When did the classic era of gaming end?

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 15, 2009 16:01:35 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

I don't really see how SF4 brought anything new to the table.

It doesn't have to, the game is still good ass hell. Despite what a few may say, the game is a different SF from the ones that came before it and is easily one of the most enjoyable to me and many others who bought it.

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 20, 2009 23:32:31 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 15, 2009 14:55:24 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

I got a love hate relationship, wit SFIV, although I gotta say it's prolly more love than hate.

My problems are, the costume packs, that shit was weak, I bought'em anyway, but the shit was still weak. Capcom is just lucky that I enjoy Guile dressed like Charlie and Fei Long dressed like Bruce Lee from Enter the Dragon. SFIV is kinda watered down to please the casuals too, prolly not in gameplay cuz I find that Focus cancel shit to be kinda hard and I think I'm a tad bit better than your average dude in a SF game.

It's watered down to me and still has me pissed cuz it's new characters+SFII. I'm like, damn, can we get past this whole SFII thing already. The main reason they are in there is to pleez the mainstream market who only played SFII. It's not until Super that they actually decided to add more Alpha characters and like one 3rd Strike character, hopefully Dudely or somone cool. Then again, I find myself playin' 3rd Strike and wishin' Sagat or M.Bison was there. It's wierd.

Then there are games like Blazblue that go TOO hardcore fanbase and think they are doin' peeps favors. Cuz they made this game for FG fans they think they can send out another full priced game simply cuz it has 2 new characters, some new stages and BGMs. Plus, that game is just too "animeish" a bunch of skinny supermodel characters running around wit big weapons. Just silly. If you ask me, TVC is a FG that came out this year that really reminds me of the good old days. That's not to say that the games I named previously are better or worse, just that they seem to be makin' mistakes on how to REALLY pleez peeps.

Yeah, this is what kills me about the new gen games. Everything you buy (console-wise) nowadays costs just as much as it did before (oh wait, games actually cost 60 now), except now it's half a game, that you can't get the rest of without spending money on DLC. It's really a disgusting practice, but hey they're making money. I think I've nearly had my fill of the new consoles. When I get on XBL I only feel like I own my system half as much. The last thing I want my console doing to me is advertising itself and trying to get MORE MONEY out of me. It's great though because the wii and the ps3 are no different, so at least I know it wasn't a failed choice of purchase.

But yeah, the casual/hardcore dichotomy plays in a little for me as well. Not as much as what I said above though. SFIV and Blazblue are two of my favorite games on that console right now. Only reason I don't have SFIV is because I want to buy it new, and I don't have money to spend on that kind of thing right now. SFIV would definitely appeal to a broader audience, but I like that fact. Personally, I like that non-gamers are starting to come into the gaming community. People who play for fun happen to be a lot of fun to play with, unless you have a massive skill gap. It depends on the game obviously. For a fighting game I would really just want to fight someone close to my level or a little above. But that's besides the point. Both games piss me off a little because of the DLC, but I didn't even know about Blazblue DLC until recently so they piss me off slightly less for not being obnoxious pricks about it. However, SFIV and Blazblue are BOTH releasing as new versions, which ticks me off because I'd really love to play both (Continuum Shift in particular), but Continuum Shift is going to be a brand new independent game retailing at... ALSO $60. This doesn't change the fact that I think Daisuke Ishiwatari is the most kickass VG producer ever to grace Japan. But still, come on, all that's changing is the balance, a couple characters, and minor graphics differences, aside from obvious things such as plot etc.

When you say TVC, you mean Tatsunoko vs. Capcom? If that reminded me of the old days, I'm not sure it would be in a good way. It's just another old recycled crossover. Those games sell so easily just for fan-service.

Wait, while I agree wit everyone here on most parts of what's being said, I don't wanna make this in to a "negative gamer session". While the industry has MANY shitty ways, it's not all bad. DLC is not all bad. Some DLC is needed simply because some development teams have time constraints so they can't add er thang they like. Some DLC is added due to fan demand and sometimes, the teams just thought up somthin' cool and just wanted to put it on a game that's already out. I'm not sure about the motives for addin' most DLC out there but I know shit like the SFIV costume packs were BS from the start. Not to mention the BS about multiplayer VS mode in RE5. That's not to say that all DLC are attempts to milk more money outta people. Plus, if you don't like the DLC, you don't HAVE to buy it.

Also, don't get me wrong, non-gamers becomin' gamers is great. I just think the market is overloaded wit games meant for casuals. There are less games to get "hardcore" about these days. And skill gaps have never been a problem to me. Too weak, your prcatice. Same level, good times. Too good, somthin' to work at. Blazblue's update is the one I have MAJOR problems wit. SFIV's update is decent, I was ready for it, plus it's not like SFII Turbo to Super SFII Turbo. It's like Double Impact to 3rd Strike. All the shit that's in SSFIV couldn't possibly be all DLC AND it's 40$. Blazblue on the other hand is doin' that whole Guilty Gear BS all over again. Blazblue is gettin' the mandatory tweak, a few new BGMs, 3 stages, and 2 characters for 60$. That's BS. I would have really liked it if SFIV was the 1st and only SFIV but thanx to complainers and whinnin' ass SF fans, we have to get an update, at least it's alot though.

Also, have you ever played TVC? That game aint a recycled cross over. It's THEE MOST entertainin' FG to come out this year. Character specific themes, loads of stages, badass roster, cool graphics and amazin' presentation...it brought back the same feellin' I had when I 1st played the 1st MVC. If you don't like, or are simply tired of Capcom crossovers, I can understand. But if you can like SFIV and BB and NOT like this game, your an alien.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 21, 2009 21:58:17 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Well, sure, we could just say it's the invisible hand of capitalism causing all this. We don't have to blame people per se. The age of information enables thievery, and companies are compensating. The tragedy is that people who aren't stealing are suffering just as much, and ironically are becoming inclined to steal (me for instance).

Some non-mainstream systems back then costed a buttload, sure. I guess it would be accurate to say video games used to cost more way back when, then went down from the SNES era to the GC/PS2/XB era and now they've shot up big time.

Well that is how it is with eveyrthing, the losers will affect everybody. The ones who take advantage of the system with welfare and disability will make the taxpayers pay for it. The ones who file fake insurance claims affect all of us. We have to support the makers of said games, or else this will happen more and more and we won't have anything. The prices aren't going up that much and it isn't really a good reason to steal a game that has come out. Granted some older games are nigh impossible to find (but can be found online, I found some old games that way), but newer stuff, it's not like people are buying every game that's out, just pay the 50 dollars. That's like 1 day of work or something. Then most people's parents buy the stuff anyways, and those tend to steal because it's "cool". But meh that's starting to get off topic a bit.

[Dja Majista]

Dec 22, 2009 0:37:31 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Wait, while I agree wit everyone here on most parts of what's being said, I don't wanna make this in to a "negative gamer session". While the industry has MANY shitty ways, it's not all bad. DLC is not all bad. Some DLC is needed simply because some development teams have time constraints so they can't add er thang they like. Some DLC is added due to fan demand and sometimes, the teams just thought up somthin' cool and just wanted to put it on a game that's already out. I'm not sure about the motives for addin' most DLC out there but I know shit like the SFIV costume packs were BS from the start. Not to mention the BS about multiplayer VS mode in RE5. That's not to say that all DLC are attempts to milk more money outta people. Plus, if you don't like the DLC, you don't HAVE to buy it.

Also, don't get me wrong, non-gamers becomin' gamers is great. I just think the market is overloaded wit games meant for casuals. There are less games to get "hardcore" about these days. And skill gaps have never been a problem to me. Too weak, your prcatice. Same level, good times. Too good, somthin' to work at. Blazblue's update is the one I have MAJOR problems wit. SFIV's update is decent, I was ready for it, plus it's not like SFII Turbo to Super SFII Turbo. It's like Double Impact to 3rd Strike. All the shit that's in SSFIV couldn't possibly be all DLC AND it's 40$. Blazblue on the other hand is doin' that whole Guilty Gear BS all over again. Blazblue is gettin' the mandatory tweak, a few new BGMs, 3 stages, and 2 characters for 60$. That's BS. I would have really liked it if SFIV was the 1st and only SFIV but thanx to complainers and whinnin' ass SF fans, we have to get an update, at least it's alot though.

Also, have you ever played TVC? That game aint a recycled cross over. It's THEE MOST entertainin' FG to come out this year. Character specific themes, loads of stages, badass roster, cool graphics and amazin' presentation...it brought back the same feellin' I had when I 1st played the 1st MVC. If you don't like, or are simply tired of Capcom crossovers, I can understand. But if you can like SFIV and BB and NOT like this game, your an alien.

I played TvC, beat it, played my friend in a bunch of matches. I just didn't really care for it. The roster was OK. One thing I thought was awesome was that they had that Karas guy in it. I didn't pay much attention to the themes or stages, so you could be right about that, but at the same time there wasn't anything memorable about it. Another thing, I thought the mechanics were pretty awkward. And I seem to remember being able to do incredible things just by spamming light punch. It was fun for a bit, but I couldn't see myself actually buying it. BlazBlue on the other hand is incredible. For one thing, the music is unrivaled. Listen to the soundtrack sometimes. I liked it just as much, if not more than GG. I can see why you might not like some of the characters, but it's a pretty varied roster. But what keeps me hooked is the combos, and the amount of creativity you can have with them, not to mention the aesthetic appeal.

You're right about DLC though. It isn't all bad. I just have a problem with it when it's planned, and they release an incomplete game intentionally. There has been a lot of half-assing in development these days. Namco-Bandai for instance. So far it looks like they've made two tales games, Vesperia and Graces, with a purposely incomplete roster in one version (Vesperia 360, Graces Wii) and a complete roster in the other version (Vesperia PS3, don't know about Graces yet). In that case it was because Sony paid them to do it.

Well that is how it is with eveyrthing, the losers will affect everybody. The ones who take advantage of the system with welfare and disability will make the taxpayers pay for it. The ones who file fake insurance claims affect all of us. We have to support the makers of said games, or else this will happen more and more and we won't have anything. The prices aren't going up that much and it isn't really a good reason to steal a game that has come out. Granted some older games are nigh impossible to find (but can be found online, I found some old games that way), but newer stuff, it's not like people are buying every game that's out, just pay the 50 dollars. That's like 1 day of work or something. Then most people's parents buy the stuff anyways, and those tend to steal because it's "cool". But meh that's starting to get off topic a bit.

Whatever though. The 360 is the one system that is actually unwise to mod nowadays. I'm expecting the ban hammer to drop sometimes this week if it hasn't already, because Microsoft said they were planning to ban some million odd users by Christmas or something. Personally, I like to support the companies I like. If I get all my games used, I'm not really helping anybody. But whatever games I buy new, I know that does something. So for me, illegal downloading is my way of renting good games before I buy them, and having relatively bad games because I probably wouldn't buy them anyway. Not trying to justify my actions, just saying, that's how I do things.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 22, 2009 13:21:18 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 22, 2009 0:37:31 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Wait, while I agree wit everyone here on most parts of what's being said, I don't wanna make this in to a "negative gamer session". While the industry has MANY shitty ways, it's not all bad. DLC is not all bad. Some DLC is needed simply because some development teams have time constraints so they can't add er thang they like. Some DLC is added due to fan demand and sometimes, the teams just thought up somthin' cool and just wanted to put it on a game that's already out. I'm not sure about the motives for addin' most DLC out there but I know shit like the SFIV costume packs were BS from the start. Not to mention the BS about multiplayer VS mode in RE5. That's not to say that all DLC are attempts to milk more money outta people. Plus, if you don't like the DLC, you don't HAVE to buy it.

Also, don't get me wrong, non-gamers becomin' gamers is great. I just think the market is overloaded wit games meant for casuals. There are less games to get "hardcore" about these days. And skill gaps have never been a problem to me. Too weak, your prcatice. Same level, good times. Too good, somthin' to work at. Blazblue's update is the one I have MAJOR problems wit. SFIV's update is decent, I was ready for it, plus it's not like SFII Turbo to Super SFII Turbo. It's like Double Impact to 3rd Strike. All the shit that's in SSFIV couldn't possibly be all DLC AND it's 40$. Blazblue on the other hand is doin' that whole Guilty Gear BS all over again. Blazblue is gettin' the mandatory tweak, a few new BGMs, 3 stages, and 2 characters for 60$. That's BS. I would have really liked it if SFIV was the 1st and only SFIV but thanx to complainers and whinnin' ass SF fans, we have to get an update, at least it's alot though.

Also, have you ever played TVC? That game aint a recycled cross over. It's THEE MOST entertainin' FG to come out this year. Character specific themes, loads of stages, badass roster, cool graphics and amazin' presentation...it brought back the same feellin' I had when I 1st played the 1st MVC. If you don't like, or are simply tired of Capcom crossovers, I can understand. But if you can like SFIV and BB and NOT like this game, your an alien.

I played TvC, beat it, played my friend in a bunch of matches. I just didn't really care for it. The roster was OK. One thing I thought was awesome was that they had that Karas guy in it. I didn't pay much attention to the themes or stages, so you could be right about that, but at the same time there wasn't anything memorable about it. Another thing, I thought the mechanics were pretty awkward. And I seem to remember being able to do incredible things just by spamming light punch. It was fun for a bit, but I couldn't see myself actually buying it. BlazBlue on the other hand is incredible. For one thing, the music is unrivaled. Listen to the soundtrack sometimes. I liked it just as much, if not more than GG. I can see why you might not like some of the characters, but it's a pretty varied roster. But what keeps me hooked is the combos, and the amount of creativity you can have with them, not to mention the aesthetic appeal.

You're right about DLC though. It isn't all bad. I just have a problem with it when it's planned, and they release an incomplete game intentionally. There has been a lot of half-assing in development these days. Namco-Bandai for instance. So far it looks like they've made two tales games, Vesperia and Graces, with a purposely incomplete roster in one version (Vesperia 360, Graces Wii) and a complete roster in the other version (Vesperia PS3, don't know about Graces yet). In that case it was because Sony paid them to do it.

Well that is how it is with eveyrthing, the losers will affect everybody. The ones who take advantage of the system with welfare and disability will make the taxpayers pay for it. The ones who file fake insurance claims affect all of us. We have to support the makers of said games, or else this will happen more and more and we won't have anything. The prices aren't going up that much and it isn't really a good reason to steal a game that has come out. Granted some older games are nigh impossible to find (but can be found online, I found some old games that way), but newer stuff, it's not like people are buying every game that's out, just pay the 50 dollars. That's like 1 day of work or something. Then most people's parents buy the stuff anyways, and those tend to steal because it's "cool". But meh that's starting to get off topic a bit.

Whatever though. The 360 is the one system that is actually unwise to mod nowadays. I'm expecting the ban hammer to drop sometimes this week if it hasn't already, because Microsoft said they were planning to ban some million odd users by Christmas or something. Personally, I like to support the companies I like. If I get all my games used, I'm not really helping anybody. But whatever games I buy new, I know that does something. So for me, illegal downloading is my way of renting good games before I buy them, and having relatively bad games because I probably wouldn't buy them anyway. Not trying to justify my actions, just saying, that's how I do things.

I understand people do things, but my point was discussing why people do it on the topic. People always tell themselves something so it seems less bad. This isn't even aimed at a particular person, but the theology in general.

That same logic could be used from everything to a house or car though. The money doesn't go to the builder/maker/bank (unless it's not completely paid off, and that is up to how the person pays)... it's just the circulation of money and the balance in the big picture. That money goes into the pockets of others to support more buying. If there was no money circulated it still has an affect. They have game stores nowadays that allow for people to use them beforehand and trade, and a rental is 5 bucks, that's nothing. Young kids have their parents buy things for them and any adult who really enjoys something would be willing to spend 30-50 bucks for it especially with no other serious expenses preventing said purchases. A 12 year old could make a few bucks and buy a game they wanted, it isn't that outrageously priced to where nobody could afford them. Of course everyone will do what they do, but it's no different than losers on welfare saying they'd just get the money other ways. It's like, "Get off of your ass and get a job.... seriously."

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 22, 2009 13:21:18 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 22, 2009 0:37:31 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Wait, while I agree wit everyone here on most parts of what's being said, I don't wanna make this in to a "negative gamer session". While the industry has MANY shitty ways, it's not all bad. DLC is not all bad. Some DLC is needed simply because some development teams have time constraints so they can't add er thang they like. Some DLC is added due to fan demand and sometimes, the teams just thought up somthin' cool and just wanted to put it on a game that's already out. I'm not sure about the motives for addin' most DLC out there but I know shit like the SFIV costume packs were BS from the start. Not to mention the BS about multiplayer VS mode in RE5. That's not to say that all DLC are attempts to milk more money outta people. Plus, if you don't like the DLC, you don't HAVE to buy it.

Also, don't get me wrong, non-gamers becomin' gamers is great. I just think the market is overloaded wit games meant for casuals. There are less games to get "hardcore" about these days. And skill gaps have never been a problem to me. Too weak, your prcatice. Same level, good times. Too good, somthin' to work at. Blazblue's update is the one I have MAJOR problems wit. SFIV's update is decent, I was ready for it, plus it's not like SFII Turbo to Super SFII Turbo. It's like Double Impact to 3rd Strike. All the shit that's in SSFIV couldn't possibly be all DLC AND it's 40$. Blazblue on the other hand is doin' that whole Guilty Gear BS all over again. Blazblue is gettin' the mandatory tweak, a few new BGMs, 3 stages, and 2 characters for 60$. That's BS. I would have really liked it if SFIV was the 1st and only SFIV but thanx to complainers and whinnin' ass SF fans, we have to get an update, at least it's alot though.

Also, have you ever played TVC? That game aint a recycled cross over. It's THEE MOST entertainin' FG to come out this year. Character specific themes, loads of stages, badass roster, cool graphics and amazin' presentation...it brought back the same feellin' I had when I 1st played the 1st MVC. If you don't like, or are simply tired of Capcom crossovers, I can understand. But if you can like SFIV and BB and NOT like this game, your an alien.

I played TvC, beat it, played my friend in a bunch of matches. I just didn't really care for it. The roster was OK. One thing I thought was awesome was that they had that Karas guy in it. I didn't pay much attention to the themes or stages, so you could be right about that, but at the same time there wasn't anything memorable about it. Another thing, I thought the mechanics were pretty awkward. And I seem to remember being able to do incredible things just by spamming light punch. It was fun for a bit, but I couldn't see myself actually buying it. BlazBlue on the other hand is incredible. For one thing, the music is unrivaled. Listen to the soundtrack sometimes. I liked it just as much, if not more than GG. I can see why you might not like some of the characters, but it's a pretty varied roster. But what keeps me hooked is the combos, and the amount of creativity you can have with them, not to mention the aesthetic appeal.

You're right about DLC though. It isn't all bad. I just have a problem with it when it's planned, and they release an incomplete game intentionally. There has been a lot of half-assing in development these days. Namco-Bandai for instance. So far it looks like they've made two tales games, Vesperia and Graces, with a purposely incomplete roster in one version (Vesperia 360, Graces Wii) and a complete roster in the other version (Vesperia PS3, don't know about Graces yet). In that case it was because Sony paid them to do it.

I found TVC to be so hot, man. And I only played it twice for a combined total of 3 hrs at the most. But I geuss there are different strokes for different folks. I pretty much loved every thing about that game. BTW, I'm not sayin' TVC is better than BB, I just thought TVC was more nostalgic, in a good way. I honestly did find TVC AND BB to be WAAAYYYYYYY too noob friendly after playin KOFXII and SFIV. As me and the guys say, "Turn it on and MASH your way to heaven". LP spams can lead you to double didigit, air combo, 50% set ups. I also don't care for rock music too much so I don't like BB's sound track but DJ Ohno's remixes of some of the BB songs on the special addition was hot. I usually play the songs from my hard drive when playin' rock themed games.

I know what you mean with the DLC. The Namco situation, from what it seemed like to me is, I don't think it was planned. Sony just payed Namco to make/invent some more shit for that version to boost PS3 sales, I could be wrong but I wanna give them the Benefit of the Doubt. What SUX BALLZ to me is, the PS3 version doesn't seem to be commin' to the states. If they realease the PS3 content as DLC, I'll prolly get it *sigh*, but I wont be happy about it.

[Dja Majista]

Dec 22, 2009 20:18:14 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Dec 22, 2009 13:21:18 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

I played TvC, beat it, played my friend in a bunch of matches. I just didn't really care for it. The roster was OK. One thing I thought was awesome was that they had that Karas guy in it. I didn't pay much attention to the themes or stages, so you could be right about that, but at the same time there wasn't anything memorable about it. Another thing, I thought the mechanics were pretty awkward. And I seem to remember being able to do incredible things just by spamming light punch. It was fun for a bit, but I couldn't see myself actually buying it. BlazBlue on the other hand is incredible. For one thing, the music is unrivaled. Listen to the soundtrack sometimes. I liked it just as much, if not more than GG. I can see why you might not like some of the characters, but it's a pretty varied roster. But what keeps me hooked is the combos, and the amount of creativity you can have with them, not to mention the aesthetic appeal.

You're right about DLC though. It isn't all bad. I just have a problem with it when it's planned, and they release an incomplete game intentionally. There has been a lot of half-assing in development these days. Namco-Bandai for instance. So far it looks like they've made two tales games, Vesperia and Graces, with a purposely incomplete roster in one version (Vesperia 360, Graces Wii) and a complete roster in the other version (Vesperia PS3, don't know about Graces yet). In that case it was because Sony paid them to do it.

I found TVC to be so hot, man. And I only played it twice for a combined total of 3 hrs at the most. But I geuss there are different strokes for different folks. I pretty much loved every thing about that game. BTW, I'm not sayin' TVC is better than BB, I just thought TVC was more nostalgic, in a good way. I honestly did find TVC AND BB to be WAAAYYYYYYY too noob friendly after playin KOFXII and SFIV. As me and the guys say, "Turn it on and MASH your way to heaven". LP spams can lead you to double didigit, air combo, 50% set ups. I also don't care for rock music too much so I don't like BB's sound track but DJ Ohno's remixes of some of the BB songs on the special addition was hot. I usually play the songs from my hard drive when playin' rock themed games.

I know what you mean with the DLC. The Namco situation, from what it seemed like to me is, I don't think it was planned. Sony just payed Namco to make/invent some more shit for that version to boost PS3 sales, I could be wrong but I wanna give them the Benefit of the Doubt. What SUX BALLZ to me is, the PS3 version doesn't seem to be commin' to the states. If they realease the PS3 content as DLC, I'll prolly get it *sigh*, but I wont be happy about it.

Yeah I feel you. I don't think it was bad, I just don't think it brought anything new to the table. I would have thought you'd owned that game though. I don't think either of us have played it long enough to write a review/recommendation. Personally, I didn't even see 80% of the roster. But yeah, I'm really big into metal and stuff so obviously we're gonna disagree there.

And the whole Namco thing is just the Sony people being pricks, trying to live up to their "exclusive content" motto. Namco's not completely to blame, though a lot of their business decisions have annoyed me in the past.

[Dja Majista]

Dec 22, 2009 18:56:34 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

I understand people do things, but my point was discussing why people do it on the topic. People always tell themselves something so it seems less bad. This isn't even aimed at a particular person, but the theology in general.

That same logic could be used from everything to a house or car though. The money doesn't go to the builder/maker/bank (unless it's not completely paid off, and that is up to how the person pays)... it's just the circulation of money and the balance in the big picture. That money goes into the pockets of others to support more buying. If there was no money circulated it still has an affect. They have game stores nowadays that allow for people to use them beforehand and trade, and a rental is 5 bucks, that's nothing. Young kids have their parents buy things for them and any adult who really enjoys something would be willing to spend 30-50 bucks for it especially with no other serious expenses preventing said purchases. A 12 year old could make a few bucks and buy a game they wanted, it isn't that outrageously priced to where nobody could afford them. Of course everyone will do what they do, but it's no different than losers on welfare saying they'd just get the money other ways. It's like, "Get off of your ass and get a job.... seriously."

I'll be honest, I don't really understand your point. It's hard to gauge what you're getting at when you just talk about more general things. Though I should note that stealing something physical and stealing a copy of information (torrent a video game, movie, music) are fundamentally different on the standard of consequences/effect. I'm not sure how relevant that is.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 23, 2009 10:14:36 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 22, 2009 18:56:34 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

I understand people do things, but my point was discussing why people do it on the topic. People always tell themselves something so it seems less bad. This isn't even aimed at a particular person, but the theology in general.

That same logic could be used from everything to a house or car though. The money doesn't go to the builder/maker/bank (unless it's not completely paid off, and that is up to how the person pays)... it's just the circulation of money and the balance in the big picture. That money goes into the pockets of others to support more buying. If there was no money circulated it still has an affect. They have game stores nowadays that allow for people to use them beforehand and trade, and a rental is 5 bucks, that's nothing. Young kids have their parents buy things for them and any adult who really enjoys something would be willing to spend 30-50 bucks for it especially with no other serious expenses preventing said purchases. A 12 year old could make a few bucks and buy a game they wanted, it isn't that outrageously priced to where nobody could afford them. Of course everyone will do what they do, but it's no different than losers on welfare saying they'd just get the money other ways. It's like, "Get off of your ass and get a job.... seriously."

I'll be honest, I don't really understand your point. It's hard to gauge what you're getting at when you just talk about more general things. Though I should note that stealing something physical and stealing a copy of information (torrent a video game, movie, music) are fundamentally different on the standard of consequences/effect. I'm not sure how relevant that is.

They aren't really though, one just has a quicker effect and consequence usually. Web crimes are charged steeply it's just easier to remain anonymous, some lady was charged an obscene amount of money for illegally downloading music (which cost what, not even a dollar). Over time they have the same effect, just at different speeds. If I go to a vendor and take Windows 7 it may or may not be noticed or be a big deal, but when it is done in mass amounts over time the store and the creator all have to make their money so they have to charge more. So it's from price, to new vs used, vs who gets caught. People will do what they do, but to say there is no cumulative effect because of anonymity isn't right either.

[Dja Majista]

Dec 23, 2009 15:40:06 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Dec 23, 2009 10:14:36 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

I'll be honest, I don't really understand your point. It's hard to gauge what you're getting at when you just talk about more general things. Though I should note that stealing something physical and stealing a copy of information (torrent a video game, movie, music) are fundamentally different on the standard of consequences/effect. I'm not sure how relevant that is.

They aren't really though, one just has a quicker effect and consequence usually. Web crimes are charged steeply it's just easier to remain anonymous, some lady was charged an obscene amount of money for illegally downloading music (which cost what, not even a dollar). Over time they have the same effect, just at different speeds. If I go to a vendor and take Windows 7 it may or may not be noticed or be a big deal, but when it is done in mass amounts over time the store and the creator all have to make their money so they have to charge more. So it's from price, to new vs used, vs who gets caught. People will do what they do, but to say there is no cumulative effect because of anonymity isn't right either.

I understand what you're saying but I really don't want to get in a big discussion about this, sorry. Something to think about though: consider a scenario where a person would not pay full price for music, games, or operating systems, because to them, it wouldn't be worth it. Even with enough money, they wouldn't buy it. However, on the other hand, given the opportunity to acquire it freely they would seize the chance, just to try it out. No matter what the person does, it's the same consequences. If they can't download it they won't buy it anyway. It's the same effect on the company no matter what the person does. A very intriguing phenomenon.

The only solution to these "free-riders" so to speak is bargaining, something that big companies never do.

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 23, 2009 10:05:46 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 22, 2009 20:18:14 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

I found TVC to be so hot, man. And I only played it twice for a combined total of 3 hrs at the most. But I geuss there are different strokes for different folks. I pretty much loved every thing about that game. BTW, I'm not sayin' TVC is better than BB, I just thought TVC was more nostalgic, in a good way. I honestly did find TVC AND BB to be WAAAYYYYYYY too noob friendly after playin KOFXII and SFIV. As me and the guys say, "Turn it on and MASH your way to heaven". LP spams can lead you to double didigit, air combo, 50% set ups. I also don't care for rock music too much so I don't like BB's sound track but DJ Ohno's remixes of some of the BB songs on the special addition was hot. I usually play the songs from my hard drive when playin' rock themed games.

I know what you mean with the DLC. The Namco situation, from what it seemed like to me is, I don't think it was planned. Sony just payed Namco to make/invent some more shit for that version to boost PS3 sales, I could be wrong but I wanna give them the Benefit of the Doubt. What SUX BALLZ to me is, the PS3 version doesn't seem to be commin' to the states. If they realease the PS3 content as DLC, I'll prolly get it *sigh*, but I wont be happy about it.

Yeah I feel you. I don't think it was bad, I just don't think it brought anything new to the table. I would have thought you'd owned that game though. I don't think either of us have played it long enough to write a review/recommendation. Personally, I didn't even see 80% of the roster. But yeah, I'm really big into metal and stuff so obviously we're gonna disagree there.

And the whole Namco thing is just the Sony people being pricks, trying to live up to their "exclusive content" motto. Namco's not completely to blame, though a lot of their business decisions have annoyed me in the past.

I don't fully understand the sayin' "brought anything new to the table". Does a game really have to do that to be great? No FG that came out this year did that or the year before. The genre is pretty old now, how much more can you invent and add to the genre, yet still keep it a fighting game? Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 23, 2009 20:36:33 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 23, 2009 15:40:06 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

They aren't really though, one just has a quicker effect and consequence usually. Web crimes are charged steeply it's just easier to remain anonymous, some lady was charged an obscene amount of money for illegally downloading music (which cost what, not even a dollar). Over time they have the same effect, just at different speeds. If I go to a vendor and take Windows 7 it may or may not be noticed or be a big deal, but when it is done in mass amounts over time the store and the creator all have to make their money so they have to charge more. So it's from price, to new vs used, vs who gets caught. People will do what they do, but to say there is no cumulative effect because of anonymity isn't right either.

I understand what you're saying but I really don't want to get in a big discussion about this, sorry. Something to think about though: consider a scenario where a person would not pay full price for music, games, or operating systems, because to them, it wouldn't be worth it. Even with enough money, they wouldn't buy it. However, on the other hand, given the opportunity to acquire it freely they would seize the chance, just to try it out. No matter what the person does, it's the same consequences. If they can't download it they won't buy it anyway. It's the same effect on the company no matter what the person does. A very intriguing phenomenon.

The only solution to these "free-riders" so to speak is bargaining, something that big companies never do.

It is off topic.... but there is bargaining and everything going on already, people download stuff but making an excuse for stealing is baffling really. Now sampling things are allowed to be done for free, or at a very low cost, and how can someone decide if a song or something isn't worth it by what they heard someone else say, but they're willing to steal it? Is that person who "tried the stuff out" for free really going to buy it or get rid of what they "acquired"? No. Now I understand to a degree, but I don't see why someone would try to justify it. Comic readers might not have a scanner and use the downloads from an issue they bought to show in a debate, or a gamer has a game, but wants to record it onto the internet much more conveniently. That would be more understandable in that aspect because you've already supported the company with that product. If you go to a restaurant and have a bad meal, you'd still pay wouldn't you, because if you didn't, you'd be in legal trouble. Also you generally gravitate towards what you like to avoid being let down, now there will be a few duds, but if someone constantly purchases things they don't like, especially without prior research, well they're just dumb. And I'm sure we can say that doesn't happen to anybody here.

We speak by what we buy, what we determine is or isn't worth it is determined by what we purchase. We are in a capitalist society. So if people were to *not* think something is worth it, they wouldn't buy it. That way the developers would have to drop the price, or improve upon it. If something isn't that good, then why steal it in the first place? It isn't a life need. That is just really wow... would it affect you if someone stole from you? Of course it would, just because companies have deeper pockets doesn't mean it doesn't affect them. The people who came up with that were paid to use a bit of their creativity and intelligence into what they were doing and deserve to be compensated, we've talked about this with the invention talk. And that's another thing I have a problem with involving business. Why should I go out and do everything legit, when some fool across the street can start a business up illegally and make profits with less overhead? Only to have these same fools charge like 1/3 the market rate and run themselves out of business, affecting everyone. Pretty bad with the economy like it is now. It happens everywhere. How about this, what if people at a job you or someone you worked at started hiring illegal work for half the pay and everyone else got laid off, it would affect you wouldn't it? People complain when corporations do this but they do the same thing.

I can afford a game, but I won't buy it, but I'll illegally download it, that's worse than someone who can't afford it. And no it doesn't have the same consequences. One is creating less of a need for something to be improved or built upon. The money goes into research for the products and go to pay people who need to feed their families.

I work at Comcast, so a loser or two decide to steal Cable, doesn't really affect me, but it does affect the company in the long run because there is no need for the product because it is already acquired. Whether we think something is over or underpriced is based on the fact that we as consumers decide what we do or don't buy. Hence the rapidly decreasing pries in tech, and increasing salaries of sports and movie stars, we decide those. So the "bargaining" would be people not buying garbage and the price will have no choice but to drop due to the lack of demand. The solution to the "free riders" would be for them to go out and support the companies that make the games they like and ignore the ones they don't, they have the power to. Don't have money? They can find work, I know small children that buy their own video games and I did it when I was not even a teen.

[Dja Majista]

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Dec 23, 2009 10:05:46 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Yeah I feel you. I don't think it was bad, I just don't think it brought anything new to the table. I would have thought you'd owned that game though. I don't think either of us have played it long enough to write a review/recommendation. Personally, I didn't even see 80% of the roster. But yeah, I'm really big into metal and stuff so obviously we're gonna disagree there.

And the whole Namco thing is just the Sony people being pricks, trying to live up to their "exclusive content" motto. Namco's not completely to blame, though a lot of their business decisions have annoyed me in the past.

I don't fully understand the sayin' "brought anything new to the table". Does a game really have to do that to be great? No FG that came out this year did that or the year before. The genre is pretty old now, how much more can you invent and add to the genre, yet still keep it a fighting game? Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

No you're right, it doesn't have to bring anything new to be good. I would think an HD version of Turtles in Time would be an awesome game. But at the same time, there isn't much to commend about it. New FG's are always based on new mechanics, it would be nice if they mixed up the super system somehow. BB penalizes you for playing too conservatively. "Rapid canceling" has come up in a lot of games which allows for extremely creative combos. It's stuff like that I'm talking about that, to my knowledge, TvC didn't really do.

It is off topic.... but there is bargaining and everything going on already, people download stuff but making an excuse for stealing is baffling really. Now sampling things are allowed to be done for free, or at a very low cost, and how can someone decide if a song or something isn't worth it by what they heard someone else say, but they're willing to steal it? Is that person who "tried the stuff out" for free really going to buy it or get rid of what they "acquired"? No. Now I understand to a degree, but I don't see why someone would try to justify it. Comic readers might not have a scanner and use the downloads from an issue they bought to show in a debate, or a gamer has a game, but wants to record it onto the internet much more conveniently. That would be more understandable in that aspect because you've already supported the company with that product. If you go to a restaurant and have a bad meal, you'd still pay wouldn't you, because if you didn't, you'd be in legal trouble. Also you generally gravitate towards what you like to avoid being let down, now there will be a few duds, but if someone constantly purchases things they don't like, especially without prior research, well they're just dumb. And I'm sure we can say that doesn't happen to anybody here.

Ok, first of all, it seems like you think I'm trying to justify some form of stealing. I'm not. I'll be the first to confess it: I steal video games. Yes it's wrong. What I'm saying actions which for all legal purposes are considered stealing, but in reality they have no negative effect on the company. It's still stealing it just doesn't do anything, because information is freely available, and infinitely reproducible.

We speak by what we buy, what we determine is or isn't worth it is determined by what we purchase. We are in a capitalist society. So if people were to *not* think something is worth it, they wouldn't buy it. That way the developers would have to drop the price, or improve upon it. If something isn't that good, then why steal it in the first place? It isn't a life need. That is just really wow... would it affect you if someone stole from you? Of course it would, just because companies have deeper pockets doesn't mean it doesn't affect them. The people who came up with that were paid to use a bit of their creativity and intelligence into what they were doing and deserve to be compensated, we've talked about this with the invention talk. And that's another thing I have a problem with involving business. Why should I go out and do everything legit, when some fool across the street can start a business up illegally and make profits with less overhead? Only to have these same fools charge like 1/3 the market rate and run themselves out of business, affecting everyone. Pretty bad with the economy like it is now. It happens everywhere. How about this, what if people at a job you or someone you worked at started hiring illegal work for half the pay and everyone else got laid off, it would affect you wouldn't it? People complain when corporations do this but they do the same thing.

Now you say, a person determines whether a product is worth it, so to my hypothetical character: Why bother getting it if it's not worth it? The reason is simply this: Because it would be worth it at a lower price. If it WERE at a lower price that character would buy it. How many companies let you talk down prices though? Not a whole lot. If a game in Japan is worth about $10 to me, but it's only being offered for $40 plus shipping, I'm simply not going to buy it. So instead I download an illegal copy. Tell me how me downloading an illegal copy versus me just simply not buying it adversely affects the company. And don't use analogies with physical products unless you can back up that claim. The thing about information-based products is that they have a high cost of creation, but a virtually negligible cost of reproduction, especially when using internet distribution. The cost to them is brought down to nothing when you consider that people who illegally download are doing it off of independent servers and hence aren't even using their meager services. THAT is what makes this case special, this in no way applies to products that have significant costs of reproduction like cables.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Merry Christmas guys, the season is back with me and David going at it... it wasn't the same... ;D

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 24, 2009 19:22:37 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Merry Christmas guys, the season is back with me and David going at it... it wasn't the same... ;D

MER KRISTMAZ to you too and everyone else. I suppose I should say X-mas to be politicaly correct.

Dec 24, 2009 12:40:28 GMT -5 Dja Majista said:

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

I don't fully understand the sayin' "brought anything new to the table". Does a game really have to do that to be great? No FG that came out this year did that or the year before. The genre is pretty old now, how much more can you invent and add to the genre, yet still keep it a fighting game? Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

No you're right, it doesn't have to bring anything new to be good. I would think an HD version of Turtles in Time would be an awesome game. But at the same time, there isn't much to commend about it. New FG's are always based on new mechanics, it would be nice if they mixed up the super system somehow. BB penalizes you for playing too conservatively. "Rapid canceling" has come up in a lot of games which allows for extremely creative combos. It's stuff like that I'm talking about that, to my knowledge, TvC didn't really do.

GG also penalizes you for playin' too conservatively. When you run away, your Overdrive runs down, in GG. GG also has rapid canceling, which they borrowed from KOF. I didn't play TVC enough to really explore the new mechanics myself to see if there was really anything "new". But here is what they say is new about it, as far as gameplay goes...

"There are also new universal techniques found in the game. "Variable Aerial Rave" lets the character switch to his or her partner while in mid-air. "Mega Crash" is a defensive maneuver that frees the character from the opponent while sacrificing a part of his or her life and two stocks of levels. "Baroque Cancel" is a mode where the character glows in a rainbow of colors while sacrificing the red portion of the character's life - activating the mode cancels the current attack animation, allowing the player to extend combos and deal more damage relative to the amount of red life that is sacrificed. Baroque ends when the character stops or performs a Hyper move."

None but the 1st statement is really new to FGs, but they are 1st for a VS title.

[Dja Majista]

Yeah Merry Christmas peoples. It's 2:30 in the morning and I'm watching Star Wars.

Dec 25, 2009 0:08:11 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Dec 24, 2009 19:22:37 GMT -5 The Big Daddy C-Master said:

Merry Christmas guys, the season is back with me and David going at it... it wasn't the same... ;D

MER KRISTMAZ to you too and everyone else. I suppose I should say X-mas to be politicaly correct.

No you're right, it doesn't have to bring anything new to be good. I would think an HD version of Turtles in Time would be an awesome game. But at the same time, there isn't much to commend about it. New FG's are always based on new mechanics, it would be nice if they mixed up the super system somehow. BB penalizes you for playing too conservatively. "Rapid canceling" has come up in a lot of games which allows for extremely creative combos. It's stuff like that I'm talking about that, to my knowledge, TvC didn't really do.

GG also penalizes you for playin' too conservatively. When you run away, your Overdrive runs down, in GG. GG also has rapid canceling, which they borrowed from KOF. I didn't play TVC enough to really explore the new mechanics myself to see if there was really anything "new". But here is what they say is new about it, as far as gameplay goes...

"There are also new universal techniques found in the game. "Variable Aerial Rave" lets the character switch to his or her partner while in mid-air. "Mega Crash" is a defensive maneuver that frees the character from the opponent while sacrificing a part of his or her life and two stocks of levels. "Baroque Cancel" is a mode where the character glows in a rainbow of colors while sacrificing the red portion of the character's life - activating the mode cancels the current attack animation, allowing the player to extend combos and deal more damage relative to the amount of red life that is sacrificed. Baroque ends when the character stops or performs a Hyper move."

None but the 1st statement is really new to FGs, but they are 1st for a VS title.[/quote]

Heh, that just goes to show how awesome Arksys is. ;D

No, I suppose the whole novelty thing is a moot point. Though, the main reason I've come to dislike games like that is that they have no focus or theme. It's almost like, the rosters are just fan service. There's no sense of belonging. It's just a copy-paste sort of thing.

As for TvC in particular, I just didn't like how it played. I can't really put my finger on all the reasons why though. Like I didn't like how you could shoot hadokens in midair over and over again, with this stupid slow fall. That and the LP stuff, but hey, I wouldn't say I've played it enough to give it a completely fair appraisal, so I could be wrong.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Ok, there doesn’t really need to be any additional wasted posts on this. I drove the point home and at this point, it’s not even about opinion anymore. I know I’m right, I’ve proved it, I know it, I’ve experienced the consumer *and* producer end and to say that stealing doesn’t affect the company in any way is simply absurd sorry. It was one thing to have odd opinions on the matter, which shifted from price, to convenience, to “trying it out”, all which are just bad excuses, there’s no reason to do it at all in this situation. So hopefully there won’t be any “getback for the sake of it posts”, because unless you can back up that it doesn’t do anything, which you can’t, it’s impossible as it’s just from your theory, there needs to be no further back and forth discussion on this off topic matter.

Of course as usual, not meant to be harsh, blah blah blah. We know the drill. But I’ll look over it a few times to make sure I didn’t say anything that might not sound too nice.

Ok, first of all, it seems like you think I'm trying to justify some form of stealing. I'm not. I'll be the first to confess it: I steal video games.

Man that is the very meaning of justification, it's wrong but you're making it less wrong. No different than the guy selling drugs that says he isn’t killing anybody, or the person out committing fraud saying they aren’t cheating on their wife, justification. It’s not even that I don’t think people do it, it’s just that you are trying to say it’s nothing and doesn’t do anything. I even have copies of games that I already own for recording, as do you with things like Starcraft, that’s different and not an issue, the company was supported for their efforts, however copying a friends game would be wrong and stealing, costing the company their money they deserve. Another example would be with my Duke3d disk, it doesn’t read on a 64 bit os, and I can’t upgrade it to the latest version of the OS without the file on the disk, so I did the prepackaged download, available on the site. Or things that don't really exist for sale at all or anymore.

Yes it's wrong.

Why? I think you know deep down.

What I'm saying actions which for all legal purposes are considered stealing, but in reality they have no negative effect on the company.

Wrong, utterly and totally wrong, no offense. There’s no way around it or it wouldn’t be stealing. I’m sorry but to say that is just ignorance really, and that may sound harsh but it’s the truth. Do you really think companies would be complaining about it if it didn’t matter? Where did you get this, who told you this? I mean seriously, do you really believe that?

So if I have a product that is out, and can be downloaded “which most forms of entertainment can be downloaded” do you really believe that it has no effect if everyone got them for free and nobody bought them? Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? Tell me you don’t believe that, please. So not only am I now losing money, other people have my product, and for the people who “try them out” what percentage of them actually go out and buy it after that? Very few, extremely few. There are other ways to try it out, borrow your friends, go rent it, that’s what those mediums are for. We can’t argue with common sense things that have similar impacts over time. Of course trading it or borrowing a friends or buying a friends is different as you are giving up something in the process, which adds for the incentive to get something else, especially with money.

It's still stealing it just doesn't do anything, because information is freely available, and infinitely reproducible.

Ok, so go and counterfeit money. Just make your own copies of it, you won’t get in trouble. Wrong. It’s a felony, I’ve also enlisted for the FBI (I was too young to get in, but can do it later.) I mean by your logic, you *aren’t* taking what is there and are only reproducing something right, and at your own costs? It doesn’t hurt anybody, I mean you are just getting what you want for free. Everybody else is unaffected?

Wrong. Let me explain to you why. Although I thought it would have been obvious. When you have an overflow of any good, whatever it is, the value of it decreases. There is supply, demand, costs of overhead and various other things, I’m going to try to keep it as basic and as clear as possible.

Say you have a rare copy of I dunno, Tetris, let’s say for some reason Tetris becomes very rare and hard to find. The demand of it would rise and go up. It would have more value of it, and the demand and *quantity demanded* (which are two different things btw, price itself doesn’t affect demand). Now if everyone had their own copy of the game suddenly, the demand drives down the price, and that also means that not only the people at the top lose money, but the people at the bottom who work hard to make those products come to you lose money too, as do other retailers who hold the product. Look at the big picture on both ends.
Now if you start mass producing something over and over, the value of it decreases and decreases, even necessities. Take food, essential to life, but common everywhere, so it is pretty cheap overall. Now take gold, doesn’t have much use in everyday life for most, but is expensive because of their scarcity. It’s the law of diminishing marginal utility, the more you use it the less in demand it becomes because less people want it.



Supply and demand shifts. When there is a lack of supply the demand changes on a wanted item, making it more valuable. Remember when people were buying PS3’s for like a grand when they came out? But obviously you can get them much cheaper now… the demand was higher then.

The law of marginal utility (or, more precisely, the law of diminishing marginal utility) states that the ranked value of any good will decline for each additional unit. A second apple will be valued less than the first apple and the third apple will be valued less than either the first or the second. How much less the second apple is valued than the first apple is an empirical fact of subjective value -- not a praxeological principle. But it is certainly not true that the first apple is exactly equal in value to the second apple. The greater the supply of the good, the lower the marginal utility. Although water is essential to life, because water is plentiful it is marginally valued less than diamonds, which are far more scarce.

Now you say, a person determines whether a product is worth it, so to my hypothetical character: Why bother getting it if it's not worth it? The reason is simply this: Because it would be worth it at a lower price. If it WERE at a lower price that character would buy it.

Please, that’s a part of life, what person wouldn’t get something you want if it were much cheaper? Price doesn’t affect the demand, it only affects the quantity demanded. If that game were 500 dollars it wouldn’t change how you felt about the content of the *game* but of the price, but would you buy it at that expense, probably not. The people can’t just adjust a price for themselves on a market item, the market demand affects that item.

Not to mention that it is a luxury item. You steal an apple for survival, I’d probably just turn the other cheek, but a *luxury* item not needed for survival? There’s no argument there. Especially when one can just get the item but doesn’t want to pay for it, which is pretty selfish.

How many companies let you talk down prices though? Not a whole lot. If a game in Japan is worth about $10 to me, but it's only being offered for $40 plus shipping, I'm simply not going to buy it.

How about this? You’re 21 right? No real bills, why not work part time somewhere and *have* the money to spend on a few games you want? Seriously, you’re talking a day or two of work at the most, all of that money going in your pocket, that just makes it even worse. People then complain about the economy, but that excuse doesn’t work because people don’t need to have things *stolen* for them in this economy either.

Oh and what you said shifted. So like most you admit you aren’t “trying it out” but now you’re doing it because you don’t feel like paying the price? How selfish is that? That is why most people do that though, selfishness and laziness.

You’re obviously very cheap, so you don’t like paying full prices for things anyway, use the effort to find the games cheaper, they have them online cheap all the time anyways. Work and contribute to the economy, you’re old enough now.

So instead I download an illegal copy.

Which is selfish and lazy to do for the above reasons. How many games do you buy a year? You probably wouldn’t even spend a couple hundred on the ones you play, which could be purchased in under a month of work, probably one or two weeks. And that’s not even full time.

Tell me how me downloading an illegal copy versus me just simply not buying it adversely affects the company. And don't use analogies with physical products unless you can back up that claim.

Wow, you are now going to tell me what I can and can’t back up? What have you backed up? Absolutely nothing and I know what I’m talking about, from experience as a business owner and tracking every piece of overhead expense, to having education on said matter, to doing work in legal fields in that matter.
Please.

Ok, how about another point where you countered yourself. Remember that discussion we had about school and its pricing and how it is overpriced and everything (although it is useful if you get the right thing, although vastly overrated) and you said to me “The teachers need to be paid for their time”? Well that is how this goes. Although there is no physical “product” the effort itself is a product and needs to be compensated for. Let’s say people started downloading illegal degrees from the school or classes and completing them without paying, the school would lose money, but the demand would be driven out because the person supplied their need for free. That’s the problem, the school (like any other business) has an overhead because there was a demand for it in the first place, or else it wouldn’t be there. Different from not taking classes as you wouldn’t get a degree, or taking classes elsewhere, because there would be an exchange of money in one way or another.

Want more backup? You do realize that any product has a much smaller cost of it and production than the profit, seeing as the profit goes to other things. I might charge a person 100 dollars a month to do their yard, but I go two times a month and spend about… $2.00 or so of gas, probably less, and I use a little of my machines life like (.01%), but I make over 50 fold of what I put into it. If someone were to take my service and not pay, would I lose loads of money up front? No, but it would come out of the other end at a later time and that money would be used to take care of my needs and further the economy.

The thing about information-based products is that they have a high cost of creation, but a virtually negligible cost of reproduction, especially when using internet distribution.

Well you said it yourself, a high cost of creation, and they also have the pay the people for creating it, but not only that but for researching it, analyzing it, testing it, and advertising it. Oh and since you think the price scaling is so much different- it isn’t. With any product it is sold at a much higher margin than the original cost. Even high end things like a Ferrari, which can go for 600,000 US dollars, not the cost of the actual material isn’t even 1/100th of that. Take a 40 dollar game, divide it by 100 and you get 40 cents, which the casing and disc are worth more than that (but not a whole lot).

The cost to them is brought down to nothing when you consider that people who illegally download are doing it off of independent servers and hence aren't even using their meager services.

And still have an impact on the company due to the aforementioned reasons, it matters not what happens afterwards, and so you know the corporation funds the distribution of the games, so everyone down the ladder is hurt by it too, but once that item leaves the corp the additional things that happen to it aren’t calculated in the same overhead. So in the end it’s the same result stealing.
Now since you want to get hypothetical: if you had a device that allowed you to duplicate a physical item and you could do it, would that “not matter” as well if everyone started doing that? Of course it would, to say otherwise is absurd.

Also the aforementioned point of a copyright, patents and things like this exist for a reason, if someone took your idea and used it for free (whether they make money or not) is against the law. That’s why they exist, so someone won’t swoop in without any of the work for the benefits. Support the companies who make the things you enjoy. So it is also copyright infringement.

THAT is what makes this case special, this in no way applies to products that have significant costs of reproduction like cables.

Wrong again, Cables are set in the *entire* district (which is why I work at Comcast and I don’t get the service here although it would be free), and you choose whether or not you have the service and they set up a modem, which you rent along with the service, very cheap and inexpensive to run. It’s probably there before you even move into the house. You should research these things when using analogies with them. For someone to use a box and steal the product “at their own costs” is still infringing upon law, even though you didn’t “remove any physical service”, so really, what is the difference between that and downloading? Tell the judge your case that it wouldn’t matter if you didn’t buy it or stole it, and you’d hear the clink of the hammer before long.

In the end, it all comes to the fact that illegal downloads are done anonymously and easily and are a safer, more cowardly way of stealing something, especially when there is no reason for it.

[JACK-2]

Dec 21, 2009 23:36:25 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

]It doesn't have to, the game is still good ass hell. Despite what a few may say, the game is a different SF from the ones that came before it and is easily one of the most enjoyable to me and many others who bought it.

After ten years dawg since the last SF, it really does. Also, how can it be different from the others when it doesn't really do anything new? How does that contradiction work?

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

I don't fully understand the sayin' "brought anything new to the table". Does a game really have to do that to be great?

If A game is out to perfect previous game implements why wait a decade to bring it out? That's ridiculous.

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

No FG that came out this year did that or the year before. The genre is pretty old now, how much more can you invent and add to the genre, yet still keep it a fighting game?

Genre's aren't immortal, if you can't bring something new to the table. Why even bother?

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

So, what's the point of making new games then? Might as well stick to the old games, never gonna get the logic. If you want things to stay the same then go play older games. What's the point of playing a new game that plays like a game that came out 10 years ago?

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 29, 2009 21:08:42 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Dec 21, 2009 23:36:25 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

]It doesn't have to, the game is still good ass hell. Despite what a few may say, the game is a different SF from the ones that came before it and is easily one of the most enjoyable to me and many others who bought it.

After ten years dawg since the last SF, it really does. Also, how can it be different from the others when it doesn't really do anything new? How does that contradiction work?




If A game is out to perfect previous game implements why wait a decade to bring it out? That's ridiculous.




Genre's aren't immortal, if you can't bring something new to the table. Why even bother?

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

So, what's the point of making new games then? Might as well stick to the old games, never gonna get the logic. If you want things to stay the same then go play older games. What's the point of playing a new game that plays like a game that came out 10 years ago?

I think they should keep the good aspects of a game and improve upon things.

[JACK-2]

I prefer something new along with the good things.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 29, 2009 22:47:13 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

I prefer something new along with the good things.

Absolutely, though you can't please everybody. I don't like that they got rid of the ability to do all the supers in the game, took away a lot of possibilities.

[JACK-2]

The game was retrograded by a fanboy producer.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 30, 2009 14:28:21 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

The game was retrograded by a fanboy producer.

SF3 did that as well (somewhat), I would have loved it if they didn't.

[Dja Majista]

/me writes get-back-for-the-sake-of-it post

...Sorry bud, I just don't want to read all that. My grandparents are over and all.

By the way, I noticed you brought up the law of diminishing use. That's pretty cool. I remember reading about that in The Worldly Philosophers.

I MIGHT reply to it later. It's a lot to read. I'm not as willing as I once was to go through and answer these long and treacherous arguments.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

I hear ya, gotta have them every now and then... sorry in advance if anything sounded mean. Tell your folks I said hi.

[JACK-2]

SF3 did that as well (somewhat), I would have loved it if they didn't.

Eh?

SF3 dumped the entire cast of SF2 except Ken & Ryu. Just like SF2 dumped the entire cast of SFI except Ken & Ryu. I don't see that as a retrograde.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

Dec 30, 2009 21:05:15 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

SF3 did that as well (somewhat), I would have loved it if they didn't.

Eh?

SF3 dumped the entire cast of SF2 except Ken & Ryu. Just like SF2 dumped the entire cast of SFI except Ken & Ryu. I don't see that as a retrograde.

Oh I meant more of the moveset, we're talking about different things I suppose.

[Saikyo Kid]

Dec 29, 2009 21:08:42 GMT -5 JACK-2 said:

Dec 21, 2009 23:36:25 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

]It doesn't have to, the game is still good ass hell. Despite what a few may say, the game is a different SF from the ones that came before it and is easily one of the most enjoyable to me and many others who bought it.

After ten years dawg since the last SF, it really does. Also, how can it be different from the others when it doesn't really do anything new? How does that contradiction work?




If A game is out to perfect previous game implements why wait a decade to bring it out? That's ridiculous.




Genre's aren't immortal, if you can't bring something new to the table. Why even bother?

Dec 24, 2009 1:00:39 GMT -5 Saikyo Kid said:

Then again, I'm more of a traditional type of guy, if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me. I geuss I'm just stuck in the past.

So, what's the point of making new games then? Might as well stick to the old games, never gonna get the logic. If you want things to stay the same then go play older games. What's the point of playing a new game that plays like a game that came out 10 years ago?

1.Well, that is indeed your opinion and I respect it, but I don't agree. SF doesn't need to go in a NEW direction. It's good as is, enhance what's old to make it new, I think SFIV did that. Also, it didn't do anything "never before seen", but it added, new graphics, stages, music, 6 characters, and told a new story. Might not be enuff for you, but it's good to me.

2. Cuz everyone doesn't wanna buy SF, peeps sure as in hell didn't buy SFIII like they were suppose to. I would be reluctant to make another installment if my previous work was a miss.

3. Cuz it's fun...at least for me. Add enuff new shit to an old game and I'm fine. That's how it's been since the birth of fighting games.

4. My friend, your logic on how to create a sequel to a preexisting SF game shootz over my head and to the moon. So SF and all other FGs are doomed from the start? Is SFI, II, III, IV, and Alpha all the same game over and over, is that what your saying? Minus the whole throwin' the entire cast to the wayside for new characters concept, SFIV is as much of a leap away from SFII as III was. Unless your sayin' that SFIII wasn't different enough for your constantly varyin' taste. And for the record, when I say, "if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me." I mean a fighter's basics have to be like SFI or II. Ya' know, 2 kicks, 2 punches, specials done wit the D-Pad and attack buttons, pretty much like most fighters are. I don't want a kick button, cut button, super button, slash button, razor button, none of that other shit. I don't want SF to become like Smash Brothers juts so it can FINALLY be different. What more can you add and still call it a SF game? You confuse me.

5. I don't wanna play the same 32bit game over and over. Give me some new characters, story, stages, BGMs, fight mechanic, and I'm pleased. Don't forget to make it fun too. I don't understand this whole beef wit SFIV, you got a right to hate it, but I don't get it. Nothin' new has come to the genre since X-Men Children of The Atom and Soul Blade. Are we are goin' to rag on one game for the problems facin' an entire genre? I had no idea that SFIV was the only fighting game to come out since SFI. The problems you speak of are ALL present in EVERY fighter that came out this year.

SFIV is yet another SFII

Tekken 6 is Tekken 5, which is Tekken 4, which is...

Blazblue is Guilty Gear all over again

Marvel VS Capcom 2 is just a bigger X-men VS Street Fighter.

Garou: Mark of the Wolves is just a pretty Real Bout Fatal Fury, which is just Fatal Fury with "Real Bout" taped to the front.

This is what you sound like to me.

[JACK-2]

2. Cuz everyone doesn't wanna buy SF, peeps sure as in hell didn't buy SFIII like they were suppose to. I would be reluctant to make another installment if my previous work was a miss.

It's pretty absurd to think every game you make is gonna be a hit. Especially, when SF IV was not a hit in anyway and If you're gonna bring up SFIII sales bring actually figures my man. SF IV sold around 2 million that's not much higher than fighters that came out a decade ago.

3. Cuz it's fun...at least for me. Add enuff new shit to an old game and I'm fine. That's how it's been since the birth of fighting games.

What new stuff does SF IV add? Ultra's aren't new, and saving is a combination of a bunch of old shit. What exactly is new dawg?

4. My friend, your logic on how to create a sequel to a preexisting SF game shootz over my head and to the moon. So SF and all other FGs are doomed from the start? Is SFI, II, III, IV, and Alpha all the same game over and over, is that what your saying?

None of those games even resemble each other in anyway down to the character animations. SFIV is the least ground breaking and this is a game that came out after SF has been absent from 10 years. That's alot of time to come up with something new. So, what are you getting at?

Minus the whole throwin' the entire cast to the wayside for new characters concept, SFIV is as much of a leap away from SFII as III was. Unless your sayin' that SFIII wasn't different enough for your constantly varyin' taste.

No, it wasn't it more like SFIV is as different as Super Turbo is from Hyper Fighting. the difference is definitely not as big. Hell, SF IV even recycled the old animations from SFII. Not even SF III did that.

And for the record, when I say, "if the roots of a FG cannot be found back in SFII or Virtua Fighter, then it's not really a fighter, to me." I mean a fighter's basics have to be like SFI or II. Ya' know, 2 kicks, 2 punches, specials done wit the D-Pad and attack buttons, pretty much like most fighters are. I don't want a kick button, cut button, super button, slash button, razor button, none of that other shit. I don't want SF to become like Smash Brothers juts so it can FINALLY be different. What more can you add and still call it a SF game? You confuse me.

How about a new cast how about some new mechanics? I mean obviously some things have to stay the same or the game would not be street fighter game. My beef is SFIV experiments very very little and claiming that adding things would turn the game into smash bros is really absurd. Because that's really not what i was getting at. We are talking about a game that builds a brand new engine with every installment. Why could they have not done the same thing? Don't bring up SFIII because I'm not asking for another SFIII, I'm asking for a new game. Because new players don't care about a game as old as SFII enough for them to miss the older mechanics.

5. I don't wanna play the same 32bit game over and over. Give me some new characters, story, stages, BGMs, fight mechanic, and I'm pleased. Don't forget to make it fun too. I don't understand this whole beef wit SFIV, you got a right to hate it, but I don't get it. Nothin' new has come to the genre since X-Men Children of The Atom and Soul Blade. Are we are goin' to rag on one game for the problems facin' an entire genre? I had no idea that SFIV was the only fighting game to come out since SFI. The problems you speak of are ALL present in EVERY fighter that came out this year.

Just for the record I'm criticizing every fighter this year as well. Not just SFIV.

Tekken 6 is Tekken 5, which is Tekken 4, which is...

Tekken 4 was broken, though. Tekken 5 fixed it, but I agree.

Marvel VS Capcom 2 is just a bigger X-men VS Street Fighter.

Yeah, but MVC2 didn't wait a decade before it made a new installment.

Garou: Mark of the Wolves is just a pretty Real Bout Fatal Fury, which is just Fatal Fury with "Real Bout" taped to the front.

Didn't take 10 years to come out with Garou and on a next gen console no less.

[The Big Daddy C-Master]

I liked having something new, but I wished they wouldn't have simplified it as much, they were way overdue for a new game though.