Well that's the trick, the release HAS to be confirmed, and as early as possible for full benefit to the publisher.
IMHO there's not enough gambling going on with publishing. If people are crying out for a game that's already been translated to their language, and has a good chance of passing uncut, you'd think if nothing else that the hardware manufacturer would at least try and get the title released. For the money they put in they discourage people from having to modify their hardware, and there's the chance of getting an exclusive release.
(Obviously completionists will want every version of every title, but they're a special type of hardcore that you can't take into account when discussing imports)
That's my impression also - they're giving people an incentive to hack it so they can justify making the next one more hackproof.
I normally wouldn't be concerned about multiregion ACCOUNTS but I don't doubt that the Vita will support DLC and I'm going to be sitting working myself into a rage because Armored Core gets DLC in Japan but nowhere else.
I'll be the first to admit my concerns are hypothetical, but after the PSP and the Go I'm erring on the side of not wasting my money.
Basically Nintendo cite a number of factors -
"... take into account different languages, age rating requirements and parental control functionality, as well as to ensure compliance with local laws in each region."
So essentially Europe blame Germany, Asia blames China, and the States blame Europe and the lack of US publishers willing to gamble on localisation.
Of course if the games were released in all regions then people wouldn't have to learn how to get around region locking, which would take a big chunk out of the casual piracy market but would take an unacceptably bigger chunk out of publisher profits.
A different solution would be to have a unified global currency, because all they really care about is money, despite their claims regarding age ratings and legislation.
I'd argue that the average consumer is prepared to wait if the release is confirmed.
There's only an issue when a multiregion release is unconfirmed, and that's when people start modifying their hardware as a solution.
Of course this argument leaves out people who just thieve for the sake of thieving. Some people will never pay for a game. You can't lump them in the same category as people who wait X years for localisations of Xenoblade, or Trauma Center.
Sorry for the late reply. The first part of my statement was meant as a sweeping statement over all devices, not just Nintendo's.
As for currency exchange... a sale is a sale. If you weren't planning on exporting (with all the translation/publishing costs associated with it) then you're not really losing any money, other than a theoretical profit IF you had decided to export.
In the bulk of cases though the amount of money "lost" to purchasers outside the publishing region is negligible compared to the cost of releasing it in new publishing regions, and if nothing else provides a good yardstick for approaching prospective publishers with your NEXT release.
I paid money for my games, Sony. My reward will be to carry around 2 handhelds, a pile of UMDs, and to pray that my favourite import game get a proper regional release this time because I'll not be able to get the DLC outside of where I imported from.
The "pirates" will get to carry around one handheld, all their games, (without needing all the accompanying physical media), plus nearly perfect emulation of every console up to the present day.
Who really wins there, Sony? I just want to play the games I've bought. I've bought some of them twice, just so I wouldn't have to cart around those UMDs. I bought a memory card I've barely filled and which is now obsolete, you want me to buy a new one but you're not releasing all sizes in all regions... I mean... seriously... it's like you struggle to care less about keeping paying customers happy but you can't worry enough about "pirates".
It's depressing. Two weeks back I was all hyped for Vita, day one purchase, now I'm completely disillusioned with a big wad of bills in my pocket :-/
Oh man, PLEASE let this signify the end to region locking, region exclusivity, and badly designed 1st wave hardware releases. Make it easier for us to give you money, Nintendo. It's not that hard.
Just a few thoughts -
"I am white, male and straight" - Good for you, have fun with that.
"I am the definition of cultural privilege in the United States" - If the prior statement is true, then no, you're not. In theory or numerically maybe you have a case but in actual practice the more common you are the less rights you have. "All men are not created equal and it is the duty of Government to render them so". Satire to fact in half a century, not bad.
My overall point is also that if the issue does not affect you then I don't feel you are best placed to comment on said issue. Would you be happier if they added the words "Without lube" on the end of those hatecrime sentences? I'm sure everyone can agree a dry run in the Hershey Highway is less preferable to the Water Park of America Slide'n'Ride.
I don't mind reading the guest pieces about people being abused or hounded by "the gaming community", where I lose interest is when their deep seated psychological issues are related to something that happened in their childhood that noone knows/cares about. In this article's instance we're talking about offence being taken by someone completely unqualified to comment on the experience.
"Oh you've got skin cancer? Aww that's too bad, I know how you feel, I had crazy dermatitis because of how I was doing my laundry. Feel better!"
If UMD Passport fails to deliver, then the Vita will disappoint me. I don't want to be carrying two PSPs around.
I had this same issue with the PS3 at launch, so I admit my bias. I look for BC first and a good game catalogue second, and I don't buy a console until it hits 12-24 "must have" titles. So for the PS3, that meant I wasn't a purchaser until the Slim (no BC in my area) and by then 20 of those 24 games were very cheap to buy preowned.
For the sake of BC, I could have been a launch purchaser, buying those titles as new PLUS other titles that would have been impulse purchases outside of the must haves.
Now we see the Vita. I have a big back catalogue of UMDs and import titles because I enjoyed the PSP's region free functionality. If I can play those titles on my Vita, including my imports, then I'm a launch purchaser and all that that implies.
If, however, Sony in my region stay true to form and stiff us on the UMDs then I'll be waiting until I get my 24 must have titles. It's really disappointing to me that Sony are uncaring about screwing their long term customers if they live outside Japan.
Still, positive thinking. Just have to wait and hope for the announcements.
"Wait, I signed the rights away to WHO?"
Wow, Moore's getting pretty mellow these days.
If you won't run, and you won't stand up for yourself, what IS your proposal then?
Stand and stare, talk big about it later?
To bring the pacifist argument into it - Some dudes bust into your house. You going to help them lift the TV out?
Stand and stare, talk big about it later?
To bring the pacifist argument into it - Some dudes bust into your house. You going to help them lift the TV out?
Complaining about content but offering no alternative? Check. Parading their life history to random strangers who really don't need to hear about your emotional baggage? Check. Well at least that's that out of the way for another week.
I think the article confuses Kotaku for "The World". The World doesn't care if you go away. You are but one, and if you do not like the environment you are free to leave by the manner of your choosing. Don't expect The World to react, except the comment trolls who will say they're "lighting a candle" for you or that you're "with the angles (sic)". Actually that'd be pretty sweet, being with the Many-Angled Ones. BUT I DIGRESS.
Let me spin a grossly insulting trivialisation of the daily struggle that is your life. Consider the spectacle wearer. Every day people call them Specky, Bookworm, Goggles, Harry Potter, Lennon, and so forth. Not because they wear glasses, you understand, but because the bullies are blatant matogyaliaphobes. To blend in, spectacle wearers are FORCED to "wear contacts" but people will know you wear glasses by the way you rub your nose or have dents in either side of your head. Spectacle wearers are shunned from many sporting activities. There also exists a subculture of people who wear spectacle FRAMES but not the LENSES. They claim that it is just as valid a lifestyle choice as wearing or not wearing but are treated with the contempt they deserve. And don't get me started on the people who think it's ok to be wear spectacles for long AND short distances just as long as you don't do "normal" vision.
Spectacle wearers have awards to celebrate people with "different" vision. I wish Kotaku would embrace these people. I remember when I was in school and a PERSON came in wearing glasses. KIDS WITH "NORMAL" VISION said to them that they never knew they wore glasses! IN PUBLIC!! I am sure that person is traumatised to that day. I think those kids must secretly have been longsighted which accounts for why they were so matogyaliaphobic (statistics show that everyone has been a little long or short sighted in their life, glasses wearers are not freaks). Traumatised youths have even turned to SURGERY to "correct" their "problem".
Kotaku may be trying to be all inclusive with their large text button, but until all the text is in large AND small print in the same time they are just being biased against spectacle wearers. We should all look forward to a day where spectacle wearers are accepted as they are. Except for those ones who don't pick a side and just wear frames, because nobody respects bi.
BTW I am loving the Equal Op Perversion link at the bottom of the article. Well played, Kotaku.
In B4 "STOP TRIVIALISING OUR STRUGGLE" and "WTF GUISE I WER GLASSES AND AM STRAIGHT?"
Seriously though, my faith in objective complaints regarding sexual equality took a severe knock after that lesbian blogger turned out to be a dude (who preferred the company of women to be sure, but that's only part of being a lesbian).
I think the article confuses Kotaku for "The World". The World doesn't care if you go away. You are but one, and if you do not like the environment you are free to leave by the manner of your choosing. Don't expect The World to react, except the comment trolls who will say they're "lighting a candle" for you or that you're "with the angles (sic)". Actually that'd be pretty sweet, being with the Many-Angled Ones. BUT I DIGRESS.
Let me spin a grossly insulting trivialisation of the daily struggle that is your life. Consider the spectacle wearer. Every day people call them Specky, Bookworm, Goggles, Harry Potter, Lennon, and so forth. Not because they wear glasses, you understand, but because the bullies are blatant matogyaliaphobes. To blend in, spectacle wearers are FORCED to "wear contacts" but people will know you wear glasses by the way you rub your nose or have dents in either side of your head. Spectacle wearers are shunned from many sporting activities. There also exists a subculture of people who wear spectacle FRAMES but not the LENSES. They claim that it is just as valid a lifestyle choice as wearing or not wearing but are treated with the contempt they deserve. And don't get me started on the people who think it's ok to be wear spectacles for long AND short distances just as long as you don't do "normal" vision.
Spectacle wearers have awards to celebrate people with "different" vision. I wish Kotaku would embrace these people. I remember when I was in school and a PERSON came in wearing glasses. KIDS WITH "NORMAL" VISION said to them that they never knew they wore glasses! IN PUBLIC!! I am sure that person is traumatised to that day. I think those kids must secretly have been longsighted which accounts for why they were so matogyaliaphobic (statistics show that everyone has been a little long or short sighted in their life, glasses wearers are not freaks). Traumatised youths have even turned to SURGERY to "correct" their "problem".
Kotaku may be trying to be all inclusive with their large text button, but until all the text is in large AND small print in the same time they are just being biased against spectacle wearers. We should all look forward to a day where spectacle wearers are accepted as they are. Except for those ones who don't pick a side and just wear frames, because nobody respects bi.
BTW I am loving the Equal Op Perversion link at the bottom of the article. Well played, Kotaku.
In B4 "STOP TRIVIALISING OUR STRUGGLE" and "WTF GUISE I WER GLASSES AND AM STRAIGHT?"
Seriously though, my faith in objective complaints regarding sexual equality took a severe knock after that lesbian blogger turned out to be a dude (who preferred the company of women to be sure, but that's only part of being a lesbian).
But.... Omi Gibson is married? How can she be lonely??
Am I the only one concerned about a seeming absence of UMD Passport?
As it adds value to the purchase of a Vita and overcomes a criticism of the Go, I'd have expected it to be trumpeted.
Be a shame if it was to be Japan-only.
As it adds value to the purchase of a Vita and overcomes a criticism of the Go, I'd have expected it to be trumpeted.
Be a shame if it was to be Japan-only.
Someone needed to film it.
My beef is that 50 people did not need to stand idly by waiting for the right moment to whip out their iPads for YouTube glory.
Rather than project on me, try considering the collective motivation of a crowd of onlookers waving their recording devices rather than supporting what you would purport to be their protesting brethren.
Injustice happens. You can take action, you can accept it.... or you can record it live for the home audience?
My beef is that 50 people did not need to stand idly by waiting for the right moment to whip out their iPads for YouTube glory.
Rather than project on me, try considering the collective motivation of a crowd of onlookers waving their recording devices rather than supporting what you would purport to be their protesting brethren.
Injustice happens. You can take action, you can accept it.... or you can record it live for the home audience?
To defend your beliefs? It's no big deal at all. If people were more worried about getting shot than a sense of duty or responsibility then we'd collectively be short our militaries and police forces.
I'm not saying it doesn't have the potential for grim finality, or that it won't radically change your lifestyle. What I'm saying is that taking a bullet for something you believe in, standing firm in the face of potential harm, is pretty much the end point for your belief.
Put another way - if you're not willing to suffer for it, do you really care about it?
I'm not saying it doesn't have the potential for grim finality, or that it won't radically change your lifestyle. What I'm saying is that taking a bullet for something you believe in, standing firm in the face of potential harm, is pretty much the end point for your belief.
Put another way - if you're not willing to suffer for it, do you really care about it?
It's not that easy though. What if the suspect appears unarmed but is believed to be holding an easily hidden detonator? What if he has an appearance that leads you to believe he has a suicide vest on? Do you shout out a challange, give him time to push the button? He looks unarmed, he looks like he's not resisting arrest, but in a second he could be ground zero of a radical attempt at redecoration. As I say, different subject entirely to using nonlethal weaponry on protesters you'e been observing for most of the day.
To the subject at hand, and doing nothing - they could have been getting first aid or similar supplies, giving a coat to the more unprotected guys on the ground, or in the long build up they could have sat down beside them if they felt so strongly about it.
Fact is they didn't. They stood, gawped, took some footage and stills for pageviews and subs ++, and we can infer this because there's a notable disparity between the number of recording devices being used and the number of clips being used to report the incident in the media.
To the subject at hand, and doing nothing - they could have been getting first aid or similar supplies, giving a coat to the more unprotected guys on the ground, or in the long build up they could have sat down beside them if they felt so strongly about it.
Fact is they didn't. They stood, gawped, took some footage and stills for pageviews and subs ++, and we can infer this because there's a notable disparity between the number of recording devices being used and the number of clips being used to report the incident in the media.
Well, it breaks down like this -
You don't need 50 people attempting to capture 1 image, you need 1 image and 50 people to retweet it. The very fact we are discussing the protest isn't because of the politics of the protest, it's because some people found the image hilarious and turned it into a meme. To me, that is not a success, that is not a protest message reaching people. If anything it diminishes the message by turning it into a cheap laugh.
As I have no real interest in "their cause" I would find it difficult to care less about my "contribution" to it. My beef here is with the onlookers hoping for pageview++ and more subs to their online presence. Spreading the imagery in the fashion described above is actually more damaging than doing nothing, I think you'll find.
I could almost accept that perhaps they had no interest in the protest but were instead outraged at the actions of the police, but that doesn't make you stand around a bunch of protesters in the hopes of something happening. They're not journalists being sent to cover a story, they're not protesters because they're not on the ground with their buddies. They've turned up to be entertained or to write themselves into someone else's "cause". There's a mob of them, they're not people who accidentally wandered into a protest on the way to class.
By all means, defend the right for people to stand and stare. I can accept that. But I don't think you can either defend or glorify hiding in a faux press pack as being the best way (or even one of the best ways) to support a cause. Even assuming some sort of conceit that you cannot afford to be "injured" by pepper spray (taking the average response to a spraying, not people with allergies or complications) there's nothing preventing you hurling your coat at the guys on the ground to give them something to shelter behind, or running to find some water or first aid materials. It takes you out of the firing line but you're still doing something. Struggling to get a good ogle of people getting sprayed with 49 likeminded buddies isn't the act of protesting people, it's the act of a mob of self promoters.
As for irony, to imply that I'm arrogant enough to sling judgements around like I'm somehow superior... is to be arrogant enough to a sling judgement around. THAT is hilarious. But yes, I do consider most people superior to those whose first thought at seeing an injustice is "ZOMZ I GOTS TO TWEET DIS!!!!11".
You don't need 50 people attempting to capture 1 image, you need 1 image and 50 people to retweet it. The very fact we are discussing the protest isn't because of the politics of the protest, it's because some people found the image hilarious and turned it into a meme. To me, that is not a success, that is not a protest message reaching people. If anything it diminishes the message by turning it into a cheap laugh.
As I have no real interest in "their cause" I would find it difficult to care less about my "contribution" to it. My beef here is with the onlookers hoping for pageview++ and more subs to their online presence. Spreading the imagery in the fashion described above is actually more damaging than doing nothing, I think you'll find.
I could almost accept that perhaps they had no interest in the protest but were instead outraged at the actions of the police, but that doesn't make you stand around a bunch of protesters in the hopes of something happening. They're not journalists being sent to cover a story, they're not protesters because they're not on the ground with their buddies. They've turned up to be entertained or to write themselves into someone else's "cause". There's a mob of them, they're not people who accidentally wandered into a protest on the way to class.
By all means, defend the right for people to stand and stare. I can accept that. But I don't think you can either defend or glorify hiding in a faux press pack as being the best way (or even one of the best ways) to support a cause. Even assuming some sort of conceit that you cannot afford to be "injured" by pepper spray (taking the average response to a spraying, not people with allergies or complications) there's nothing preventing you hurling your coat at the guys on the ground to give them something to shelter behind, or running to find some water or first aid materials. It takes you out of the firing line but you're still doing something. Struggling to get a good ogle of people getting sprayed with 49 likeminded buddies isn't the act of protesting people, it's the act of a mob of self promoters.
As for irony, to imply that I'm arrogant enough to sling judgements around like I'm somehow superior... is to be arrogant enough to a sling judgement around. THAT is hilarious. But yes, I do consider most people superior to those whose first thought at seeing an injustice is "ZOMZ I GOTS TO TWEET DIS!!!!11".
Facing up to anyone is very simple indeed, if it's for a cause you believe strongly enough in. It's telling and somewhat sad that you don't seem to understand that.
