|
Tiggum posted:Recording and distributing cover versions is a lot more straight-forward than getting the rights to someone else's version. It's all standardised and there's no need to contact or negotiate with the copyright holder. For books, isn't that just Amazon with a kindle? Music would be Spotify or the iTunes Store.
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 05:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 01:59 |
|
|
Steam isn't complete for games anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 05:54
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:We need something like a Steam equivalent for movies, TV, music, books, etc. I haven't pirated a game since Steam became a thing, and it's not because I've got more money, it's just because getting legit copies became the most convenient option. I'm not subscribing to the sixteen billion different TV and movie streaming services I'd need to to get every TV show and movie I want, but if you put everything up on one service that I could just buy the things I want from I'd be all over that. To pull some speculation out of my rear end, it was probably easier with games because the big players aren't bogged down with miles of distribution deals and copyright formalities, and were already used to their product being something you just go out and buy by itself. Steam was acting more as a digital Gamestop(minus the terrible everything on the consumer end) than as a revolution to how they do business. dissss posted:Steam isn't complete for games anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:Presumably it's a bit easier since they're making their own covers rather than using pre-existing recordings. Yeah, there's a little controversy about that...
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:Also this. It has a gigantic library, but there's still a lot of indie games & older games that aren't on Steam. But even then, if you want a PC game that's not on Steam you're not SOL or very far out-of-pocket, it's just not as crazily-convenient. If I want the new Mass Effect, all I have to do is go to a different service where I can buy it without any trouble. The only time things are gonna get any harder than that is if I want a game that's not digitally available at all for whatever reason, then it can get a little hazy trying to find it. And at that point I might go 'gently caress it, I'm just gonna get a ROM' or something, but that's really only if it's a console-native title which is a totally different ballgame (hi, PS2 Megatens, I wish I could play you conveniently). But with TV and movies it's the subscription system that kneecaps that one. Here in Australia there's two streaming services, but I haven't bought into either of them because they offer completely different shows that I'd like to watch but don't need to watch. I was always more of a DVD-watcher, buying into a single show and going hard on it, but that's not an approach that's really transferred well to today because of the 'all-or-nothing' style of streaming services. If I subscribe to Netflix but a show I really want to watch is on Stan, I can't just go 'hey, I want to watch Crazy Ex-Girlfriend' without getting the whole package. And of course then there's the fact shows can disappear out from under you and there's nothing that can be done. Classic Doctor Who is apparently awful for this, which sucks because that's one of the biggest shows I'd want to buy in for. Cleretic has a new favorite as of 08:31 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:Here in Australia there's two streaming services There's way more than that. And even figuring out which ones you'd need to subscribe to to get everything you want is a massive pain in the arse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 08:51
|
|
|
I mean it sucks that if you want to stream Bojack Horseman, The Man in High Castle, Game of Thrones and WWE NXT you need to subscribe to four different streaming services but is it that different from console exclusive games for instance? And the benefit is you can sign up for one month and binge watch the show you want then cancel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 09:14
|
|
|
I don't know why studios and distributors don't just set up streaming services in house and cut out all the middle men. Pay a monthly fee, get access to the entire Warner Bros. back catalogue. Netflix is strongly moving towards this model, dropping old movie licenses and emphasising original productions to the extent that studios will eventually have to look for new ways to let people watch their stuff. I also wonder when the first services will pop up that offer a combined subscription to several streaming services for a combined fee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 09:59
|
|
|
Because media conglomerates and movie studios and TV networks are all owned by the same 4 companies or something and it's all intertwined to squeeze out the most money possible. See how Sony Television produces a show and then it airs on AMC and NBC produces a show that airs on Fox. Also Comcast owns everything.
Mu Zeta has a new favorite as of 10:09 on Jan 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 10:06
|
|
|
Mu Zeta posted:Doesn't iTunes require you to load up iTunes to watch the stuff? I prefer Amazon/Google because you can just watch from the browser without extra bullshit. Yeah, with iTunes I have to download the file. I don't think there's an option to stream and watching it requires an iDevice, Mac, or Apple TV. Amazon definitely has the easier setup that works everywhere (except on an Apple TV). Still, the Apple system is so much easier than anything that isn't Amazon. Apple was able to pretty much dictate terms with the Music industry after iTunes' success, but they never had that same kind of influence on video so poo poo is still fragmented. Amazon is the best though. It's weird though, I'll balk at the idea of streaming a movie for $4 on Amazon when I had no problems throwing $4 in 1980's Ronald Reagan dollars at crap in a video store. Streaming a HD video that I don't have to return is better in every way, but I seemed to value physical video store rentals more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 14:03
|
|
|
There's a quick joke in the first Wayne's World movie where Wayne gets in trouble while trying out a guitar in a shop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXlYt5JCrZw That's how the scene plays in the theatrical release. For the home video and television releases, however, the producers couldn't get the rights to the four notes Wayne plays (I don't think they got the rights at all and somebody, probably Jimmy Page, complained after the film was released) so the guitar got dubbed over and the joke becomes a complete non sequitur. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD1KqbDdmuE
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 14:39
|
|
|
Cleretic posted:But even then, if you want a PC game that's not on Steam you're not SOL or very far out-of-pocket, it's just not as crazily-convenient. If I want the new Mass Effect, all I have to do is go to a different service where I can buy it without any trouble. The only time things are gonna get any harder than that is if I want a game that's not digitally available at all for whatever reason, then it can get a little hazy trying to find it. And at that point I might go 'gently caress it, I'm just gonna get a ROM' or something, but that's really only if it's a console-native title which is a totally different ballgame (hi, PS2 Megatens, I wish I could play you conveniently). I'm pretty sure all the ps2 megatens are on the ps3 digitally at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
Hardly obscure trivia, but I chuckle every time it pops into my head The T-Bone Burnett-produced soundtrack is one of the many reasons The Big Lebowski is an enduring classic. Former Rolling Stones manager Allen Klein even offered up the rights to the song “Dead Flowers” gratis. Initially, Klein wanted $150,000, but so adored the scene where The Dude talks about hating “the f**kin’ Eagles,” he waived the licensing fee.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 15:26
|
|
|
Waffleman_ posted:The best part is his tweet after. quote:It’s easy for fans to get behind characters by uploading their own art online. Thanks to Nier: Automata protagonist 2B’s tush, the internet certainly has done a lot of that. And the game’s creator would like it if you could send it his way in a handy ZIP file. http://kotaku.com/nier-designer-butts-in-regarding-cheeky-controversy-1790967094
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
The correct response to Randy Pitchford is to ignore him.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:28
|
|
|
Yoko Taro is a goddamn treasure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:34
|
|
|
I'm not sure Yoko Taro belongs in this thread. However, there's an argument to be made that everything he does is either a dumb or a genius marketing move. Case in point: When all kinds of people spoke out in support of a new fantasy IP or something from Atlus, he chimed in with his own special congratulatory speech, filmed in Square Enix's conference room: http://www.siliconera.com/2016/12/27/yoko-taro-supports-atlus-new-fantasy-rpg-project-yoko-taro-way-possible/
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Yoko Taro moves at his own pace and at his own whims, mortals 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
HenryEx posted:I'm not sure Yoko Taro belongs in this thread. However, there's an argument to be made that everything he does is either a dumb or a genius marketing move.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I don't know why studios and distributors don't just set up streaming services in house and cut out all the middle men. Pay a monthly fee, get access to the entire Warner Bros. back catalogue. Netflix is strongly moving towards this model, dropping old movie licenses and emphasising original productions to the extent that studios will eventually have to look for new ways to let people watch their stuff. Two reasons, both unlikely to ever be solved. For current movies and TV, the content creators don't own those titles free and clear. They are beholden to contracts with the networks (TV) or distributors (film), which include, deals about home video rights, tv broadcast rights, streaming rights, airline viewing rights, international rights, everything. It's an enormous, insanely complicated money-printing machine that nobody could extricate themselves from even if they tried. The only titles that have a chance are the ones produced intentionally for streaming, but even those get weird around international rights and will sometimes have DVD runs and poo poo like that. For back catalog titles, the simple fact is the decision to release those falls on the desk of about six old stubborn studio executives who balk at the idea of a title earning a fraction of a $15 monthly fee when he thinks everyone should still happily pay $40 for a special-edition dvd box set and people stopped doing that just to stick it to him personally. It's a pretty bedrock human psychology concept - people would rather get no money at all than a little money when they think they're being cheated out of more. A lot of the back catalog isn't zero-revenue anyway. Most movies made in the last 20 years air on tv somewhere at least some point in the year, and there are trickles of home video sales, international deals, etc. Even those ancient black and white comedies still get airtime on special channels only grandparents' TVs can pick up. And building a Netflix-size streaming network with good speeds and uptime, and then marketing it so people know it exists, is a huge up-front cost. Right now they can spend nothing and make a little bit of money, rather than spend a ton and make an undefined amount of money. You don't make it to the C-suite by taking a bunch of risks.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
Companies are really protective of their licensing. STARZ shared it's licensing deals with Netflix for something like 30 million a year, but they got so much grief from other media companies that they rejected Netflix's $300 million dollar multi-year renewal offer. Ironically one of the content providers who didn't like the STARZ deal was Disney, who promptly turned around and signed an exclusivity deal with Netflix that Netflix was able to afford only because they didn't renew with STARZ.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2017 19:44
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:I mean it sucks that if you want to stream Bojack Horseman, The Man in High Castle, Game of Thrones and WWE NXT you need to subscribe to four different streaming services but is it that different from console exclusive games for instance? And the benefit is you can sign up for one month and binge watch the show you want then cancel. And yes, it is different to console-exclusive games, because you're not paying a monthly subscription fee for those. There are exceptions, obviously, but in general you can buy a game and then play it whenever you want, it's a one-time, up-front cost. If all those services just let me buy TV shows and watch them whenever I liked with no ongoing fees then I'd be fine with that. Well, not fine exactly, I'd still prefer everything centralised, but it wouldn't seem like such an obvious rip-off. Krispy Kareem posted:It's weird though, I'll balk at the idea of streaming a movie for $4 on Amazon when I had no problems throwing $4 in 1980's Ronald Reagan dollars at crap in a video store. Streaming a HD video that I don't have to return is better in every way, but I seemed to value physical video store rentals more. Tiggum has a new favorite as of 03:18 on Jan 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 03:15
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmZm8vNHBSU
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 06:18
|
|
|
Is it a dumb marketing move if your commercial is amusing but nobody can tell what you're selling. I remember that commercial with Alec Baldwin and Missy Elliot but I can't for the life of me remember what they were supposed to be selling.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
Casimir Radon posted:Is it a dumb marketing move if your commercial is amusing but nobody can tell what you're selling. I remember that commercial with Alec Baldwin and Missy Elliot but I can't for the life of me remember what they were supposed to be selling. That's normal. Pretty much nobody owns an Amazon Echo and nobody has any idea what Alexa is. They aren't even that clear about what it does besides play songs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 06:31
|
|
|
I hear it's great for ordering dollhouses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 10:16
|
|
|
Mierenneuker posted:I hear it's great for ordering dollhouses. But Amazon must be selling more than one dollhouse, right? Does it just pick the most expensive one and call it good?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 10:25
|
|
|
The Battleborn poo poo is hilarious how much of a ripoff of other games it is, especially Overwatch. One of them is literally "what if Pharah was a bird?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
Bertrand Hustle posted:The Battleborn poo poo is hilarious how much of a ripoff of other games it is, especially Overwatch. you mean she isn't?
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 11:03
|
|
|
Did Battleborn come out before or after Overwatch? I seem to remember it being the former, just that Blizzard was a marketing juggernaut about its IP.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 11:19
|
|
|
CommissarMega posted:Did Battleborn come out before or after Overwatch? I seem to remember it being the former, just that Blizzard was a marketing juggernaut about its IP. battleborn may 3rd, overwatch may 23rd although Overwatch was, I think, a 'thing' a lot longer, both in terms of being marketed and known to consumers and in terms of being developed by Blizzard (since it was also built on the remains of an axed mmo)
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
People who were in the beta were allowed to stream Overwatch several months in advance and it got a decent amount of hype that way. And then they had an open beta at the start of May so everybody had a chance to play it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 11:28
|
|
|
I think it's probably fair to say Battleborn flopped because nobody was interested in it as much as anything else. Like, did Overwatch kill it or was it simply mediocre? I suspect the latter. After all it's not like Evolve was competing with Overwatch or anything when it launched and that belly flopped just fine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 12:14
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:I think it's probably fair to say Battleborn flopped because nobody was interested in it as much as anything else. It's both.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 12:17
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:I think it's probably fair to say Battleborn flopped because nobody was interested in it as much as anything else. Overwatch murdered it, and frankly, Battleborn is a jankier actual MOBA but it cost money to buy and you had to grind character unlocks in a game you bought which also did a ton to kill it. It didnt help further thay while polishe, its nowhere on the level of Overwatch and its marketing was loving abysmal and turned off so so so many people. It still continues to be abysmal. I know im an extreme minority but to me it was the better game, but I never cared for TF2 at all. Im honestly am confused why it hasnt gone F2P yet, though since it actually already has mutiple F2P mechanics in the game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 15:07
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:And yes, it is different to console-exclusive games, because you're not paying a monthly subscription fee for those. There are exceptions, obviously, but in general you can buy a game and then play it whenever you want, it's a one-time, up-front cost. If all those services just let me buy TV shows and watch them whenever I liked with no ongoing fees then I'd be fine with that. Well, not fine exactly, I'd still prefer everything centralised, but it wouldn't seem like such an obvious rip-off. On the other hand, you'd have to be subscribed to a streaming service for a couple of years to spend the same amount of money on it as you would having to buy a PS4 and Bloodborne for example.
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
The Popeye's Chicken ad starring Jerry Rice isn't going over well with certain segments of the North American population. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNDllDH0w5E I can see why. But gently caress it, Jerry has bills, Jerry needs to get paid!
|
|
#
?
Jan 20, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
Indolent Bastard posted:The Popeye's Chicken ad starring Jerry Rice isn't going over well with certain segments of the North American population. What's the issue with it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:What's the issue with it? Probably the whole fried chicken - African American stereotype thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 06:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 01:59 |
|
|
Tiggum posted:What's the issue with it? Some discontent over a helmet that holds fried chicken infront of a back man's face. If you watch the video most of the suggested Videos are responses. I'm not saying I agree or that they are correct, but it is a bit of a dumb move.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2017 06:27
|
|