Nintendo DS to use Steam!

[Gregory DG]

Well, not really...

 

But imagine if the PSP or the DS used some kind of "leased" game service like Valve's Steam. A service where you never actually get your hands on a cartridge or CD, but the game is downloaded directly into the machine. So when you are done with it, you can't sell it to your friend.

 

I'm betting this "leased" game concept is something that the big guys are looking at with green colored glasses. Imagine... THEY would benefit hugely because everyone would have to come to them to get the game rather then turning to Ebay...

[Albert]

You mean like the Phantom?

 

..Al

[RavenOne]

Not to stray , but at what point did the phantom decide to switch from the traditional console games type issue to bringing all games online. It's an interesting Concept but it will fail miserably i'm thinking ..

[Fretwobbler]

You better get used to it, because thats most likely the way Xbox 3 will work.

 

Once the world has adequate bandwidth, it will be absolutely pointless for hardware manufactures to make anything other than a glorified modem.

 

If done properly, it will irradicate piracy. That will be motivation enough for them.

 

Maybe not by the time Xbox 3 arrives, but Id bet my house that it happens before 2015.

[Fretwobbler]

Edit - and when it arrives big time you wont be downloading games as such. You will only download some sort of client, most of the processing will occur server side in a convoluted ASP kind of set up.

[RavenOne]

Maybe it's just me and the oldschool mentaility and such, I know that bandwith is prominent and getting better everyday ,and I appreciate the online Gaming technology etc. etc.

 

But even downloading A Client or anything would just kind of suck , theres somethign to be said about going to a store , buying X game , coming home reading the manual etc. etc.

You know having something to show versus the just the "Glorified Modem".

 

Incidentally to that end, As far as coding games to work as Clients and having everything server side, i'm gonna have to say that Would Suck , and I mean big time, just to give you a little personal background , I'm head of IT at a small company and I do coding in PHP , etc.

 

Not saying that it could not be done, it's completely viable and sounds at first glance like a feasable anti piracy solution.

But what if those servers go down , which they will , I think someone quoted murphy's law earlier today. That kind of leaves alot of us with no gaming system. And I can't really see how anyone can claim to have this technology to the point where it wouldn't break, nor could they ever claim that.

Furthering ( and no i'm not wanting to start a fight, more just offering contradictory thoughts) the argument , even at bandwidths current expanision rate that doesn't change the fact that people could overload those servers to the point where a gamer, you or I, as it were has approximately 12 an hour before we have to go do (x) thing , well now we have to wait 10 mintues for it to load etc. etc. leaving us with 20 minutes. Now this is not including whether or not the game is Mplayer and then it takes another 10 to find a rival.

 

Given that situation is only hypothetical but with the way technology is expanding , instead of worrying about piracy shouldn't the industry be thinking about ways to make the games that you can sit down , plug it in , be up and running in about a minute, increasing game time efficiency. I mean you'd almost have to say , if people get more satisfaction from a game ,and the game is maybe better priced, then shouldn't piracy be decreased through alternate methods.

[Fretwobbler]

Maybe it's just me

 

Nope, I agree with ya! I dont like the idea, but its coming. Its a natural progression.

 

Incidentally to that end, As far as coding games to work as Clients and having everything server side, i'm gonna have to say that Would Suck , and I mean big time, just to give you a little personal background , I'm head of IT at a small company and I do coding in PHP , etc.  

 

Not saying that it could not be done, it's completely viable and sounds at first glance like a feasable anti piracy solution.  

But what if those servers go down , which they will , I think someone quoted murphy's law earlier today. That kind of leaves alot of us with no gaming system. And I can't really see how anyone can claim to have this technology to the point where it wouldn't break, nor could they ever claim that.

 

No differant to when a satellite or TV transmitter transmitter goes fizz really. I know they wont use satellites due to ping times, but bear in mind these things will be implemented with an almost military budget, not your average corporates annual IT budget and 10 x 42U racks at head office.

 

Given that situation is only hypothetical but with the way technology is expanding ,

 

Im not so sure it is hypothetical. Theres probably a fair chance the big two are playing around with the idea already in early stage of development.

[RavenOne]

Hypothetical Was directed at the sitting down with 30 minutes of playing time, 10 minutes to connect, then 10 to find a game , etc. etc. not the technology itself.

 

As far as military budget typed funding , You still have to contend with Murphy's law, and the simple fact that nothing is absolute. You have to think sometimes of the most insignificant of events that could cripple the industry , lets take something like a power surge, it affects one computer, but then 5 more rely on that one computer, then 5 on those 5 etc. etc. It just has me worried that no matter what budget you have theres always something that will go wrong. Given you could argue percentage rates of what does go wrong versus what could, and I also know we're not talking life support here ... (well at least for some gamers we're not) but it just kind of bugs me that with the way technology is reproducing that more and more we lose a little bit of control in our daily lives.

[Fretwobbler]

Also, regarding the possibility of this system on portable devices..

 

Just why do you think Intel are pouring $millions into the development of the WIMAX

....it isnt just so people can surf the net without a cable stuck in the wall.

 

Pretty soon your Coke vending machine will be connected to it, As will everything else.

 

IPv6 + WIMAX = the future.

[Fretwobbler]

Edit - Sorry that should be -

 

IPv6 + WIMAX + VoIP + GSM = the future.

 

Give it two decades and your PSP will use all of them.

[RavenOne]

I think a friend of mine said it best when he said, I love the ability to know I can plug in and be plugged in at all times, but I question now more than ever if I have lost the ability to unplug myself.

 

Yes I knew about WiMAX, and I don't like it, more or less because I hate INTEL (love AMD) but I guess , now that we're really really off the topic here, could we or could be not argue now more than ever if we have or do not have the ability to get away from thigns the way they are.

 

What should be said is that I am not against developing these things, Yes I think it's utterly amazing the fact that we can do so many different jobs with technology, but at what point does this thign that we have created really overstep its bounds and begin locking us into a situation in which we cannot live without it.

[Jess Ragan]

I disagree about online subscription services becoming the preferred method of game distribution. Think about this... companies have tried this before. It hasn't caught on. How many people do YOU know that had the Sega Channel or America Online's short-lived Gameline service?

 

You may argue that that was then, and that things are different in the 21st century. That may be true, but look at subscription services for movies, like Charter On-Demand. They've enjoyed moderate success, but the majority of people who rent movies still do it the old-fashioned way, by picking them up from a local rental store.

 

I don't see video games being any different. People prefer to have physical copies of games; something they can hold in their hands, brag about to their friends, and play whenever they like. You can't do any of these things with a subscription service, and that's why they'll never replace the traditional style of game distribution. Yes, selling software on disc may be the old way of doing things, but it's important to note that "old" is not synonymous with "obsolete". We still have books, despite the introduction of the Internet. We still have bicycles, despite scooters, motorcycles, and the Segue. In the future, we'll still be able to buy games at a retail store, even with subscription services like Steam.

 

JR

[Gregory DG]

I disagree about online subscription services becoming the preferred method of game distribution.  Think about this... companies have tried this before.  It hasn't caught on.

I don't think it's going to matter if it "catches on" with the public or not. They will continue to try until it does. And if every software house decided to do it, you would have no choice but to get onboard if you wanted to play games.

 

I remember Nintendo hating the idea of video game rentals because they wanted more new copies of their games to be sold. You know that movie companies on down are still seething with anger at all the money they've lost in rentals and used game sales. This new online delivery is a way for them to get back their "lost" revenue and lock people out from selling used copies. It's looking very enticing for them. I think there's going to be a lot of this going around in the near future I'm afraid.

[Avid Fan]

I dont think this will ever happen. Companies like Sony are going to use the Blu ray disc, which will be a while before everybody has burners for that. And with Nintendo, they've never used a traditional CD based system, so you cant copy there. I think companies will just start making much, much larger games, so they cant be copied so easily

[Fretwobbler]

I disagree about online subscription services becoming the preferred method of game distribution.

 

Preffered for who?

 

Provider - prefers it

consumer - doesnt prefer it

 

I know thats no scientific study or anything but if it went to the vote now, i know where my money be.

 

 

How many people do YOU know that had the Sega Channel or America Online's short-lived Gameline service?

 

Ive never even heard of one of them myself!

 

 

You may argue that that was then, and that things are different in the 21st century.

 

Indeed I will. Things are differant, and they will be even more differant in the future, and the pace of those changes is increasing.

 

One day, I couldnt call my friends from the car, then overnight, there are more mobile phones in my country than there are people. OK It didnt happen overnight, the thing that did it for mobiles was reducing power consumption/increasing battery life backed up by improved/increasing coverage - that was the catalyst that did it for that technology. Once that aspect of the device reached a certain previously unknown point - there was an explosion and the land line is in terminal decline (from an non-digital voice perspective).

 

The same will happen to Ethernet. At somepoint in the future currently unknown, there will be something that happens to the wireless alternative(something thats also as yet unknown), but whatever it is, that will be the catalyst that makes the whole world shift forward in a giant leap. It will most likely be a combination of security plus RF power - once those two things reach a certain as yet unknown threshold, bang, Cat 5 production will all but cease overnight.

 

The same will happen to video gaming.

 

I don't see video games being any different.  People prefer to have physical copies of games; something they can hold in their hands, brag about to their friends, and play whenever they like.  You can't do any of these things with a subscription service, and that's why they'll never replace the traditional style of game distribution.  Yes, selling software on disc may be the old way of doing things, but it's important to note that "old" is not synonymous with "obsolete".  We still have books, despite the introduction of the Internet.  

 

You keep mentioning all the things we all love to do and what we all love about video gaming...... collecting them, holding them, owning them! I love them the same as you. But you are forgetting one very important point...

 

It isnt what you or I want that matters.

 

As long as they can deliver a quality game to the masses that they enjoy and pay for, it dont matter one bit that you and me want a box and CD.

 

We still have bicycles, despite scooters, motorcycles, and the Segue.  In the future, we'll still be able to buy games at a retail store, even with subscription services like Steam.

 

Maybe we do still have bycicles, but the roads have been re-laid with better surfaces, and the roadsigns and highway infrastructure have improved remarkebly.

 

Your analagy is in keeping with my argument - You will still have games, it will just be delivered via a differant medium.

[Jess Ragan]

All I'm saying is that game discs won't go the way of the dinosaur for a long time. Online distribution has many negatives, the greatest of which is that some gamers (like myself) don't even have an online connection at home. Even those who do are still working from a dial-up connection that's ill-suited to downloading entire games. The people who crow about the future of online gaming (both distribution and multiplayer play) always conveniently forget that in many parts of the country, broadband Internet either doesn't exist, or just isn't practical.

 

Of course, the media, which is located primarily on the East and West coasts, may not understand this at first. Having lived in affluent, technologically abundant New York and California all their lives, the chairmen of major video game companies don't grasp the notion that there are fifty states in the union, and not just two. However, they'll come to that understanding pretty quickly when their profits take a nosedive after trying to switch to online distribution, and losing millions of frustrated Midwestern customers in the process.

 

JR

[Vic George 2K3]

I wonder how they would handle switching from game to game if the person wants to play something else -- either have the games stored on a hard drive or what?

 

Consider me somewhat braindead on the issue.

[Fretwobbler]

I wonder how they would handle switching from game to game if the person wants to play something else -- either have the games stored on a hard drive or what?

 

Consider me somewhat braindead on the issue.

 

As we are talking about things in a futuristic sense with this thread, the hard disc may well have been surpassed, either by solid state memory(most likely), or some new-fangled invention.

 

Either way, think of it like cable television.... you switch it on, and then chose the channel you want to watch.... you will switch on your PSP year 2020, and then chose which game to play, as if chosing a TV channel.

[Stingray]

How many people do YOU know that had the Sega Channel or America Online's short-lived Gameline service?

 

Ive never even heard of one of them myself!

 

That's precisely the point that Jess was trying to make. I do remember the Sega Channel. I had no interest in it for the reasons stated in this thread, I wanted a real cart. Nobody else had any interest in it either. It flopped. Ultimately it is the consumer who decides if a product is sucessful or not. The big bad corporations may like to force feed the public something like this, but if nobody is interested, it isn't going to happen.

 

-S

[+davidcalgary29]

I disagree about online subscription services becoming the preferred method of game distribution.  Think about this... companies have tried this before.  It hasn't caught on.

I don't think it's going to matter if it "catches on" with the public or not. They will continue to try until it does. And if every software house decided to do it, you would have no choice but to get onboard if you wanted to play games.

 

I remember Nintendo hating the idea of video game rentals because they wanted more new copies of their games to be sold. You know that movie companies on down are still seething with anger at all the money they've lost in rentals and used game sales. This new online delivery is a way for them to get back their "lost" revenue and lock people out from selling used copies. It's looking very enticing for them. I think there's going to be a lot of this going around in the near future I'm afraid.

 

I believe that Atari themselves attempted this with the Jag in a few test markets across the U.S. Obviously, it didn't catch on.

 

I have to say that I am not a fan of on-line or subscription gaming. I prefer to have games in my collection, of which I have physical possession, and I do not want to switch to a pay-per-use system. I think that the gaming industry will offer enough flexibility to suit all tastes, in any case.

 

I would also suggest that on-line or pay-per-use gaming will facillitate (and not eradicate) piracy, as there would be an increase of multi-user interaction.

[Fretwobbler]

I had no interest in it for the reasons stated in this thread, I wanted a real cart. Nobody else had any interest in it either. It flopped. Ultimately it is the consumer who decides if a product is sucessful or not. The big bad corporations may like to force feed the public something like this, but if nobody is interested, it isn't going to happen.

 

Absolute mollycoddle nonsense with technologies such as what we are discussing. Areas of mass-infrastructure.

 

The consumer has had absolutely ZERO input into the design and deployment of the infrastructure or technology method used to deliver any of the following products or services ....

 

Satellite TV

Terrestrial TV

Digital Radio

GSM

SatNav

The Internet

VIDEO GAMES

 

...the publics only real concern is that the finished product/experience is satisfactory.

 

 

 

In 1978, it was though the most practical method of delivery was to burn the program onto a microchip and house it in plastic, so thats what the public got. I cant remember being asked how I would like the game made.

 

Nobody was polled to find out ther preferred method for obtaining a video game in 1982 either - the vendors used the most suitable technology at the time to deliver the product which in ~1982, it was decided to force fed video games on cassette tapes because that was the most practical method of delivery at the time.

 

It is currently believed that a shiney flat piece of plastic-coated metal, with lots of small bumps and troughs on is the best manner in which to deliver such a product.

 

Each of these transitions in turn highlighting a very important point in the large scale introduction of new technologies - that each method of delivery INCREASES in practicalilty and DECREASES in cost.

 

When the time is right for the most practical and lowest cost method of delivery of videogames to be via either a wired or wireless network and/or processed centrally in a thin client manner, the infrastructure will be put in place, the marketing engine will kick in, and neither you, I, or anyone else will have any say in any of it whatsoever.

 

Sorry to break it to people but thats the way the world of new technology infrastructure works, forgive me of course should the majority of people here been on the Internet 2 steering committee, you would obviously proove my point less valid

[Stingray]

 

The consumer has had absolutely ZERO input into the design and deployment of the infrastructure or technology method used to deliver any of the following products or services ....

 

Satellite TV

Terrestrial TV

Digital Radio

GSM

SatNav

The Internet

VIDEO GAMES

 

...the publics only real concern is that the finished product/experience is satisfactory.

 

That is correct. If the public finds a new technology to be unsatisfactory it will fail. You act as if you posted a list of things that have no alternatives. For example, Satelite TV. The consumer has plenty of choice here. There's certainly Cable TV if the consumer finds the satelite service to be unsatisfactory. In addition the existance of Satelite TV and Cable TV have not done away with DVD and VHS movie sales. You see, even though people can watch a movie via their DirectTV reciever, and even record it with their Tivo unit, they still like to own those "shiny flat pieces of plastic-coated metal". I don't argue that there will not in the near future be a "pay-per-view" type service for video games, but I just don't see that service doing away with being able to purchase a game on a disk (or whatever the current medium may be).

 

-S

[Fretwobbler]

You act as if you posted a list of things that have no alternatives.

 

It wasnt meant to get accross in exaclty that manner, part of the point I was trying to make is that with video games, there wont be any alternative, its a big-bang scenario. i.e. when(if, I suppose ) they do it, its an all or nothing thing.

 

Because of this, it would never launch until the back-end ability is there, and after sooo many lab-rat trials (the only involvment consumers will get in such matters - guinnipig, not decision maker) that they know its going to succesful: because its econimically viable, more practical, and people like it.

 

Decision made, next 'console' gets made, public lap it up, the consumer masses are happy(not specifically you that is like me your a nerd on a classic videogame forum), as are the shareholders.

 

And all the nay-sayers keep forgetting that our geeky world of hardcore gamers, collectors, and nerds of yesteryear, are no longer the majority, the majority owners(spenders) are now 35 year old mothers of 2. Does she.... or her children who wouldnt necessarily know or care any differant if it launched tomorrow.... does she care that you dont get a box?

 

I hope this forum database is still intact in the year 201?, maybe 202?, whenver it happens. I will relish bumping this thread

[Stingray]

 

Decision made, next 'console' gets made, public lap it up, the consumer masses are happy

 

Of course you're assuming here that all of the game hardware makers will do this, leaving the public with no alternative. I'd like to offer up this alternate scenario.

 

Company A. releases it's next gen console. It has no disk or cart slot. All games are downloaded.

 

Company B. releases it's next gen console at roughly the same time. It uses some kind of disks.

 

Other than the method of game delivery, the consoles are pretty similar, much like today's big three consoles are more or less pretty similar.

 

The public for the most part, thinks that not being able to physically own a copy of the game that they paid for is a pretty crappy deal. Company A's system flops like Sega TV did. Company B pats themselves on the back for not making the same boneheaded decision that Company A made.

 

This is all pure speculation of course, but that's pretty much true of this entire thread.

 

-S

[Fretwobbler]

Of course you're assuming here that all of the game hardware makers will do this, leaving the public with no alternative.

 

No i didnt mean that. Could Nintendo afford such a move? maybe at some point, but SOny and MS could afford it a lot sooner.

 

 

I'd like to offer up this alternate scenario.  

 

Company A. releases it's next gen console. It has no disk or cart slot. All games are downloaded.

 

Company B. releases it's next gen console at roughly the same time. It uses some kind of disks.

 

Other than the method of game delivery, the consoles are pretty similar, much like today's big three consoles are more or less pretty similar.

 

The public for the most part, thinks that not being able to physically own a copy of the game that they paid for is a pretty crappy deal. Company A's system flops like Sega TV did. Company B pats themselves on the back for not making the same boneheaded decision that Company A made.

 

Thats a very viable scenario, and history has proved it with the afformentioned Saga cable channel thing.....on a the genesis!! when the Playstation has just been released! Why on earth did it fail!?!?!

 

Back then 95% (completely speculative number of course ) of people though the net (or such concepts) was something that only fisherman need concern themselves with.

 

The public would not have been as receptive to such technologies, more frightened of them. "sounds complicated", "no your not having that son! its too expensive"... and of course there was the real reason it failed....coverage!

 

Remember, nothing will happen until infrastructure(coverage/useability/cost) reaches a certain threshold and then whoosh!