DonFerrari said:
So, since GC wouldn't need to playback DVD video they wouldn't have to pay 4-8 USD, so your point is? |
Nintendo is also NOT a DVD licensee so they would also have to pay extra fees and get certified, Microsoft is a DVD licensee because of Windows and and they still didn't want to pay to include DVD playback on the original Xbox. - https://www.dvdfllc.co.jp/license/lifc/alp_m.htm
foxtail said:
Nintendo is also NOT a DVD licensee so they would also have to pay extra fees and get certified, Microsoft is a DVD licensee because of Windows and and they still didn't want to pay to include DVD playback on the original Xbox. - https://www.dvdfllc.co.jp/license/lifc/alp_m.htm |
If Xbox didn't put the dvd playback but thad the driver to accept bigger games, why wouldn't GC use it same way?
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
I can think of 3 : PS3 $600, Xbox One reveals and Wii-U approach
1: Nintendo giving birth PlayStation.
2. Dat Cell Processor.
The CELL processor, it costed Sony a fortune, botched up a lot of the PS3 versions of multiplat games and made PS3 bc on PS4 nigh impossible.
Nintendo ditching the PlayStation, they must be thinking right now: "All of this could've been ours!"
The Xbox One 2013 fiasco, but serves them right for listening to the numbnuts claiming that consoles were done for and that mobile is where its at.
Capcom during the seventh gen.
foxtail said:
To conform to the applicable DVD format standards (DVD disc, drive, codec and software, etc.) you must pay the licensing and/or royalty fees. The company that ships the end product is responsible for paying those fees unless the drive is sold standalone. For new PCs it would be the PC OEMs. Microsoft avoided paying the fees on the original Xbox by excluding the necessary software for DVD video playback. Even for Win7 and later they avoid paying fees by not including the codecs in non-Media versions of Windows out of the box. Since the cap is $8 they would never have to pay more than that no matter if the whole price of the PC was $200 or $4000. If the price was $100 or less the fee would be the $4 minimum, in-between $100-200 it would be 4% of the total price (i.e. if the final price was $150, 4% of that would mean a $6 fee). |
It seems the wording in my last post above may be leading to a misunderstanding. Microsoft didn’t avoid paying fees altogether, they avoided paying fees under the classification of a DVD video player. Any device with a DVD drive has to pay at least the $4 fee somewhere along the line. What Microsoft did with the dongle on the original Xbox is avoid the end product being classified as a DVD video player.
The classification depended on the capabilities of the end product (i.e. does it play DVD-Video/DVD-Audio/or have the ability to DVD Decode out of the box). It depends on what the drive does for the end product device, and what DVD patents it uses out of the box. So yes, the royalty may have been paid on the drive only if that part didn’t assist the Xbox in any other DVD capabilities or use any other DVD functions. But since the Xbox used a standard DVD drive and standard DVD discs it may have been harder to make the distinction to have the loophole apply.
World of warcraft not being rts. I remember thinking "it's a what?" What a horrible decision that was! I bet they didn't make a dime. /s
l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble? If not, I'll keep looking.
I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?
Marco....
World of warcraft not being rts. I remember thinking "it's a what?" What a horrible decision that was! I bet they didn't make a dime. /s
l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble? If not, I'll keep looking.
I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?
Marco....
Everything involved with the Wii U. Whoever thought the Gamepad would be a hit should be fired.
foxtail said:
It seems the wording in my last post above may be leading to a misunderstanding. Microsoft didn’t avoid paying fees altogether, they avoided paying fees under the classification of a DVD video player. Any device with a DVD drive has to pay at least the $4 fee somewhere along the line. What Microsoft did with the dongle on the original Xbox is avoid the end product being classified as a DVD video player. The classification depended on the capabilities of the end product (i.e. does it play DVD-Video/DVD-Audio/or have the ability to DVD Decode out of the box). It depends on what the drive does for the end product device, and what DVD patents it uses out of the box. So yes, the royalty may have been paid on the drive only if that part didn’t assist the Xbox in any other DVD capabilities or use any other DVD functions. But since the Xbox used a standard DVD drive and standard DVD discs it may have been harder to make the distinction to have the loophole apply. |
So you are still agreeing that the royalty is no reason to excuse GC of using a 1.47 Gb driver?
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
