-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusGAF 6 - Ricki Lee is awful. Everything else about Australia is AMAZING [Free hugs]
- Thread starter HolyCheck
- Start date
- Status
reptilescorpio
Member
What do you need a credit card for Jintor?
I know plenty of contractors who use Galaxy Tabs for their paperwork out in the field. Much easier than writing it all out by hand and you can still do proper signatures on them.
I know plenty of contractors who use Galaxy Tabs for their paperwork out in the field. Much easier than writing it all out by hand and you can still do proper signatures on them.
I have another overseas thing maybe lined up and I've been advised to get one now. Student cards have 0 monthly fees anyway.
Meanwhile the FM guys laugh all the way to the bank.
Box of Bunnies
Banned
So it's a replacement for laptops more than portable game systems.
no the fact it does games as well as a lot more makes it easier to swallow $900 (they are not 900 dollars for entry level anyway)
my point is people are spending 350 bucks for a gaming only system, add 200 and you get a fairly viable gaming system with a whole lot more these days
my point is people are spending 350 bucks for a gaming only system, add 200 and you get a fairly viable gaming system with a whole lot more these days
reptilescorpio
Member
Why not buy a PC then?
Also they don't have to deal with consoles, aside from their brief foray into it which obviously wasn't worth the effort since they only do PC releases now.
EDIT: Wavebird was mindblowing at the time. Worked so damn well and the white finish looked sexy.
So a debit card wouldn't suffice? I just tell everyone it is a credit card when they ask.
Helps that they only have a team of 60 odd people. Plus SEGA would be completely hands off considering their success.
Also they don't have to deal with consoles, aside from their brief foray into it which obviously wasn't worth the effort since they only do PC releases now.
Pffft! The GC controller was cool but it never felt perfect in my hands, the 360 controller just fits like a glove.
EDIT: Wavebird was mindblowing at the time. Worked so damn well and the white finish looked sexy.
It might. Scammed my way through Vancouver with one. Still...
ClivePwned
Member
no, that was helpful. I visited Vancouver Island last week and it was a pretty nice place from what little of it I managed to see in a day and a half. The weather there is apparently much milder than the rest of Canada (rarely dropping below zero).
codswallop
Member
So does the PS3, and so does the 360, and so does the PC.
It's not part of the discussion when talking about the gaming capability of these devices.
Hell, even the Wii has netflix (outside aus), and a web browser.
None of the consoles do "just games" anymore.
PS you also forgot iView on PS3 as well. One of the main reasons mine gets used along with blurays.
I find the 360 controller has bad build quality (lol microsoft). Analog sticks wear out, drift and the press to click function fails thanks to CoD. Dpad is shit. General shape is ok but I far prefer the GC pad. It's like soft molded latex compared to the 360 pad.
BananaArnie
Member
Clearly they should just call it F then they will sell a bajillion
I remember watching it, but most parts of it were just too damn weird. Love Big Jim Slade though!
This was on PC though. Online was broken but the killer for me was that DX11 would not work at all with more than one ATI GPU. Single was fine, but the moment you enabled >1 it would only show up in crappy DX9... great way to alienate people who have a gaming PC.
So for that, Codies are on my shit list. As much as I love F1, I won't be buying 2012 until it hits the bargain bin.
Hey, can anyone recommend any good Android tablet games? I'm tempted to jump in on the current Humble bundle just so I have something to play on my Android boot of the Windpad, but something that really takes advantage of it would be kinda sweet.
AusGAF I need your help!
Two quick questions.
1. My 3DS has the stock SD card (2GB) in it. It houses a whole swathe of eShop data. When I boot to the menu, it takes a few seconds (2-4) for all the little icons to pop up. I attribute this to the read speed of the device. If I get a faster (and higher capacity) SDHC card, that should solve the problem yes?
2. Explain this to me (regarding software licenses). I buy a game on a disc/card/cart. I claim that I own it. The publisher/copyright holder tells me I don't, because otherwise that would mean I would have rights to sell the content in form of copies. But by my understanding, I own the disc, access rights to all of its contents, but not the rights to reproduce it (unless backups are legal which I don't know, but that's a separate issue).
My understanding is that copyright law was originally that - the right to make copies. A copyright holder has the sole right to make duplicates of a piece of literature/music etc.
A license is a constructed idea that does not make sense in this regard: if I dont have the rights to make a copy, why must you restrict what I can and cannot access on the disc if Ive already agreed not to copy it?
It just strikes me as a redundant and anti-consumer concept.
Two quick questions.
1. My 3DS has the stock SD card (2GB) in it. It houses a whole swathe of eShop data. When I boot to the menu, it takes a few seconds (2-4) for all the little icons to pop up. I attribute this to the read speed of the device. If I get a faster (and higher capacity) SDHC card, that should solve the problem yes?
2. Explain this to me (regarding software licenses). I buy a game on a disc/card/cart. I claim that I own it. The publisher/copyright holder tells me I don't, because otherwise that would mean I would have rights to sell the content in form of copies. But by my understanding, I own the disc, access rights to all of its contents, but not the rights to reproduce it (unless backups are legal which I don't know, but that's a separate issue).
My understanding is that copyright law was originally that - the right to make copies. A copyright holder has the sole right to make duplicates of a piece of literature/music etc.
A license is a constructed idea that does not make sense in this regard: if I dont have the rights to make a copy, why must you restrict what I can and cannot access on the disc if Ive already agreed not to copy it?
It just strikes me as a redundant and anti-consumer concept.
Copyright is a bundle of associated rights, not merely the rights to copy. Rights to use, distribute, copy and distribute, show to others, part-modify, redistributed modified works, associated works, accreditation, who gets profits - all of these fall under copyright. Licences are commonly only the rights to access the media on it and even these may be subdivided into further categories. By copyright, by the way, I mean "Intellectual Property Rights" which are the property rights to non-tangible property.
You might look upon it as anti-consumerist. The alterate view is, of course, that it is author-friendly. It incentivises creation when authors have greater control over their work, or so the theory goes. Remember though that these laws were created prior to the rise of participatory culture and powerful publishing houses, so in certain senses it is redundant and anti-consumerist.
Yes and no.
Exactly.
Certainly a law with essentially random enforceability can still modify cultural consumption and social behavioural patterns - the 'chilling effect', for example. Merely because it is routinely violated does not make it non-existent.
To put it another way, the fact that people are murdered does not mean that anti-murder legislation is useless.
Furthermore, licences are contractual obligations and govern the use of the provided software. They mostly have nothing to do with copyright. Copyright already prohibits you copying the content within the dvd - the restriction within the license is just another layer upon it. Accessing of a section of content which you do not have a licence for is almost like stealing - you did not pay for that content. And that's the answer to your question - you are restricted from certain content on the disc because you did not pay for it, you paid for a lesser licence.
e.g. Should you be allowed to use Windows 7 professional when you only paid for Windows 7 home? (assume they are on the same disc)
e.g. Should you be allowed to use Windows 7 professional when you only paid for Windows 7 home? (assume they are on the same disc)
This is the kind of response I hoped for.
AFAIK, copyright is a concept from a few centuries ago, and it predates IP law and even the concept of it? As in, copyright as a literal concatenation of two words meant "the right to copy". Implied in that is the right to distribute, sell (the original stock - used sales/trading still are fair game as they have been for the other 30,000 years+ of human society).
I must say I struggle to grasp why a license means I can only use 20 of the 30 characters loaded onto this fighting game disc. I just think that if youre going to sell someone a physical copy of something, and they agree not to pirate it, then anything they can find on the disc is open for them to use for their own enjoyment.
Obviously I'm referring to SFvTekken, but it's not just that. It's even down to the old developer/debug levels in games like Mario 64 or Sonic 2. According to a license agreement, we are NOT ALLOWED! to look at those bits of the game. It's an odd concept and it is to me, completely antithetical to a good author-customer relationship whereby I pay money and get to read/listen to/play/watch the whole thing.
A bit of trust would go a long way, because as a result of this "pro-author" legal construct, I'm significantly more likely to take my money elsewhere.
codswallop
Member
In Australia you are allowed to make a backup copy of said disc as long as you don't break any copy protection while doing so.
They are.
A driver's license for automatic cars only allows you to drive automatics. If there were some car that had the facility for both, your license still wouldn't let you drive manual even though it would be quite easy to do so (assuming you know how)...
No, that's not putting it another way. A law against a guy quietly making personal backups of his media is way less enforceable than laws against murder.
Lots and lot of enterprise level software is all on the same disk and just unlocked with a license. No one calls that anti consumer. At that level at least, people are less likely to pirate because (among other things) they're more likely to require ongoing support from the vendor.Boken said:
Only specifically for "computer programs" I believe.
Yeah see I dont like this. If you put it on the disc, then be prepared to see it exploited in the wild. You could make the argument that the license for the deluxe version entails some extra customer support stuff (ie specific updates and whatnot).
But I dont think this argument can really apply to games in the same way as it does to software like operating systems or similar. One has implied productivity uses, the other is entertainment only and has a track record of being open from day 1.
After a certain period of time, all automatic licenses become full drivers licenses.
I don't think there's any valid distinction to be made here.
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
This just happened.
Maybe youre right. In which case, if its on the disc it should be available to the user. If you want to sell different flavours, make different versions.
This is pretty much just a disconnect between your perceived common-sense rights and your actual legal rights. I don't have much to say on your 'in ancient times' thing because law develops over time. But not nearly fast enough to keep up with technology and actual practices.
Fred said:
Point, retracted.
You are perfectly free to use the character file information and program your own game to use that information. Just because it is on the disc doesn't mean that the developer/publisher has to make that data work in their game for everyone for free. In Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Master Hand is playable through a very tricky sequence of glitches. Does that mean that they should have programmed the game so that he should be normally selectable? No. That's not the game the developers wanted to make. If they decide that the 20 characters are worth the standard purchase price and that the extra 10 characters require a slightly more expensive game, that's their prerogative.
Also, look at the micro-transactions for Facebook games and so on. The whole game is there, why should I have to pay real money to get another set of seeds to plant today or whatever? I've never played Farmville, so I don't know if this is a real transaction, but it's what I've heard it's like.
You are certainly allowed to use your money how you want to. It's not a trust issue, it comes down to what they thought the game was worth for given amounts of content. If you don't agree that the 20 characters are worth the purchase price of the game, nor that the 30 characters are worth the price of the game plus the DLC price, then don't buy the game.
This is one thing that would be bad, as it means you could never play with anybody who bought the extra characters. Don't you want that, and not want to download a whole lot of patches off the Internet in order to do so?
Why bother? It's easier to distribute everything in one go. It's easier for the customer too, since you don't have to worry about which version of the media you have.
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
No, luckily. And yep, t-boned. Someone didn't see me coming an d tried to pull out of the t-intersection.
That's my point: IP/copyright law is no longer about common-sense and it verges on exploitative. See below:
^^^ This pretty much reads like a publisher checklist of what they want you to agree to.
"Oh but if you dont like it, dont pay for it". Well then, why not just make it less of a hassle for the customers in the first place and stop aggressively blaming them for your own bad business model?
I'm not sure you have a meaningful distinction to make here. There's no confusion if they just sell it in a different coloured box like they already do. Just dont put the full version on the crippled version's discs so that you dont have to worry about consumers getting what they bought.
Nah I think he has a point, it could be argued to extend to videogames.
Licenses aren't comparable - a software licence not a thing that can be compared to other licenses. They're essentially a contract between you and the software owner. Simply because a drivers licence does X means nothing for a software licence.
I was replying to the comment that "if it is on the disc, I should be allowed to use it". Even Fredscu agreed that it was a valid used for licenceing software. You're not making any compelling argument to regulate what software licences can be - merely the fact that an industry used to do something does not mean it can't change.
The essential argument of any licence debate would boil down to contract. Perhaps it is "anti-consumer" to lock data on the disc, but so what? It is a contract, so don't buy it. Which brings up the parallel argument - buyers of ME3 bought ME3 ONLY. They did not buy "everything on this disc". Believing that you're entitled to "from ashes" when all you contracted to buy was ME3 simply because it happens to be on the disc is ridiculous.
And I don't understand your first paragraph "if you put it on the disc, prepare for it to be exploited" - are you essentially condoning piracy? How do you then turn around and say that operating systems and software bundling for the sake of productivity a different area?
EDIT: well I think IP law can be cleaned up but I really don't think this is an IP issue.
Is there actually any confusion with this fighting game you're talking about? Does the box say you get these additional characters, when you actually don't? If they're being deceptive about it, that's a problem, but a separate one to the software license problem you're talking about.
One of the big SAN vendors has stuff in their OS that you unlock using product keys that you enter at a command line. Every one of their SANs has all the OS features physically on the disk, but they're locked unless you put a code in for it. It's really handy because they can give you a trial code so you can use a feature for 30 days or whatever to see what it's like. I've never seen anyone complain "it's there, why can't I use it?".
I wasnt the one who mentioned drivers licenses first. Just pointing out why it was an analogy unfavourable to codswallop's argument.
So are you saying that playing the SFvTekken characters is the same as piracy?
It's not even remotely the same as piracy. Next you'll say that used sales = piracy too?
I know what I'm saying, and that is that if its on the disc, publishers should expect to see customers try and use it. Just the same as (car analogy warning) if the car can do over 110, sooner or later someone is going to go faster.
they are
reptilescorpio
Member
If prosecuting is likely to reap a reward with more value than the cost of prosecuting then I would be worried.
not entirely true. in NSW at least after 12 months you can drive a manual without a re-test. There are cars that have both
RandomVince, it seems this is what you want them to do:
Release Fighting Game Light on Day 1 including 20 fighters at $50
Release Fighting Game Heavy on Day 1 including 30 fighters at $60 with a different box, different disc and so on.
You buy Light and your friend buys Heavy. You now can't play together. Or in the very least, if you are to play together, he can't use 10 of the characters he paid for because you didn't pay for them. Are you happy with this?
Release Fighting Game Light on Day 1 including 20 fighters at $50
Release Fighting Game Heavy on Day 1 including 30 fighters at $60 with a different box, different disc and so on.
You buy Light and your friend buys Heavy. You now can't play together. Or in the very least, if you are to play together, he can't use 10 of the characters he paid for because you didn't pay for them. Are you happy with this?
"Right of access" is not a copyright btw
Of course not. Hacking the characters you didn't pay for is violation of licence. I was simply responding to your statement "if they release it on the disc, they should prepare for it to be exploited"
ok guys I wasn't sure
reptilescorpio
Member
Isn't that the situation with the new street fighter except the second product isn't available for another few months?
Actually that is what happened with mass effect 3 having stuff for only the CE buyers
Really? Hmmm. Let me check.
You're right (Copyright Act 1968 s31). Then it's a purely contractual matter and IP law isn't applicable.\
It looks as though there's some academic debate as to whether it exists, but under Australian legislation at least it clearly does not as of yet. Maybe there's some common law out there...
You're right (Copyright Act 1968 s31). Then it's a purely contractual matter and IP law isn't applicable.\
It looks as though there's some academic debate as to whether it exists, but under Australian legislation at least it clearly does not as of yet. Maybe there's some common law out there...
Publishers have already mutilated what a purchase once meant, so sure, why the fuck not do something like you outlined. There are already enough hassles with online passes, retailer exclusive content, fundamentally broken games, singleplayer DLC hidden behind online authentication codes, and cases where the codes dont work or arent even printed properly. I'm sure lite and full cream versions wouldn't fuck things up any more than they already are.
~~
I think I'm done with the license/copyright debate. It's going down the same circular path that the gaming side threads always take and I'm not up for a second lap today.
All I'll say in conclusion is that when a certain segment of customers are willing to argue why they no longer have the rights they used to, is partly the reason why we have companies shutting down servers, stealing game libraries for forum bans and publisher mouthpieces that equate used game sales to piracy. It's an antagonistic atmosphere where it seems that standing up for your customer rights makes you an entitled whinger from the olden days. [/rant]
Now onto my important question:
Will faster SDHC cards make my 3DS channels load quicker?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked