Business Approach for Video Game Physical and Digital versions *spawn*

Regardless, movies and games aren't the same and we shouldn't treat them as such.

I think that's where you & I disagree. They provide a slightly different experience, but they still provide entertainment & they fight for the same entertainment dollars as movies, music & books. You & hardcore gamers may disagree that they should be treated the same, but I doubt the general public thinks the same. Games have been fighting to treated the same & now you don't want them to? Make up your minds! LOL

Tommy McClain
 
I think that's where you & I disagree.
Movies have a unique limited access first-performance revenue stream making the business model fundamentally different. If the cinema didn't exist and all movies when straight to disk+download, or if all games appeared first in arcades for 6 months before general release, then they'd be comparable.
 
Movies have a unique limited access first-performance revenue stream making the business model fundamentally different. If the cinema didn't exist and all movies when straight to disk+download, or if all games appeared first in arcades for 6 months before general release, then they'd be comparable.

Movies get 3 or 4 chances to monetize, theatrical release, Media sales, cable and regular TV.
Currently games get 1, with an incredibly short window. So short in fact that many people would be willing to leave their consoles off line to finish a game so they didn't have to pay for it.
 
So it's only one chance to monetize? So I guess, Xbox 360, One version, Playstation 3, 4, PSP, Vita version, Nintendo Wii, WiiU, DS, 3DS version, the PC version, the Apple iOS version, Android version, Windows Phone version, Facebook version, Game of the Year Edition, the Original + Sequel 1, 2, etc bundled version, Satellite/Cable TV game on-demand version, the next-gen/nothing changed version repackaged 5-20 years down the road don't count? None of those count as additional ways to monetize? A bit myopic eh?

Tommy McClain
 
You're understanding that all wrong. When you make a movie, it plays on every every media. There's a minimal cost in turning it from cinema release to disc, and to download, and to broadcast. When you make a game, you have to remake it for all the devices you want to sell it on. The parallel would be having to make your film for cinema, remake it for TV, including making variations for different makes of TV, and remake it for broadcast.

If you want a more exact, realistic comparison, try this...

Movie costs for each revenue generating step:
Code:
Initial filming $xxx millions
Distribution to cinema $moderate
Remake as disc for Sony players $little
Remake as disc for Panasonic players $ no extra
Remake as disc for LG players $ no extra
Remake as disc for Toshiba players $ no extra
(etc)
Remake as download/stream for PC $little
Remake as download/stream for Android $ no extra
Remake as download/stream for iOS $ no extra
Remake as download/stream for STB $ no extra
(etc.)
Remake for broadcast  $ no extra as handled in above releases
Rerelease collectors and special editions $some
Game costs for each revenue generating step you mention:
Code:
Initial creation for PC $(x)xx millions
Distribution to stores $moderate
Remake for XB1 $some
Remake for PS4 $some
Remake for XB360 $some
Remake for PS3 $some
Remake for Vita $lots
Remake for iOS $some/lots depending on how different it is
Remake for Android $little/some porting from iOS depending on tools
Remake for Facebook $some/lots
Remake for game on demand $unknown as it doesn't exist yet

Release on downloads $little, as once the works done in making, distribution is cheap.
Rerelease collectors and special editions $some
Or in short, movie costs are massively tied to initial creation. Distributing in different flavours after that is fairly cost minimal, relative to the cost of filming, and revenue from cinema release makes up the bulk of covering costs and turning a profit. Game costs exist for every platform targeted, and there's only first-sale revenues. You can't even sell the game to on-demand services yet unlike movies sold for TV broadcast.
 
To get this back to it's simple roots, I'll totally agree that there are differences in initial outlay & continuing development costs in games versus movies. However, I don't believe it's so different that a similar disc/digital copy method couldn't be used(yes, it would need some adjustments). You don't believe there's enough data from the movie studios to make the determination, fine, but I do. The public knows that method & is used to it. They are purchasing them & it's enough that the studios are continuing to provide them.

I'm sure Microsoft & others will look at what has worked & go from there. They already found what people don't want & have changed their plans. I'm sure they will find another way is ease people into the digital future. Selling digital copies bundled with the disc version is one way. Converting discs to digital is another. I'm sure there are others. If you got a worthy alternative I'd love to see it.

Tommy McClain
 
I'd love a way to make the disc version behave like a DD without losing the intrinsic disc ownership. Any method where discs cannot be used as a real physical media anymore are unacceptable to me, because it's back to DRM hell. So repeating a bit what others have proposed in the last few months...

1. Retail discs could come with a one-time unlock for the DD version (Sony is already doing that for some games cross-buy, so it's not that far fetched).

2. Like (1) but for a price. A one time opportunity to buy the DD version, that would make it available only to the first owner.

3. Offering a way to "convert" it and destroy the physical disc (a bit too complicated, requires retailers involvement or shipping, is it worth it?).

4. The Sony's RFID technology could make the conversion perfectly transparent though, you convert it to DD and it flash the RFID chip as disabled (cannot be used to play anymore, just install). I wouldn't want that, because it makes it difficult to resell a disc, it would have to be checked in a console to see if it's still an unlocked copy. But better than nothing and hassle free, and it could even allow to revert back and reenable the RFID.

5. They could print a play-disabled disc which can only be used as a download accelerator. They could give a stack of them with every shipment of the game to retailers who would sell you a DD version at full retail, or ship the disc to anyone buying a DD version online, as a way to quickly (re)install the game. So the DD game could cost less (like the Vita), but they could charge $5 to ship you a disc for install/reinstall.

What bugs me is that DD prices are still being experimented with, I guess it's to find the perfect spot which will yield the most profit. There's a ridiculous situation right now where DD versions costs the same as the retail disc, it's just wrong. It should be at least $5 or $10 less expensive. The gamer is paying for the distribution, there's no retail/distributor profit, nor physical media expense, nor shipping, and the gamer lost it's ownership and resale privilege. What a great deal! A lower price for DD would be more than enough to offset excess bandwidth expense for the gamer. ISPs are the new distribution middleman, after all. Distribution cost something one way or the other, it's up to them to charge accordingly.

I'm all for choice. I wanted a choice. The FW took away my choice. They fought against it. They took away my choice of buying a physical disc with the benefits of digital copy.

With all due respect Brit, if Microsoft does something, blame Microsoft. You can call us forum warriors, vocal minority, these people, FW or whatever acronym you fancy, this isn't a group responsible for some sort of deception, nor any kind of business decision. We didn't take away your choice, we protected ours by expressing clearly and publicly our purchase intent and invited these companies to crunch the numbers to see how much they win and how much they lose. It was a very honest movement, we voiced our concerns, some sort of "hello Sony, we are more numerous than you probably think, give us a product we want to buy, we love your games", of course it ended up a bit pointless because it seems they already knew.

Microsoft however misjudged the market for months, they should have reacted long before E3. They took away your choice because they didn't want to offer both. It's possible they thought Sony would be forced to have the same scheme because of 3rd part pressure (which was a lie). For all I care they can offer a million choices, anything you want, as long as mine still remains. It's a line in the sand. It's up to you to communicate with Microsoft what you want, don't bring me into it. I'm not responsible for the other group's inability to communicate.
 
What if playing without the disk requires an internet connection
Any online play including multiplayer binds the unique disk Id to your Xbox account
If you sell the disk its just a matter of time before the new owner binds the disk to there account thus removing it from the first owners account
You can play offline with the disk without ever going online

May be even better if anytime the Xbox has an internet connection it binds all game disk it has played while offline.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What if playing without the disk requires an internet connection
Any online play including multiplayer binds the unique disk Id to your Xbox account
If you sell the disk its just a matter of time before the new owner binds the disk to there account thus removing it from the first owners account
You can play offline with the disk without ever going online

May be even better if anytime the Xbox has an internet connection it binds all game disk it has played while offline.

Discs themselves aren't unique, also, you've spawned 2 copies of the game if the person with the disc is never online.

The experiment messing at all with how disc-based games worked has failed and was still born. The only thing left is expanding digital rights.
 
Discs themselves aren't unique, also, you've spawned 2 copies of the game if the person with the disc is never online.

The experiment messing at all with how disc-based games worked has failed and was still born. The only thing left is expanding digital rights.

Burning a unique id to the disk is a capability that has been used for a very long time, both dvds and Blu-ray disk do it. It is a software/firmware feature for the replicators and does not require any changes to the disk or readers.

I don’t understand how the system I described changes or removes any rights the disk owners used to have. Disk can be rented, bought, and sold as normal with no new requirements.

It is true that the worst case under this system involves two people playing the game off one license, but the chances of this happening are greatly diminished. The only way two can play is if the new owner with the disc never takes there console online for any reason. From a business/ loss of revenue perspective the percentage of cases where users will take advantage of this loophole should be very small because it involves the person who actually owns the disk giving up all online features.
 
Nobody minds the benefits of converting a physical game into a digital one, but the restrictions placed on a digital copy would be too heavy handed. The restriction screams "NO YOU CANNOT PLAY WITHOUT ME WATCHING!"

Not being connected online, but being able to physically purchase it without one should mean you're able to play a fair portion of the game without it. Taking away that clear understanding to create terms that inconsistent isn't right, it is just more beneficial to the business perspective with less advantages to consumers of various use cases.

My possible solution:
A combination of soft online checks and a timed digital conversion.

1. Someone buys the game, they insert the disc and let it install.
2. Login to their online account and it automatically confirms it's on the hard drive.
3. There's an online check through the buyers account every 24hrs to see if the game is still present on the drive.
4. After 6 to 12 months (confirmed by the soft online check) , the disc is no longer needed to play the game.

In this scenario the disc will still be playable and able to resale without being online, but can be subjected to an online approval process for digital conversion when actually being used online. It would also incentivize the need to not resale the disc within the window of new game sales, and track the average time someone online would keep or delete a particular game on their drive (for 1st/3rd party publishers' benefits).
 
Fuck discs.

So, unknown to me, the prices of Canadian games have gone up $10 since June because of the exchange rate to the American dollar since June. I bought Batman for $69.99, but all of the fall games are $79.99 on both Xbox One and PS4. That's insane. THat's $90 after taxes. In the past two years, game prices have gone up $20. That's a 33% price increase in a couple of years, and a 14% increase since June.

Here's the thing - the price increase is only on PS4 and Xbox One. Why? Because of discs. Retailers like Bestbuy and Gamestop, which are shitty business barely staying afloat are increasing their prices because of the exchange rate. Sony and Microsoft are basically raising the prices of the digital copies of the games in their online stores to appease them. The retailers wouldn't be happy if they were undercut by digital. Need to protect that shelf space, right?!

I can go on Steam and the games are still $59.99, like they were years ago. Why? Nobody carries the discs for PC games, so the games are still priced the same as they were. If I had a gaming PC, I could save myself $20 per game. That's insane. I don't buy as many as I used to, so I really can't justify the PC, so my only option is basically to buy one less game a year. Great for the industry, I'm sure (sarcasm), and sucks for me because it's already hard enough to choose.

The prices went up 33%, but my wages definitely didn't.
 
Fuck discs.

So, unknown to me, the prices of Canadian games have gone up $10 since June because of the exchange rate to the American dollar since June. I bought Batman for $69.99, but all of the fall games are $79.99 on both Xbox One and PS4. That's insane. THat's $90 after taxes. In the past two years, game prices have gone up $20. That's a 33% price increase in a couple of years, and a 14% increase since June.

Here's the thing - the price increase is only on PS4 and Xbox One. Why? Because of discs. Retailers like Bestbuy and Gamestop, which are shitty business barely staying afloat are increasing their prices because of the exchange rate. Sony and Microsoft are basically raising the prices of the digital copies of the games in their online stores to appease them. The retailers wouldn't be happy if they were undercut by digital. Need to protect that shelf space, right?!

I can go on Steam and the games are still $59.99, like they were years ago. Why? Nobody carries the discs for PC games, so the games are still priced the same as they were. If I had a gaming PC, I could save myself $20 per game. That's insane. I don't buy as many as I used to, so I really can't justify the PC, so my only option is basically to buy one less game a year. Great for the industry, I'm sure (sarcasm), and sucks for me because it's already hard enough to choose.

The prices went up 33%, but my wages definitely didn't.

So, do you believe that if console games were digital only, Sony and Microsoft would allow games to be cheaper? Nintendo too?
 
So, do you believe that if console games were digital only, Sony and Microsoft would allow games to be cheaper? Nintendo too?

As far as I know publishers can price their titles however they want. There have been plenty of games released for cheaper than standard retail price. If publishers are putting their games on steam for cheap, the only thing I can think of is that they're worried about undermining disc sales on consoles by pricing the digital copy lower. On PC, it's not really an issue because PC games don't get any real retail space. PC is already a digital market.
 
Games sound cheap in Canada. ;)

I think most European countries pay more for games. They can cost as much as C$122 in the UK.
 
Well, here in Europe the typical game price is 70Euros or about 100CAD...so you guys still have it better...

Edit: already beaten by p-artist :)
 
So, unknown to me, the prices of Canadian games have gone up $10 since June because of the exchange rate to the American dollar since June. I bought Batman for $69.99, but all of the fall games are $79.99 on both Xbox One and PS4.

I remember buying DOA3 for $79.99 back in 2002. :p
 
Blocking lending and resale of disks under MS's original Xbox 1 vision was not inherent in the "physical with benefits of digital" model, it was a choice that backfired.

With "activation at install" required, games could have been lent and sold much as they are today with diskless use after install. A switch between "always online, always offline" mode could have worked too, but MS didn't want you to have the choice. MS tried to grab too much away from the customer, and it backfired.

If physical exists next gen, it still won't be handled as MS tried to do it at the start of this gen. There are far more elegant and far more acceptable ways to handle it.

Digital only is more likely to see prices remain high, btw, as retailers will no longer be dumping excess physical stock after the initial sales window. Promotions will be carefully calculated and data driven rather than be in an orgnic or surplus (excess stock or second hand glut) way.

If you don't want to be a bottom feeder, hoovering up games you don't want for cheap just because they bait the water (like me on Steam, so many frikkin games bought I don't even want), you'll be paying as much or more.

Digital only + pre-order scams + season passes = wallet tears.
 
If physical exists next gen, it still won't be handled as MS tried to do it at the start of this gen. There are far more elegant and far more acceptable ways to handle it.

I can't see physical drives being removed for the next generation - PS5/XB4 are already well advanced in the design stage right now and both manufacturers will be conscious that many countries are facing difficulties in deploying high-speed broadband to some areas. What is happening is some people are getting faster and faster and faster connection options while others are stuck with relatively very slow broadband.

I live in central London and I can't get anything faster than 18 Megabits downstream DSL because I'm connected directly to a telephone exchange and the current fibre solutions only work with intermediate infrastructure connections(UK BT green cabinets). And I really I shouldn't complain given plenty of people in rural areas are stuck on 1-2 Megabit connections with no immediate prospect of going faster.

Sony and Microsoft will also have reliable information (from connected consoles) about the usage of discs so they'll know how popular game discs remain (remember discs still well outsell digital) and they'll likely know what kind of usage the consoles get as DVD/Blu-ray players as well.

It's not just a technical issue, i.e. can our users get by without an optical drive and games on disc, it's also one of user preference, i.e. even if they can, will they want too? I could "get by" with digital only; day one games are pre-loaded anyway but with HDD sizes still tight relative to the space needed for all of the games I own now (less than 2 years into this console cycle), I would have to delete/re-install games and this introduces a 7 hour wait for a 40Gb game.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top