What if Nvidia subsidises PC developers?
I came up with this on another forum, but I've been doing the rounds and reconnecting with a lot of my old friends in other countries. Countries not named the United States of Americaland or Japan who are more or less ex-hardcore gamers now. Maybe mainstream gamer might be a better term, they played some of the same games, but didn't care enough to argue about them on the internet and don't know who Peter Molyneux is. Aaaanyway, Ive noticed that there is a bit of a perception that one *should* steal PC enginefest games just because of a) made in America/some far-away-land-that-is-not-us so it is harmless b) they have to pay so much in video card costs and upgrades that the games should be 'free'.
It's the b) that interested me. The attitude is that the developers are more or less in the pockets of the video card manufacturers and are just extended employees. It's true that Nvidia sells cards because developers make games that require them and were profiting even as everyone was paying for the cards but pirating the games. What if instead, gamers paid a subscription fee to Nvidia for a regular supply of PC games, but Nvidia in turn subsidizes PC development and the fee may also help to reduce the cost of the cards, or maybe they could even give away the cards eventually and sell the games if the subscription revenue becomes high enough.
Would you guys pay? would it mean saving PC dev so that I can destroy it all over again? 
That won't stop piracy.
People who would rather not pay will find a way not to pay for things. One can try to stop them, but it becomes increasingly futile as these measures inevitably underestimate the intelligence of the pirates.
In my view the a policy is just xenophobic.
You don't have to have a bleeding edge graphics card. These 'hypothetical' pirates need to learn that disgression is the better part of not wasting tons of money on tech.
*Legion* wrote:
What about ATI?
Either way, no, I wouldn't pay. I can't really verbalize my reasons well enough to suit me, but it just seems wrong. I can't imagine them making the subscription fee vs game quality/quantity ratio reasonable enough to make it worthwhile for the game developers, graphics card company, or the consumer. Plus I don't like one company having that much control over what does or doesn't get made. Plus I don't like subscriptions in general. I'd prefer to pay based on what I actually use. Also, not everyone with a good graphics card is a gamer.
Anyone who tries to use that logic to justify stealing games is deluding themselves. The real reason they're not paying is because they don't believe it's worth paying for. I've pirated games before. Most of the time to see if it's worth buying. If it's not, I delete it; if it is, I buy it, if I can find it for a price I'm willing to pay (I'm not paying more than $40 for any game, I'm patient enough to wait for the price to drop to reasonable levels, like $25). Is it illegal for me to download a torrent to see if I like a game? Yes. I certainly am not going to claim that I deserve the right to steal them. But I'm also not going to spend $30-$50 on a 10 hour game I'm going to play through maybe once, if it's good enough. I wouldn't be opposed to paying $10 for 24 hours of in-game time so I can rent a game for a weekend. They can do this, I remember a demo of Sid Meier's Pirates! that gave you the whole game, for an hour. If they can set it up to have the game unplayable after an hour, why can't/won't they set it up so that I can pay $10 for a one-time code that lets me play the game over the weekend?
Unlike consoles, there's no rental system (that I'm aware of ) for PC games, and a lot of demos don't do a decent job of representing the whole game.
Duoae wrote:
Stengah's Steam ID
ICO: Stengah
A way, and a "moral justification". Been there, done that.
Piracy is a fact of the software business. Those folks were never going to buy it anyway, unless you give them a good reason not to. See StarDock, or Battle.Net for Starcraft (I'm assuming those Koreans buy Starcraft).
"And the circle has been charged through the power of unphysics, which are physics so stupid they erase normal ones from your mind." -Wields-Rulebook-Heavily at rpg.net
Well I dont doubt that piracy will still continue but I think Nvidia, ATI (well if they ever become competitive again gpu wise) might have to throw into a pot a bit to encourage engine development that sells their video cards, particularly if it's going to be at the expense of gameplay
Actually Ive read that a lot of Koreans don't even own Starcraft or a computer and that the bulk of the time that they spend learning to Zerg rush is spent from paying through the nose at a netcafe. Again the model seems to rely on the psychology of paying for time rather than software. In general North America keeps a lot of the world software market afloat and has been for eons, games or otherwise. It's an uphill battle convincing everyone else, especially non western countries to actually pay for software.
They`re doing it already. Both Nvidia and ATI are sponsoring various gamedev events/programs and whatnot. And, I assume that all those games with Nvidia logo right after publisher`s logo, are somewhat subsidized too.
I`m Artsy Partsy Gun For Hire
I would say that such model is just wrong. It basically monopolizes supply of games to nVidia (and duopoly with ATI is only a marginally better option). Moreover there are other hazards, such as support: your game doesn't run on your Intel built-in video chip? Sorry, we don't care, we're nVidia. And you know what? They would be right, because their customers pay for the games development, not the buyers of cheapo computers.
What gaming needs for its evolution is simply a plethora of distribution channels and payment options. From them, the better ones will prevail and the ineffective ones will perish. I'm not against some sort of nVidia service per se, but I don't want it to be the only one. At the end of the day, paying for the game you want to play is still the most just option - you get exactly what you pay for, no hidden subsidies to developers you don't care about anyway, no fees for games you don't want to play. And last but not least, you don't have to upgrade your card every year or so, it's just your choice (my 6600GT is now more than three years old and can handle Bioshock satisfactorily). If you are a graphics whore, admit it and learn to pay for your vice, just don't use it as an excuse for stealing.
And another last thing: you will not stop piracy this way. As long as the service is paid, there will be people who would try and steal the products.
You can't take the sky from me.
Well, i don't know about this particular form of implemenation but both Nvidia and ATI subsidise games in the form of TWIMTBP (The Way It's Meant To Be Played) and whatever ATI's scheme is called. It may not always be monetary in substance but having extra developers on call and looking at the game engine etc is what i call subsidising the development of a game.
There are also a number of subscription 'rental' PC companies that utilise digital distribution instead of mailing Metaboli is one of them though the other one i was going to link to seems to have transformed into a buy to download service.
Of - power - insessantly
Plagued - by - malefisense
Doomed - to - insidious -
Death - is - he - who - breaks
this - monument - i - prophesy
You know, I pay so much for my car, that my gas should be free. I mean, that was $15k! Plus tags, title, and taxes! And I gotta pay for my license, decals, and registration renewal! You'd think they'd give me a meager $40 in gas every couple weeks, right?
That's probably the worst excuse for pirating I've ever read.
IronClad Online: PurEvil
LOL good way of putting it there.
I've got a couple more even though they're not exactly PC related. There is a girl I know who thinks XBLA games should be free since she's already paying for xbox live. Another one of my friends is very adamant about buying every movie he likes and wants "the quality". As for gaming? he doesn't think they're worth paying for except occasionally and mostly pirates. Considering that movies are easier to pirate, I doubt its a tech or cost issue here.
I think the bigger problem might be the perception that games have little value/worth by the public at large, despite how difficult or costly they might be to make. This feeds into the whole "Game developing is not a real job" thing as well. Maybe the cultural value of games is a bigger issue than most of us give us credit for.
So instead of paying developers for games, I'd pay nVidia for games which in turn pays developers for games?
Fedaykin98 wrote:
Haha something like that. As much as I rail against engine wars etc I'm also thinking how we can keep the "old way" of life within reason economically feasible.
Nvidia's not big enough to subsidize the entire industry. The $1.3B in profit they made last year would be be completely sucked away by the $1.3B in costs that EA incurred last year. Tack on the costs of other developers and publishers and Nvidia shuts its doors. Don't even bother with ATI, they lost AMD $100M on their own.
Yeah thats why I left them out in the first place
The subscription revenue was my idea to provide funding for said subsidisation but it seems like there is no financial or gameplay basis for engine wars anymore unless something with the impact and order of the next Doom comes along.
One day the practice of throwing away disposable income to micro increases in performance via each video card release will go away. Once people in general in the economy are not able to throw money away products will become fewer and those that still exist will increase in quality instead of manufacturing for the sake of quantity. It's what American business used to be founded on and now is a thing of the past. A big economy crunch akin to the Great Depression would certainly change a lot of minds in a hurry. You would want to buy a single good quality product that would last you as long as you can squeeze use out of it instead of buying an average product only to buy another one a couple of years later.
The value of the currency needs to increase in the eyes of the spenders before any measurable improvement can be seen.
Many of these technology companies are money whores using the impulse buy addiction of modern developed and rich populations to fuel their greed little paws.
Prederick wrote:
"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis.
That's got to be the weakest justification I've seen in a while.
That's like saying that your PS3 was so expensive the games should be free. WTF?
I'm all for a freebie.
See Nintendo Wii Sports for a great example.
But that's *a* free game_____ - note the lack of plurality there.
I've justified torrenting games before on the basis that there was no demo, so I'd - *sigh* - pirate the game to get a feel for it. If I liked it enough to play more than an hour/one or two levels, I'd buy it. If not, off my drive it comes.
But even in that case, just because I've justified it to myself, that doesn't make it right/good/legal.
In fact, I've stopped doing it.
If a dev isn't confident enough in their game and my intelligence to provide a slice, a thin look at their wonderful product, then I simply pass it over. It'll hit the $5-10 bin soon enough.
But really, there are no Robin Hoods in the software piracy scene. You're not hurting EA/Sony/MS one little bit. You're hurting the Iron Lores, the Black Isles. They're the ones that pay for piracy.
So I say, suck it up, pay the $50 - or wait for a sale or the bargain bin - otherwise, you could be facing more and more bland mega-corporate tripe that won't even be worth your bandwidth to pirate.
"And my son, too, thinks everything is a launchpad, every bug a meal, and every sunny day a reason to take all your clothes off and roll around in the grass." - rabbit
Ducki speaks great truth. I personally stopped the 'steal to try' method a long, long time ago, and now just wait on sales/bargain bins etc to pick up games.
Does Nvidia and ATi subsidize games? Clearly, the answer is yes. I have plenty of games with the whole 'NVidia: The way it was meant to be played' blazoned across the box, and a neat little video when the game loads. I can think of a few that I've seen with the same from ATi. There's no real difference, and this thread could easily be 'What if ATi subsidizes PC developers?' The end result is the same straw man argument that Ducki pointed out.
Oh, and Kilroy.. I stopped buying bleeding edge ANYTHING ages ago. I'm quite content with my mid to low end systems.
wordsmythe wrote:
Podunk on Jessica Alba wrote:
That was more insane than Billy Madison's ramblings about the Industrial Revolution.
Not to mention, that if Amazon UK is any indication, video card prices abroad line up more or less with US prices.
When I have spoken with people in Ireland, Australia, New Zealand(the folks whom I game with often), PC hardware and software(digital sales from Steam) tends to cost less than some of the insane prices on consoles. I recall Bioshock on the 360 was close to 200 Australian dollars, about half that on Steam.
And then so called hot beds of piracy like Eastern Europe end up being gold mines for games like The Witcher and STALKER.