This has a number of problems straight out the gate.
Firstly, this device itself. With those specs, how long is this thing going to run on battery for? I suspect a very short time indeed unless something astonishing has happened to power technology that us peons don't know about yet. The term 'control creep' seems to exactly sum up my impressions as I read about this thing. Who will buy it? Teenagers will not be able to afford it and it has zero 'cool' as a mobile phone. It's a toy phone, albeit an EXTREMELY good one (as long as you plug it in!). It must be said, if Sony's claims to have PS3 power in a handheld device are accurate, it's quite amazing.
Secondly, this thing will be far and away more powerful than any other Android smartphone. That means people developing for this PlayStation™ Suite thing will have to forgo the extra power of this device and develop for the lowest common denominator hardware or have settings in the app which adds another level of complexity to the programs and only helps so much. Or, developers will develop for this device separately to the other Android PlayStation Suite devices, creating another layer of fragmentation. The only solution is if this certification program they plan to run is gutsy and strict and insists on a level of power similar to this device. If they do that, less fragmentation will occur but all the devices will share an achilles heel - zero battery life.
All in all this seems like another layer of fluff on top of an already fragmented operating system. Steve Jobs once took apart a Walkman because he was fascinated with its build quality and design. This plastic toy wouldn't fascinate an aspiring future Jobs. That young man will be taking apart iPhones.
The iPhone hasn't become such a monster gaming phenomenon because it's a good gaming device per se, it's become so because it is the best mobile phone there's ever been by some distance and people already have it in their pockets by the millions AND it's capable of running meaningful, engaging games selling at previously unheard-of prices. Can Sony really match that? Can they get tens of millions of people to adopt this as their phone? Would you want to pull this out of your pocket in front of a girl at a bar? (imagine her rolling her eyes as your chances float away out the window and she silently thinks of a false number to give you lol). Can Sony get games made for $1-$10?
All that said, I have too much respect for Sony (as an 80s child) to write them off and I will certainly have a go on this thing in Dixons just to see PS3 graphics in my hand. But I won't be buying one.
You dont seem to know the benefits of a multicore processor.
It splits the tasks done by one overworked processor into 4 leisurely ran processors, thus saving considerable amount of battery power.
Not only that, but the newer A9 core architecture is physically made on a smaller frabrication tech of usually 45nm or less.
This transition to a smaller frabrication alone saves considerable battery power.
Just take a look at the Xbox 360's CPU move from 90nm to 65nm. Power supply unit requirement dropped from 203W to 175W.
Good point, but it isn't true. Pre-owned car and house sales don't destroy their industry. The ownership of movies and games is very different. With entertainment products, people invest in making content, which it then distributes to an audience to enjoy for a fee. I own my house. I don't really own Star Wars.
Actually I down the physical disk that the Star Wars movie has been pressed onto, I also own all the discs that my PS1, PS2, and PS3 games came on, I can resell these as I see fit, according to local laws.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
Besides, private resales are not really the problem, it's videogame stores which make large profits from turning resale in to a business. They take cash from video game buyers, but don't share that with video game creators.
Just like a real estate agent doesn't share the second hand house profit with the original building, like a second hand picture profit doesn't get shared with the original artist, this is the same with all second hand purchases. It is a risk of business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
It's different with movies, when Blockbuster wants to rent out a movie, it buys a special rental version (which is more expensive) - and in that way shares rental revenue with the content creators. Blockbuster is not allowed to rent-out standard consumer DVDs. That's fair right?
See above, if game producers aren't happy then they have to change their business model, or get over it, the law is the law, the law says I can resell my property if I want to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
But when a game publisher sells a single copy, these stores effectively rent it out 5 or 6 times. Each time pocketing a big chunk of cash. It's a virtual rental model, but with no profit share for the content creators.
If they don't want their game sold that way then don't sell it that way, which basically means they don't sell it all, or maybe, they should lower the original purchase price to encourage more people to purchase new.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
Business is war. Game content creators have never much enjoyed sharing half the retail price with bricks and mortar stores. And now the download model will torpedo the stores below the water line.
C.
Which means all the local sales money shoots straight overseas, without a single piece of sales tax going to the local government, at least these stores pay tax.
And since the download model prices are basically the same as the physical price, but without a resale model, maybe they won't make more money, they may find they make fewer sales.
If they don't want their game sold that way then don't sell it that way
Yep! That's what is happening.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfanning
And since the download model prices are basically the same as the physical price, but without a resale model, maybe they won't make more money, they may find they make fewer sales.
Doesn't seem to be the case.
Sony have been losing cash for years. MS have struggled. Even the mighty EA are looking weak. This model has stopped working.
The boxed-goods model for games is following the same inevitable arc as music.
The prices for downloads are (generally) lower, because the content creators are not sharing their revenues with greedy middlemen. And the legal file sharing of resales ceases to depress sales.
One other benefit is that bricks and mortar stores have limited floorspace. This limited floorspace means the stores aggressively edit the available content - they push the SKUs that maximise their own profits. This limits consumer choice, and pushes creators away from anything other than hit-driven mega-games. I'd argue that is has not been good for the diversity of the industry, and gaming has suffered as a result.
So Sony comes along with their PS Suite. Code a game with their baseline hardware specs, works on all Android devices that is PSS certified.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't release games on iOS too. If the iPhone was competition then so are all the Android phones not made by Sony. Their rival is Microsoft.
I think it would be in Sony's best interests to offer games for iOS but this would be announced at an Apple event like WWDC.
The NGP is a big deal for the passionate sector of the games industry as it puts PS3 power into your pocket - the casual game market is quite apathetic. The PSP already did this with the PS2. But as the PSP showed, people don't want to spend a lot of money any more on devices that just play games because you don't get enough value out of them due to the long game release cycles so you may be right, the Suite could end up being the bigger development. On Android, the fragmentation will hinder it a little.
I reckon the NGP will be expensive too. The 3DS is $249 so I'd say that while Sony have said it will definitely be less than $600, $399-499 is probably a realistic range and still very pricey. Then you'd be adding on the cost of the Flash card games, likely $30 each or more.
If this is the way they go entirely, it's a smart move because there's very little they can do next in a large console that will improve what they have and Microsoft don't have an equivalent.
They really should have gone with just a tiered Suite though. Imagine how many people would have payed $20 to play Uncharted on their iPhone 5. Sure they'd have to scale it down a bit but every sale is a first buyer sale so no losses from used games and they aren't subsidising the console. The tiered Suite would go down well with phone retailers too as they can push game catalogues for higher priced phones.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't release games on iOS too. If the iPhone was competition then so are all the Android phones not made by Sony. Their rival is Microsoft.
At the heart of this is whether Sony is a hardware company or a software company.
Instinctively I think Sony sees itself as a hardware company. Sony's engineers create hardware platforms. And Sony sells access to that platform through licenses.
But this model effectively means that Sony lose money on hardware sales, and make it back on software sales. That makes them look more like a software company, than a hardware one.
So with Android software, Sony can forget the expensive, loss making hardware development and simply focus on selling games. Yes? Sell software on Android, iOS whatever ...a sale is a sale right?
But Sony don't really make software. Yes, they acquired a bunch of game studios to bolster its platform, but game creation is not really its strong point.
Historically makes its money not by selling games but by extracting a tax from software creators. If you want a game on the PS3 platform you pay your $8.75 (or whatever it is) per unit to Sony for the privilege. But when it comes to delivering games to non-Sony hardware. Sony can't play this gate keeper role. It will have to charge a publishing fee that is more in line with Google marketplace.
It might work. It might not.
The only thing that makes me think it is in with a chance is the lack of curation in the current Google marketplace. A well-curated, well-presented games app store, exploiting the Playstation brand might allow developers to increase prices and do better than Google Marketplace.
I don't think Sony can sell games onto the iOS - because it can't end-run around Apple's revenue share.
But developers of Sony mobile content could most certainly port those titles to iOS.
At the expense of local business owners, and local tax collection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
The prices for downloads are (generally) lower, because the content creators are not sharing their revenues with greedy middlemen. And the legal file sharing of resales ceases to depress sales.
No they aren't, the new releases of major games on PSN are matching the physical copy price, plus with the download I have to pay the bandwith cost to download it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
One other benefit is that bricks and mortar stores have limited floorspace. This limited floorspace means the stores aggressively edit the available content - they push the SKUs that maximise their own profits. This limits consumer choice, and pushes creators away from anything other than hit-driven mega-games. I'd argue that is has not been good for the diversity of the industry, and gaming has suffered as a result.
Don't limit yourself to physical stores, you also are able to purchase phyiscal games from online sales places.
At the expense of local business owners, and local tax collection.
As I said. Those local business owners are participating in a legal, but commercially unsustainable rental scheme.
A global change to the law would be difficult. So the only remaining option is to cut-out the middle men.
A sense of entitlement is not a dependable revenue source.
In the past...
Creators -> Middlemen -> Consumers
After the internet this becomes...
Creators -> Consumers
This has already happened in music. So yes, we've seen the closure of a lot of record shops.
But we also see far more people buying music. A more diverse selection of music being sold. The back catalog of artists is now selling. And the end-price to consumers has come down, thanks to the end of the stupid album.
I hope we'll see a similar trend in gaming, with more experimental titles. More niche products, and fewer me-too tiles. I think that would be a good thing.
And if those middlemen want some cash, perhaps they should create something?
As I said. Those local business owners are participating in a legal, but commercially unsustainable rental scheme.
It isn't unsustainable for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carniphage
A global change to the law would be difficult. So the only remaining option is to cut-out the middle men.
But cutting out the middle man also cuts out tax collection. With a pure internet sales method all of the sales money is going overseas, nothing is staying in the local country, nothing at all. That is unsustainable.
It will be when game companies move to download only.
Quote:
But cutting out the middle man also cuts out tax collection. With a pure internet sales method all of the sales money is going overseas, nothing is staying in the local country, nothing at all. That is unsustainable.
There will be local companies that fill that same niche as Valve, Direct2Drive, GamerGate in other countries if there is a desire. Besides, the last time I stopped in a game store the PC shelf was no bigger than the GameCube shelf. And GameStop only offers a $5 discount on used games.
I couldn't care less if they (retail game stores) disappeared. Some other store will fill that storefront and provide local taxes. And your whine is equally true of Amazon and other etailers that don't collect local taxes.
There will be local companies that fill that same niche as Valve, Direct2Drive, GamerGate in other countries if there is a desire. Besides, the last time I stopped in a game store the PC shelf was no bigger than the GameCube shelf. And GameStop only offers a $5 discount on used games.
Don't assume your experience matchs everyone elses. I live in a small city, and we have a few game shops, all with a large supply of games from PCs to consoles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
I couldn't care less if they (retail game stores) disappeared. Some other store will fill that storefront and provide local taxes. And your whine is equally true of Amazon and other etailers that don't collect local taxes.
Again, don't assume the whole world are Americans. If I purchase a game from a NZ based online retailer they are paying taxes in NZ the same as the local store. When we move to download only, no taxes will be paid in the local country, all money from sales will be shipped overseas, nothing will stay behind.
Again, don't assume the whole world are Americans. If I purchase a game from a NZ based online retailer they are paying taxes in NZ the same as the local store. When we move to download only, no taxes will be paid in the local country, all money from sales will be shipped overseas, nothing will stay behind.
There are UK based download services and Valve has an Australian partner for some things.
And frankly, so what? You can change your laws to require taxes on downloads if it's all that important to the local economy. All that means is that you pay more.
There are UK based download services and Valve has an Australian partner for some things.
As I am neither Australia or British, I'm not sure of your point?
If you purchase from steam in the UK, or in Australia the money is paid straight to the US.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
And frankly, so what? You can change your laws to require taxes on downloads if it's all that important to the local economy. All that means is that you pay more.
The point is straightforward...there are download competitors to steam based in other countries. If the market is big enough there will be one in NZ.
You don't seem to understand that there won't be a local download distributor, they will be setup in the low tax countries and run internationally from. There won't be a UK one, they will sold from Ireland, or another low tax European country, just like Apple does now.
Comments
This has a number of problems straight out the gate.
Firstly, this device itself. With those specs, how long is this thing going to run on battery for? I suspect a very short time indeed unless something astonishing has happened to power technology that us peons don't know about yet. The term 'control creep' seems to exactly sum up my impressions as I read about this thing. Who will buy it? Teenagers will not be able to afford it and it has zero 'cool' as a mobile phone. It's a toy phone, albeit an EXTREMELY good one (as long as you plug it in!). It must be said, if Sony's claims to have PS3 power in a handheld device are accurate, it's quite amazing.
Secondly, this thing will be far and away more powerful than any other Android smartphone. That means people developing for this PlayStation™ Suite thing will have to forgo the extra power of this device and develop for the lowest common denominator hardware or have settings in the app which adds another level of complexity to the programs and only helps so much. Or, developers will develop for this device separately to the other Android PlayStation Suite devices, creating another layer of fragmentation. The only solution is if this certification program they plan to run is gutsy and strict and insists on a level of power similar to this device. If they do that, less fragmentation will occur but all the devices will share an achilles heel - zero battery life.
All in all this seems like another layer of fluff on top of an already fragmented operating system. Steve Jobs once took apart a Walkman because he was fascinated with its build quality and design. This plastic toy wouldn't fascinate an aspiring future Jobs. That young man will be taking apart iPhones.
The iPhone hasn't become such a monster gaming phenomenon because it's a good gaming device per se, it's become so because it is the best mobile phone there's ever been by some distance and people already have it in their pockets by the millions AND it's capable of running meaningful, engaging games selling at previously unheard-of prices. Can Sony really match that? Can they get tens of millions of people to adopt this as their phone? Would you want to pull this out of your pocket in front of a girl at a bar? (imagine her rolling her eyes as your chances float away out the window and she silently thinks of a false number to give you lol). Can Sony get games made for $1-$10?
All that said, I have too much respect for Sony (as an 80s child) to write them off and I will certainly have a go on this thing in Dixons just to see PS3 graphics in my hand. But I won't be buying one.
You dont seem to know the benefits of a multicore processor.
It splits the tasks done by one overworked processor into 4 leisurely ran processors, thus saving considerable amount of battery power.
Not only that, but the newer A9 core architecture is physically made on a smaller frabrication tech of usually 45nm or less.
This transition to a smaller frabrication alone saves considerable battery power.
Just take a look at the Xbox 360's CPU move from 90nm to 65nm. Power supply unit requirement dropped from 203W to 175W.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_hardware
I suggest you read up on this: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/te...ces_Ver1.2.pdf
Not all of the cores run at full speed all of the time, although it theoretically can if the programming is made that way.
Good point, but it isn't true. Pre-owned car and house sales don't destroy their industry. The ownership of movies and games is very different. With entertainment products, people invest in making content, which it then distributes to an audience to enjoy for a fee. I own my house. I don't really own Star Wars.
Actually I down the physical disk that the Star Wars movie has been pressed onto, I also own all the discs that my PS1, PS2, and PS3 games came on, I can resell these as I see fit, according to local laws.
Besides, private resales are not really the problem, it's videogame stores which make large profits from turning resale in to a business. They take cash from video game buyers, but don't share that with video game creators.
Just like a real estate agent doesn't share the second hand house profit with the original building, like a second hand picture profit doesn't get shared with the original artist, this is the same with all second hand purchases. It is a risk of business.
It's different with movies, when Blockbuster wants to rent out a movie, it buys a special rental version (which is more expensive) - and in that way shares rental revenue with the content creators. Blockbuster is not allowed to rent-out standard consumer DVDs. That's fair right?
See above, if game producers aren't happy then they have to change their business model, or get over it, the law is the law, the law says I can resell my property if I want to.
But when a game publisher sells a single copy, these stores effectively rent it out 5 or 6 times. Each time pocketing a big chunk of cash. It's a virtual rental model, but with no profit share for the content creators.
If they don't want their game sold that way then don't sell it that way, which basically means they don't sell it all, or maybe, they should lower the original purchase price to encourage more people to purchase new.
Business is war. Game content creators have never much enjoyed sharing half the retail price with bricks and mortar stores. And now the download model will torpedo the stores below the water line.
C.
Which means all the local sales money shoots straight overseas, without a single piece of sales tax going to the local government, at least these stores pay tax.
And since the download model prices are basically the same as the physical price, but without a resale model, maybe they won't make more money, they may find they make fewer sales.
What is it that iOS has that everyone says is chewing into PSP/NDS sales? Casual games.
So Sony comes along with their PS Suite. Code a game with their baseline hardware specs, works on all Android devices that is PSS certified.
Cool! But wait there's more.
Now all owners of NGP (probably PS3 too), get to play all these casual games too. Winner.
Downside to all this being hardcore games are gonna need hardcore hardware so it doesn't work the other way around, i.e. NGP games are NGP only.
A very good hybrid solution. Nintendo needs to sit up and take notice.
If they don't want their game sold that way then don't sell it that way
Yep! That's what is happening.
And since the download model prices are basically the same as the physical price, but without a resale model, maybe they won't make more money, they may find they make fewer sales.
Doesn't seem to be the case.
Sony have been losing cash for years. MS have struggled. Even the mighty EA are looking weak. This model has stopped working.
The boxed-goods model for games is following the same inevitable arc as music.
The prices for downloads are (generally) lower, because the content creators are not sharing their revenues with greedy middlemen. And the legal file sharing of resales ceases to depress sales.
One other benefit is that bricks and mortar stores have limited floorspace. This limited floorspace means the stores aggressively edit the available content - they push the SKUs that maximise their own profits. This limits consumer choice, and pushes creators away from anything other than hit-driven mega-games. I'd argue that is has not been good for the diversity of the industry, and gaming has suffered as a result.
C.
So Sony comes along with their PS Suite. Code a game with their baseline hardware specs, works on all Android devices that is PSS certified.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't release games on iOS too. If the iPhone was competition then so are all the Android phones not made by Sony. Their rival is Microsoft.
I think it would be in Sony's best interests to offer games for iOS but this would be announced at an Apple event like WWDC.
The NGP is a big deal for the passionate sector of the games industry as it puts PS3 power into your pocket - the casual game market is quite apathetic. The PSP already did this with the PS2. But as the PSP showed, people don't want to spend a lot of money any more on devices that just play games because you don't get enough value out of them due to the long game release cycles so you may be right, the Suite could end up being the bigger development. On Android, the fragmentation will hinder it a little.
I reckon the NGP will be expensive too. The 3DS is $249 so I'd say that while Sony have said it will definitely be less than $600, $399-499 is probably a realistic range and still very pricey. Then you'd be adding on the cost of the Flash card games, likely $30 each or more.
If this is the way they go entirely, it's a smart move because there's very little they can do next in a large console that will improve what they have and Microsoft don't have an equivalent.
They really should have gone with just a tiered Suite though. Imagine how many people would have payed $20 to play Uncharted on their iPhone 5. Sure they'd have to scale it down a bit but every sale is a first buyer sale so no losses from used games and they aren't subsidising the console. The tiered Suite would go down well with phone retailers too as they can push game catalogues for higher priced phones.
I'm not sure why they wouldn't release games on iOS too. If the iPhone was competition then so are all the Android phones not made by Sony. Their rival is Microsoft.
At the heart of this is whether Sony is a hardware company or a software company.
Instinctively I think Sony sees itself as a hardware company. Sony's engineers create hardware platforms. And Sony sells access to that platform through licenses.
But this model effectively means that Sony lose money on hardware sales, and make it back on software sales. That makes them look more like a software company, than a hardware one.
So with Android software, Sony can forget the expensive, loss making hardware development and simply focus on selling games. Yes? Sell software on Android, iOS whatever ...a sale is a sale right?
But Sony don't really make software. Yes, they acquired a bunch of game studios to bolster its platform, but game creation is not really its strong point.
Historically makes its money not by selling games but by extracting a tax from software creators. If you want a game on the PS3 platform you pay your $8.75 (or whatever it is) per unit to Sony for the privilege. But when it comes to delivering games to non-Sony hardware. Sony can't play this gate keeper role. It will have to charge a publishing fee that is more in line with Google marketplace.
It might work. It might not.
The only thing that makes me think it is in with a chance is the lack of curation in the current Google marketplace. A well-curated, well-presented games app store, exploiting the Playstation brand might allow developers to increase prices and do better than Google Marketplace.
I don't think Sony can sell games onto the iOS - because it can't end-run around Apple's revenue share.
But developers of Sony mobile content could most certainly port those titles to iOS.
C.
Yep! That's what is happening.
At the expense of local business owners, and local tax collection.
The prices for downloads are (generally) lower, because the content creators are not sharing their revenues with greedy middlemen. And the legal file sharing of resales ceases to depress sales.
No they aren't, the new releases of major games on PSN are matching the physical copy price, plus with the download I have to pay the bandwith cost to download it.
One other benefit is that bricks and mortar stores have limited floorspace. This limited floorspace means the stores aggressively edit the available content - they push the SKUs that maximise their own profits. This limits consumer choice, and pushes creators away from anything other than hit-driven mega-games. I'd argue that is has not been good for the diversity of the industry, and gaming has suffered as a result.
Don't limit yourself to physical stores, you also are able to purchase phyiscal games from online sales places.
At the expense of local business owners, and local tax collection.
As I said. Those local business owners are participating in a legal, but commercially unsustainable rental scheme.
A global change to the law would be difficult. So the only remaining option is to cut-out the middle men.
A sense of entitlement is not a dependable revenue source.
In the past...
Creators -> Middlemen -> Consumers
After the internet this becomes...
Creators -> Consumers
This has already happened in music. So yes, we've seen the closure of a lot of record shops.
But we also see far more people buying music. A more diverse selection of music being sold. The back catalog of artists is now selling. And the end-price to consumers has come down, thanks to the end of the stupid album.
I hope we'll see a similar trend in gaming, with more experimental titles. More niche products, and fewer me-too tiles. I think that would be a good thing.
And if those middlemen want some cash, perhaps they should create something?
C.
As I said. Those local business owners are participating in a legal, but commercially unsustainable rental scheme.
It isn't unsustainable for them.
A global change to the law would be difficult. So the only remaining option is to cut-out the middle men.
But cutting out the middle man also cuts out tax collection. With a pure internet sales method all of the sales money is going overseas, nothing is staying in the local country, nothing at all. That is unsustainable.
It isn't unsustainable for them.
It will be when game companies move to download only.
But cutting out the middle man also cuts out tax collection. With a pure internet sales method all of the sales money is going overseas, nothing is staying in the local country, nothing at all. That is unsustainable.
There will be local companies that fill that same niche as Valve, Direct2Drive, GamerGate in other countries if there is a desire. Besides, the last time I stopped in a game store the PC shelf was no bigger than the GameCube shelf. And GameStop only offers a $5 discount on used games.
I couldn't care less if they (retail game stores) disappeared. Some other store will fill that storefront and provide local taxes. And your whine is equally true of Amazon and other etailers that don't collect local taxes.
There will be local companies that fill that same niche as Valve, Direct2Drive, GamerGate in other countries if there is a desire. Besides, the last time I stopped in a game store the PC shelf was no bigger than the GameCube shelf. And GameStop only offers a $5 discount on used games.
Don't assume your experience matchs everyone elses. I live in a small city, and we have a few game shops, all with a large supply of games from PCs to consoles.
I couldn't care less if they (retail game stores) disappeared. Some other store will fill that storefront and provide local taxes. And your whine is equally true of Amazon and other etailers that don't collect local taxes.
Again, don't assume the whole world are Americans. If I purchase a game from a NZ based online retailer they are paying taxes in NZ the same as the local store. When we move to download only, no taxes will be paid in the local country, all money from sales will be shipped overseas, nothing will stay behind.
That's weird, I have downloaded PSP games from the PSN store, and I only have a PSP-2000, I'm fairly sure you have never even touched a PSP.
iDevice-only owners are not used to devices having access to swappable flash media
Again, don't assume the whole world are Americans. If I purchase a game from a NZ based online retailer they are paying taxes in NZ the same as the local store. When we move to download only, no taxes will be paid in the local country, all money from sales will be shipped overseas, nothing will stay behind.
There are UK based download services and Valve has an Australian partner for some things.
And frankly, so what? You can change your laws to require taxes on downloads if it's all that important to the local economy. All that means is that you pay more.
There are UK based download services and Valve has an Australian partner for some things.
As I am neither Australia or British, I'm not sure of your point?
If you purchase from steam in the UK, or in Australia the money is paid straight to the US.
And frankly, so what? You can change your laws to require taxes on downloads if it's all that important to the local economy. All that means is that you pay more.
Or local services get cut.
Or local services get cut.
A sense of entitlement is not a very reliable revenue source.
Perhaps NZ should invest in its own video games industry?
Weta demonstrates very clearly that it has some remarkable talent.
C.
As I am neither Australia or British, I'm not sure of your point?
The point is straightforward...there are download competitors to steam based in other countries. If the market is big enough there will be one in NZ.
If you purchase from steam in the UK, or in Australia the money is paid straight to the US.
So buy from the local download distributor. If there isn't one...well I guess no one cared enough to do anything about it.
Or local services get cut.
Too bad for you then eh? Don't buy the games if it bothers you that much.
The point is straightforward...there are download competitors to steam based in other countries. If the market is big enough there will be one in NZ.
You don't seem to understand that there won't be a local download distributor, they will be setup in the low tax countries and run internationally from. There won't be a UK one, they will sold from Ireland, or another low tax European country, just like Apple does now.