By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - Microsoft: Digital Distribution Will Outstrip Physical Sales

am i the only person who like the disk of things they purchase.



Around the Network
shams said:
TheRealMafoo said:
shams said:

As for piracy - its much harder to pirate digitally distributed software than it is to pirate physical media. Much, much, MUCH harder. Its probably the "real" push behind digital distribution.

 

I disagree. Try and pirate a 200 Gig game, vs a 6 Gig DL.

Easy. A 200Gig game comes on a disc, which can be copied. A 6Gig (or any size) digital download can't be copied, and might even require internet access.

Additional size is no deterent for pirates at all. Lack of physical media or drives is.

 

The only gaming system at the moment without a lot of piracy, is the PS3, and that's strictly due to size. And what makes you think files sitting on your HD that you downloaded digitally, can't be copied?



TheRealMafoo said:
Plaupius said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Plaupius said:

What difference does it make is a disk will hold a terabyte in 10 years? Are games or movies going to need that much space then? The simple answer is a resounding NO. It doesn't matter. PC hard drives have been in the hundreds of gigabytes for quite some time now, are PC games that much bigger than console games that have had to fit in DVD? Nope.

Now, imagine having a gigabit internet connection, which in 10 years time is not far fetched. That's a gigabyte of content rouhgly every 11 seconds (assuming a single parity bit, don't know if that would be the case), or 5.4 gigabytes every minute. More than a single layer DVD in a minute. 10 minutes for a dual-layer Blu-Ray disc. Think about that and tell me it's not going to change the whole game.

Also, a point I forgot from my earlier post is the bigger picture: as content delivery starts to shift to the internet, and it's already begun, then the traditional brick-and-mortar stores are the ones taking the hit. Think about how many music stores selling CD's there are in your city now vs. 10 years ago, the same is going to happen with games and movies. Even if you would like to have physical copies, there won't be as many outlets selling them in 10 years, unless the market itself grows so much it offsets the shift to digital distribution.

 

PC's have not had very big games, for a few reasons. One is you only have DVD as a delivery system.

I have no clue what a game will take up in 10 years. I bet if someone asked you 10 years ago if a 50 gig game was going to be made in 2008, you would have said a resounding NO. :)

I do not believe for a moment that the size of DVD is what is limiting the size of PC games. Nobody plays a PC game from the DVD (at least nobody I know of), everything is installed on the HDD. There's no reason why a game couldn't span more than one DVD, in fact a PC game could easily be a lot bigger than what currently fits on a Blu-Ray, from a technical standpoint. Many PC users are downloading tens of gigs of stuff every month, why couldn't they download games that are that big? But still, the games are not that big.

I have started my gaming career on PC in the 80ies, the first games took a few tens of kilobytes max. Believe me, I have seen the size of games go up. But the thing is, it has always been accompanied by the rise of resolution and available colours. Games have also become more and more expensive to make, despite the huge advances in development tools. Are we to believe that in 10 years time, the resolution will go up from full HD and the development tools will take a major leap and lead to much cheaper development that what is currently the case? Do you believe that the costs of game development will come down. 'Cause that's the only way a 200 Gig game could ever be made.

Heck, I'm under the impression that a big part of the tens of gigs of the biggest games of today is duplicate data to reduce seek times. That's one reason why PC games are not as big: with HDD, there's no need to duplicate anything. Also, the difference between well compressed audio and uncompressed audio is so ridiculously small that not even 1 out of thousand gamers could notice it with their gaming set-ups. So, what do you need the space for? And more importantly, how can you economically produce that amount of content and make a profit?

 

I started playing games in the 70's. I lived it too. (I am 8 years older then you). My first PC was in 1981, when you were 4 years old :p. I have been playing PC games primarily from then.

Let me ask you this.... this year, a 50Gig game was made. If in 10 years, a 200 Gig game is made, that's 4x the size. Have you ever seen a 10 year span where games did not grow 4x?

I have not. If you are looking at the past to predict the future (and it looks like you are), how can you say you have any clue what we will be playing, or what it will be on, in 10 years?

If history tells you anything, it should yell you that the future is going to be something we never expected.

P.S. X-Plain for the PC is 60Gig. That does not include add-ons. We could see that game, with all the content that is out there, grow to 100Gig.

Actually, I think the games have grown way more than 4x during the past 10 years, but we're quickly approaching the limits of economical feasibility. Unless the market grows in a really significant manner, there is little point in producing 200 gigs worth of content. True, there is always a possibility of something unexpected happening. In 10 years, we might be playing using 3D-hologram displays with content that is mainly direct recordings of real things, or we might be using some other technology which might cut costs a lot. For now, however, the production of high quality 3D-models and textures is so expensive that it sets the limits for game size.

But along the same lines, you can't look at the past to predict the future of digital distribution, either. The adoption rate of internet in general, and the development of bandwidth has been, simply put, astronomical, and currently there is no end in sight for the development. On the contrary, there are emerging technologies that promise to increase the bandwidth of existing fibers 10-100 fold. In 10 years time, who knows how much bandwidth there will be available for a normal consumer?



dbot said:
Arkk said:
dbot said:
MS keeps talking about digital distribution. Why haven't they released any 360 games for download? If they are so committed to it, why do they sell 360s without hard drives. Sony has already released 6 full length games via digital distribution. MS should start doing and stop talking.

When the 20GB model is all finished and the 60GB model is released as the main SKU, it will happen.

 

 

I don't think so. The Arcade will be the best selling 360 at $199. Most of the games that Sony offers via digital distribution are also offered via Blu-ray. Certainly, MS could start doing this at a minimum. I am beginning to think the only reason MS talks about digital distribution is because they backed the wrong high definition disc format.

You Win The Thread!

 

I would like to thank everyone else for participating, good show.



Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

-TheRealMafoo

TheRealMafoo said:
gebx said:

My dislike of Microsoft is related to a few things

1) Its arrogance at the start of the generation (which has yet to be fixed)

2) Its PR Spins

3) and its Fanboys who believe its PR Spins

See how that works.

If you think any company is worth defending, you really must have fallen victim to PR spin.

MS sucks as much as anyone else (and this is coming from someone who bought a 360 elite 2 hours ago).

Anyone who defends a corporation, is a fool (unless they are getting paid).

Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

Can I quote you in my sig?

 



Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

-TheRealMafoo

Around the Network
TheRealMafoo said:
gebx said:

See how that works.

If you think any company is worth defending, you really must have fallen victim to PR spin.

MS sucks as much as anyone else (and this is coming from someone who bought a 360 elite 2 hours ago).

Anyone who defends a corporation, is a fool (unless they are getting paid).

Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

 

lol.. you do realize that 99% of all Xbots LOVE THE PRODUCT AND NOT THE COMPANY right??

MS has f*&^cked up so many times this generation, and I'll be the first to admit and I've created half a dozen threads over the year picking on stupid things MS has done.

You're preaching to the choir...



Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)

                   

they will make more money off of every game and so will the studios just think of all of the people they cut out of it -retailers -distribution -packaging -cd's the only downfall would be you would spend more on gigabytes but that will just keep becoming cheeper as technology advances



For M$, a tie-or close is a major win, considering Sony's grip on that continent. 360 is clearly poised to completely take over in the most important market in the world 9The good ole US of A) and then M$ can focus on Europe...forget the Japan, saki and sony are ingrained their.



"...You can't kill ideas with a sword, and you can't sink belief structures with a broadside. You defeat them by making them change..."

- From By Schism Rent Asunder

Goddbless said:
TheRealMafoo said:
gebx said:

My dislike of Microsoft is related to a few things

1) Its arrogance at the start of the generation (which has yet to be fixed)

2) Its PR Spins

3) and its Fanboys who believe its PR Spins

See how that works.

If you think any company is worth defending, you really must have fallen victim to PR spin.

MS sucks as much as anyone else (and this is coming from someone who bought a 360 elite 2 hours ago).

Anyone who defends a corporation, is a fool (unless they are getting paid).

Love the product, not the company. They love your money, not you.

Can I quote you in my sig?

 

lol, sure :)

 



TheRealMafoo said:
dbot said:
gebx said:
Other then my giant f*&cked up statement about PSN, my points still stand.

MS isn't referring to NOW but the future, and I find it funny how a lot of people here seem ...scared??... that digital distribution might be the future and that you're $400-$500 Blu ray machine that plays game might be obsolete before it even becomes maintstream.

No worries though, I probably feel the same if I had been suckered into Sony's promises..

Digital distribution is the future.  It will start to be a reality in the next generation, and you may see diskless consoles 2 generations from now.  That's 15 - 20 years from now.  So why is MS talking about it now.  Is it to divert attention from their pathetic attempt to prop up hd dvd?

 

 

Yes, if HD-DVD had won, there is no way in hell MS would be pushing digital downloads.

 

 No, MS pushed VoD since 2006 or something. When Vista was introduced MS said something about the VoD-possibilities with it. HD-DVD was not Microsofts priority. Toshiba was the big name behind it, MS supported it. IF MS would have straightly focused on the HD-DVD, things would be different by now.

I mean Dreamworks / Paramount took 150 million Dollar to support HD-DVD exclusively. At the same time, MS was offering 45 billion Dollars for yahoo. There you see where their focus was. I know you can't compare these things, but it is interesting to see the relation moneywise. The formatwar was just a secondary theater of war for MS.

@topic:

I really love the VoD! I just downloaded Primal Fear with 420p and it took like 12-15 minutes after I received the message "the movie is playable" (my translation, I got it in German :D) I don't know about HD-Movies but it will be like 90 - 120 minutes I guess. I use a 3mbps connection. That is not very fast, even in Germany, but it works out pretty well. (one part is downloaded, rest will be downloaded while i am watching the movie)

The "Games on demand" is a good thing, too. I had hours of pure fun with Xbox Live Arcade so far. And it is just not true that good games got to be huge. GTA IV was and is a huge game and it fit on a single DVD with 9,6 GB. A 9,6GB download is not out of reach in the next generation or even this one. It would take around 7.5 hours with my connection. With a 25mbps connection I could play GTA IV after 1 hour of downloading. (hope my math is correct.) And memory-space is almost free today. This won't be a problem.

But GTA is not a great example. Let's take CoD4 or Halo or whatever. These games can just work out like the movies did. you download first 1-3 chapters of the game and during your play you are downloading the other chapters. This would be possible and very easy to use. (does the PSN work like this or do you have to download the whole game first? serious question) GTA would be a problem, because there are no chapters. Sandbox games would just take longer to download.

In a word: In countries with a decent online-infrastructure on demand is possible right now! Japan, north America, Australia, south Korea (???) and western Europe (Germany, UK, France, Netherlands, Belgium, scandinavia, austria, swiss, Spain, Italy (not sure about their internet connections)) do have the internet-connections it takes. But things will just get better with improving internet technology and spread bandwidth.



Imagine not having GamePass on your console...