Alternative distribution to optical disks : SSD, cards, and download*

[hoho]

Or should I point to a copy of The muppets on bluray at $30 and claim thats how much a bluray would cost for games ?

How can you compare blank media with something that has data on it?

How many layers does that 25$ flash card have on it? For one thing it's already without tax if I've understood US laws about online purchasing correctly. Sure, the manufacturer wants some profits, shipping costs something etc but I'm fairly certain you can't get the price <10$ while pressing a BD costs under 1$.


Another thing is about loading stuff to them. Filling up 16G to a flash card at 40MB/s would take ~6 minutes. If you plan to sell 5M games it needs a cumulative time of ~63 years. Obviously you can parallelize this. Say with 1000 machines it will take "only" ~23 days and nights. How much will the infrastructure cost for such a thing?

 

[-tkf-]

I don't excpet a 3TB 2.5inch hardrive in a next gen console at launch. Do you ?

I would expect them to go with the largest single plater 2.5 hardrive at launch. I believe that is 320gigs currently ?

Look at it this way. Even if its only 10w more. Thats 10 watts more. Meaning a larger power supply . Lets also not forget that a bluray drive is the largest thing in current and next gen consoles. They take a large amount of internal space and thus reduce the cooling capacity of said console.
You also forget that while its 10w only , its still 10w through the life of the console. So at 200w it might not be terrible , but how about when we get to sub 100w power envolope ? And then there is the fact that a 10w bluray drive might not perform as well as a higher power one. We don't know the trade offs of the usb verisons.

The 10 Watt was a full sized LG drive. And i still find your power argument to be pretty thin, it´s just not that much of a problem, and if you really want to go into details, with a Harddrive on board the BluRay drive most likely wont be eating those 10 watt all the time. The challenge with cooling is not a 5 watt harddrive or a 10 watt bluray drive, it´s the small piece of gpu/cpu that is producing 200 watt of heat in a very small area that just needs to get moved fast and silent. And the PS3 proved that it could be done, with a build in PSU and without being overly noisy.

 

[-tkf-]

hmm yeah, why not distribute games on tape while we're at it.
no more noisy optical, high data density!

800GB for a $28 tape! it's 50 times bigger than your $25 16GB example.
http://www.amazon.com/HP-Ultrium-storage-ULTRIUM-Manufacturer/dp/B0052UQ3EU

this is the solution, and with mass produced LTO drives it will drop in price like a rock through diamonds!

 

[Npl]

this is the solution, and with mass produced LTO drives it will drop in price like a rock through diamonds!

Sure, and to combat the used market you could lock the tapes so you cant rewind them without running to a store and paying 10€ for that.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Do you think people wanted to pay $60 instead of $50 this gen ? But they still did because there were benfits to go with the higher price.

I only buy 2-3 games a year anyway . I'd rather pay for the speed

People paid $60 instead of $50 because they didn't have a choice.

If MS went with a console that required a distribution medium which added a $10 premium ontop of every game, that would be 10 whole reasons for consumers to get said game on the Sony platform cos' let's face it... Sony will definintely stick with Bluray.

 

[function]

Sure, and to combat the used market you could lock the tapes so you cant rewind them without running to a store and paying 10€ for that.

No problem, just insert your pen into the empty spool and spin the tape on the pen to rewind! But don't tell anyone you can do this, because that will violate DRM and you'll be sued for hundreds of millions of dollars of imaginary damages, imprisoned for three years and you and your family will be barred form any form on online access or communication for the foreseeable future to prevent possible futurecrimes against DRM that you haven't committed!

People paid $60 instead of $50 because they didn't have a choice.

If MS went with a console that required a distribution medium which added a $10 premium ontop of every game, that would be 10 whole reasons for consumers to get said game on the Sony platform cos' let's face it... Sony will definintely stick with Bluray.

Yep, which is why if MS ditch optical disks and go solid state it'll be with publisher support and it probably won't be a straight shootout between $50 Blurays and $60 carts.

 

[Blazkowicz]

lol, I wasn't around at the time but piracy used to be done on double cassette decks, at least in europe where people couldn't afford a floppy disk drive (more expensive than the computer)

 

[Prophecy2k]

Yep, which is why if MS ditch optical disks and go solid state it'll be with publisher support and it probably won't be a straight shootout between $50 Blurays and $60 carts.

Don't you mean $60 Blurays (or likely $65-$70 for next-gen games) vs $70 carts?

Plus i fail to see how publisher support would help MS should they choose to go that route. Pubs won't swallow the extra $10 premium on MS's behalf, neither would Sony sit back and let MS persuade pubs to increade the sale price of their games on Sony's BRs just to appease MS.

The only way I can see carts happening is if both MS and Sony go that route. Which won't happen.

 

[manux]

Sure, and to combat the used market you could lock the tapes so you cant rewind them without running to a store and paying 10€ for that.

Damn you, literally spilled my morning coffee while reading this

 

[Elan Tedronai]

Yep, which is why if MS ditch optical disks and go solid state it'll be with publisher support and it probably won't be a straight shootout between $50 Blurays and $60 carts.

what publisher support? They cannot dictate what sony does with their own method of distribution

 

[function]

Don't you mean $60 Blurays (or likely $65-$70 for next-gen games) vs $70 carts?

Could well be, if all else was equal.

Plus i fail to see how publisher support would help MS should they choose to go that route. Pubs won't swallow the extra $10 premium on MS's behalf, neither would Sony sit back and let MS persuade pubs to increade the sale price of their games on Sony's BRs just to appease MS.

- Build DRM into the carts
- Second hand copies reactivated (by customer or by retail outlet) for a small fee to the publisher
- MS reduces licence fees for cart copies sold

So reduce the additional costs associated with solid state, push more customers to buy new, create a new revenue stream from 2nd hand licences / reactivations (no stupid paper code needed for first users). In exchange publishers make games that work well on 30 MB/s, 16 GB carts (2nd generation carts can be 32 GB, 64 GB, whatever).

Pretend figures: If new sales (either physical or DD) increase by 20% at the expense of the second hand market, and 1 in 5 physical copies also pulls in at least one $10 reactivation fee (some copies might bring in several), then those carts could pay for themselves and move into positive territory in no time.

If MS ditch optical next generation then it'll be because they've calculated that something like this will work out. And publishers will be on-board because they agree, or are at least prepared to give MS the benefit of the doubt. It might actually work out better for MS if Sony stuck with pure optical ROMS and were unable to offer something similar.

 

[function]

When Dram exchange lists "Memory card Price" are they showing the price of an entire unlabled micro SD card, or just the price of whatever flash chip is in it?

http://www.dramexchange.com/

A couple of whatever is in the 8GB micro SD would set you back $6. Parallel access should give you 2 x ... whatever their transfer rate is. I dunno. 8 MB/s? 22 MB/s? Maybe you test and find out and sell accordingly.

The 8GB MLC flash chip might be a safer bet at $6.26. The 4GB is $3. And we're still 18 months from launch of a platform that might last for ten years.

 

[Prophecy2k]

Pretend figures: If new sales (either physical or DD) increase by 20% at the expense of the second hand market, and 1 in 5 physical copies also pulls in at least one $10 reactivation fee (some copies might bring in several), then those carts could pay for themselves and move into positive territory in no time.

If MS ditch optical next generation then it'll be because they've calculated that something like this will work out. And publishers will be on-board because they agree, or are at least prepared to give MS the benefit of the doubt. It might actually work out better for MS if Sony stuck with pure optical ROMS and were unable to offer something similar.

But what if new sales don't increase by 20% at the expense of the pre-owned market because Sony's ditribution media, i.e. BRs hasn't changed.

If consumers see a MS console that doesn't allow them to resell their games, even if MS absorbs the extra cost of the distribution media they've chosen, by the mere fact that Sony's still using Blurays (which can be resold) makes buying games on the Sony platform more attractive to consumers. Then you also factor in the fact that retailers will automatically favour Sony's console because they can still make their massive profits off pre-owned games, and you'll soon start seeing total game sales skew away from MS and publisher support along with it.

Not a very well thought out strategy. Your entire premise assumes too much. It assumes that retailers will just sit idle while platform holders and publishers (or in your case a single platform holder) try to carve out a nice big slice of their used-games profits away from them. You also assume that consumer spending habits will change based only off what MS decide to do. You fail to recognise that by having multiple competing platform, consumers are the ones with the power to choose how they buy their games. Thus, MS is at the mercy of the consumer as well as the retailers and publishers. They cannot design their console and distribution system in a vacuum, otherwise they will fail horribly.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

What if PS4 games can't be resold cheaply because the various $15 online activation fees push the resale price up dramatically? We starting to see that now. When activation becomes more commonplace, the resale market won't be worth as much as it is now. I'm not convinced there would be a massive difference in resale value between a cart based console and a disc based console next-gen. Not enough to decide Joe Gamer's platform choice anyway. I think they'll pick on other higher priority concerns.

 

[manux]

What if PS4 games can't be resold cheaply because the various $15 online activation fees push the resale price up dramatically? We starting to see that now. When activation becomes more commonplace, the resale market won't be worth as much as it is now. I'm not convinced there would be a massive difference in resale value between a cart based console and a disc based console next-gen. Not enough to decide Joe Gamer's platform choice anyway. I think they'll pick on other higher priority concerns.

And add injury to insult there by having games come with 1 time codes to activate DLC(dragon age origins at least had this) which otherwise would need to be purchased separately. It's pretty easy to make used copy have less value than the original if publishers want to go to that direction. One time codes can also give discounts for future DLC or be timelocked to push for early adoption.

And ofcourse the cheapish platinum release can have all the updates and some DLC by standard to encourage people buy from publisher instead of getting a used copy. GT5 comes to mind as a game where the platinum(?) version is pretty good investment because it contains so much patches and DLC.

 

[function]

But what if new sales don't increase by 20% at the expense of the pre-owned market because Sony's ditribution media, i.e. BRs hasn't changed.

A life without risk would be boring!

If consumers see a MS console that doesn't allow them to resell their games, even if MS absorbs the extra cost of the distribution media they've chosen, by the mere fact that Sony's still using Blurays (which can be resold) makes buying games on the Sony platform more attractive to consumers. Then you also factor in the fact that retailers will automatically favour Sony's console because they can still make their massive profits off pre-owned games, and you'll soon start seeing total game sales skew away from MS and publisher support along with it.

The move against used games is happening. Downloads are tied to user accounts, online games require passes, offline games have content that is withheld unless you're the first user and enter the 20 character code on the included piece of paper using the d-pad.

Building support for DRM into the media would at the very least be better than paper codes.

Not a very well thought out strategy. Your entire premise assumes too much. It assumes that retailers will just sit idle while platform holders and publishers (or in your case a single platform holder) try to carve out a nice big slice of their used-games profits away from them. You also assume that consumer spending habits will change based only off what MS decide to do. You fail to recognise that by having multiple competing platform, consumers are the ones with the power to choose how they buy their games. Thus, MS is at the mercy of the consumer as well as the retailers and publishers. They cannot design their console and distribution system in a vacuum, otherwise they will fail horribly.

I was offering a possible course of action, not stating it as destiny. The risks are self evident.

You too are making a lot of assumptions in your outright dismissal: all retailers make profits from used games (false); the habit of all consumers needs to change (false) based on the actions of only one vendor; carts will be the only difference between systems (v. false); platform vendors and publishers are powerless to influence the status quo (false); both MS and Sony intend to target exactly the same group of customers (very probably false in several important regards).

Sometimes trying something different works out, sometimes it doesn't and would have been better not to try. I still think all next gen systems will come with optical drives and games on Bluray but I hope someone finds a way to do something different.

 

[manux]

When Dram exchange lists "Memory card Price" are they showing the price of an entire unlabled micro SD card, or just the price of whatever flash chip is in it?

http://www.dramexchange.com/

A couple of whatever is in the 8GB micro SD would set you back $6. Parallel access should give you 2 x ... whatever their transfer rate is. I dunno. 8 MB/s? 22 MB/s? Maybe you test and find out and sell accordingly.

The 8GB MLC flash chip might be a safer bet at $6.26. The 4GB is $3. And we're still 18 months from launch of a platform that might last for ten years.

It's not just the raw price of flash. You need to have also the factories to copy in the data, package the carts and so on. If you can write let's say 10MB/s to those cheap cards(very doubtful) copying a single 25GB blu-ray's worth of data would take 41 minutes and then some. Scale that to produce 2-5 million copies for launch date and try to interleave all the console releases not just one game. It's not going to be cheap factories and comparing price of blank media is not going to yield your true cost. Once your console is done the factories need to be closed which also should be counted to the price of the media as the guy manufacturing will not want to make a loss.

Flash is competing with optical that costs less than 1$ to manufacture for 25GB capacity with comparative performance to your example and has no risk involved in scaling up the technology or in need of building manufacturing capacity that is only used for the lifetime of single console.

If we assume 4x blu-ray in all costs 20 bucks to put into a console it can even be that buying single 20GB triple AAA game in launch period already has cost more on flash than blu-ray(count all the costs, not just blank media. And if you get only same perf as optical why even bother... 20MB/s).

We already see games on xbox360 that spill to 2 and 3 discs. Assuming next gen triple AAA games are 25GB is on my opinion safe bet, if we have blu-ray I have no doubt we will see some games pushing towards 50GB(next version of rage perhaps...)

 

[manux]

I just don't see why tim sweeneys comments on optical, sonys comments on optical and nintendo's move on wiiU don't make people realise flash is just too expensive as distribution media(note, distribution, not installation).

We also have ps vita which has frankly super horrible performance on flash(most likely due to pushing the card prices down). If flash made sense I think sony would be the first one to do it because they already have bitten the bullet with vita(factories, copying cards, deals to obtain flash chips, etc). Sony would get the best scale of economics due to multiple high selling platforms being flash based. But I very much doubt sony will do that, and there is all indication they are going with optical next gen(accompanied by digital distribution too).

The whole investment to flash based distribution is too expensive and flaky. By the time flash is price competitive perhaps major part of markets have already moved to mainly digital distribution due to convenience and even cheaper pricing. How do you recoup the initial investment if market has moved to DD? There just isn't a fairly low risk scenario where flash distribution pays off. At least not on the math shown in this thread.

 

[manux]

About blu-ray royalty costs. They just don't matter. Blu-ray playback can be enabled through apstore purchase. Movie playback doesn't need to be enabled by default(we already have examples of this happening on consoles with dvd, and ofcourse we had the hd-dvd addon which is quite more radical than buy an app to play back movies).

If we assume the royalty is 10$ the movie player purchase could cost even 19.95$. If I was wondering I need/want hmm. extra blu-ray player and I happen to have console already it's still cheaper to buy the app than go and buy another box. And note, here the console manufacturer actually made some money back through the movie playback that was invested in the form of blu-ray drive.

 

[manux]

Building support for DRM into the media would at the very least be better than paper codes.

DRM on optical media is solid. There is practically no piracy on PS3 and none of it is due to optical media having faults. All new ps3's or those upgraded past certain firmwares are at the moment tamper proof(which is amazing considering the box was hacked and then again sealed. First time in console history?)

On XBOX360 piracy would be non issue except microsoft made gigantic fuckup how they handled the firmware in dvd drive. I doubt they would do same mistake again.

Ofcourse digital downloads could have the best DRM of them all as all the games could be encrypted and watermarked with console and account specific keys assuming the server handling downloads has enough computing power. Good luck in distributing a binary that was watermarked to be downloaded by you