondering why it was taking longer than I expected. Then I just relaxed and started paying attention to the city around me, and realized that, almost certainly, it was the point of the longer drive.
I've seen complaints in reviews about the number of cut scenes and their length. To me, that's like complaining a Van Gogh has too much paint.
I'm not saying it's perfect. The graphics of the original game were absolutely stunning, and they don't pop quite as much this time. The music is also pitch perfect, but it's not Django Reinhardt, and Vladimir Šimůnek didn't do the score.
Like I said, though, the sense of time and place is overwhelming. It doesn't feel like a studio lot. And that's an experience, in gaming, that is almost impossible to find.
Whoa
We all knew this was coming, eventually, but this is much, much sooner than I expected. From
Gizmodo:
Before the end of the year, three 3DTVs from Toshiba not requiring cumbersome glasses to get the full effects are expected, after using something similar to Sharp's parallax barrier tech, as seen in the Nintendo 3DS.
The Japanese publication Yomiuri Shimbun is claiming Toshiba will launch three models before Christmas, using a technology they developed which emits light rays at different angles, meaning glasses aren't required.
Toshiba previously spoke of this technology as being 21-inches in size, with the panel not quite full HD, at 1280 x 800 (WXGA) resolution.
Oh, my.
This is not very complicated. The degree of penetration that "glasses required" 3-D screens could obtain has always been dependent on how quickly non-glasses technology could reach the market at reasonable performance and price points.
That's not what the companies who make glasses required 3-D screens would tell you, but like I said, it's not complicated. People don't want to wear clunky glasses that they don't have to, and they especially don't want to pay $150 for each pair.
Will these Toshiba screens have decent viewing angles? I don't know, but even if they don't, they will at some point in the future, and that point has been moved much closer to us.
There are some people in the glasses required 3-D camp who will never admit that a non-glasses screen as a satisfactory viewing angle. There are also people in the non-glasses 3-D camp who will never admit that a non-glasses screen
doesn't have a satisfactory viewing angle.
These people do not matter.
What matters is the average guy who walks into a Best Buy and wants to buy a 3-D screen. Can he demo the non-glasses 3-D screen without a salesperson? Yes. Can he demo the glasses required 3-D screen without a salesperson? No, because he needs the glasses, and since those glasses cost $150 a pair, Best Buy doesn't leave them out. That inconvenience alone will remind him in very specific ways of the expense and limitations of the glasses.
Game over.
Based on this announcement, I think it's reasonable to estimate that within five years, glasses required 3-D will be viewed as an awkward transition phase into "real" 3-D.
Plus, I think this is also an important factor, when the 3DS launches, it's going to introduce non-glasses 3-D to a huge number of consumers, particularly kids. What kid is going to want a 3-D television where he has to wear glasses when he's holding a 3-D device in his hand that
doesn't need them?
Well, no kid, as long as the non-glasses screen can be seen from enough viewing angles.
I can't wait to see the commercials (well, actually I can, but only because I hate commercials). Let's see- we have two families of four, and they're both watching television in 3-D. One family has everyone wearing glasses, and they're fidgeting and adjusting them constantly. One kid gets up and trips over something because he can't see very well with the glasses on.
Contrast that with the ultra-super-deluxe modern family, who is watching television in 3-D without glasses. They're laughing. They look happy.
They look
sleek.
Is that necessarily the reality? No, but it will be the advertising reality, and that drives our perception of what is real.
Like I said, game over.
Madden Coach Mode Sliders
I posted this over at Operation Sports, but for those of you who don't frequent that forum, here are the settings.
I think the sliders turned out about as well as the engine allows, and certainly, they've made the game much more balanced. I should have Play mode sliders available in a week or so.
These were developed for Franchise mode players. I can't vouch for them in any other mode, although you can try them if you'd like.
COACH MODE SLIDERS v1.0
Notes:
--In this mode, CPU and Human settings are identical.
--Quarter length should be set to whatever gets you about 110 total plays. I use 12-minute quarters, but you may need to lower that, depending on how quickly you call plays.
--The setting for player minimum speed threshold was established after stopwatch testing in practice mode. it's the same methodology I used last year.
--I like the number of minor injuries I get in a game, but it may be annoying to you, and if it is, lower the injury setting.
--There are about 16 penalties a game called in the NFL, and and false starts and holding are called about four times each. I focused on holding, since the slider actually works. If you think there are too many holding calls, lowering the slider will reduce the number of calls.
--Kick returns are broken in the sense that the CPU can never return the ball more than 20-25 yards ( if they even get that far). Sorry, that's an engine problem.
--Punt accuracy is also broken (a carryover from last year). When the CPU tries to punt out of bounds, instead of hitting the coffin corner, they'll shank it about 25 yards. Again, that's an engine issue.
--Since Special Teams sliders only have one setting (CPU/Human have to be identical), the Human kicker has a significant advantage. If you want to match the CPU's kicking ability, kick at 80-85% of the kicking meter. Fortunately, since the meter moves so slowly, that's easy to do.
SETTINGS:
GAME OPTIONS
Quarter length: 12
Play clock: On
Accel clock runoff: 15 seconds
Injuries: 75
Fatigue: 50
Game speed: Normal
Player min speed thresh: 100
Coach Mode: On
Fight For the Fumble: Off
PENALTIES:
Offside 100
False Start 100
Holding 70
Facemask 50
Def PI 100
Off PI 100
KR/PR Int 70
Clipping 50
Int Grounding 70
Rough Passer 75
Rough Kicker 85
CPU AND HUMAN SKILL
Passing:
QB Accuracy 17
Pass Blocking 80
WR Catching 45
Rushing:
Broken Tackles 20
Run Blocking 85
Fumbles 30
Pass Defense:
Reaction Time 65
Interceptions 0
Pass Rushing 40
Rush Defense:
Reaction Time 50
Block Shedding 15
Tackling 65
SPECIAL TEAMS
FG Power 30
FG Accuracy 67
Punt Power 62
Punt Accuracy 100
Kickoff Power 30
Seen
On our way to hockey practice yesterday, we saw something interesting.
We were on a local highway, heading south to the mall, when we saw something in the distance.
Ahead of us was a line of motorcycles, about fifteen in all.
In itself, that's not unusual. On the weekends, there are groups out riding all the time.
These motorcycles were loud, and collectively, they sent out quite a rumble.
Again, by itself, not unusual.
None of the riders were wearing helmets, either. Definitely not smart, but not terribly unusual.
These guys, though, were different. They were all wearing plain white T-shirts and jeans, the classic "James Dean" look. They were all riding single file.
They were all Asian.
They also had a "safety rider" with them, who was wearing the standard bright orange vest as a warning to motorists. He was riding near the front.
I have to admit (even as one of those people who think "motorcycle cool" is complete bullshit) that these guys looked totally cool. There was something about the white T-shirts that really created an effect. They would've looked good in a movie.
We slowly passed the long line, and as we drove off, Eli 9.0 said, "Sayonara, suckers!" Then he said, "See, that's funny because they're Japanese and they actually know what 'sayonara' means. Can we go to Japan someday?"
I certainly hope so.
Why would you wear no protective clothing and no helmet, but have a guy in your group who was wearing a safety vest? I don't have answers to questions like that--I just ask them.
