Physical & Digital EST: The Future of Home Video Discussion Thread

[The_Donster]

What a load of shit. You’re either pro physical format or you aren’t Steedeel. Otherwise you are talking the talking the talk and not walking the walk.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by The_Donster

What a load of shit. You’re either pro physical format or you aren’t Steedeel. Otherwise you are talking the talking the talk and not walking the walk.

This site is digital. I’m using a iPad now. It’s a daft argument by you lot. Of course my focus is film. That’s why we are here.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

This site is digital. I’m using a iPad now. It’s a daft argument by you lot. Of course my focus is film. That’s why we are here.

You're whining about digital ownership. You're fine with it when it's something you don't give much of a shit about (gaming) but it's horrific, tragic, damn near insulting for film companies to do it.

You can't have it both ways man. Either the 'rights issue' is a problem or it's not. You can't shrug it off over here and say it's bad over here.

[Vilya]

I submit that movies and games are different products. The value and importance placed upon them can be very different. How they are accessed can also be quite different.

I see my hypocrisy regarding games as lying in my willingness to agree to the terms of use governing said games when I also criticize and refuse similar terms governing digital content.

It comes down to the fact that I am passionate about movies, but I am merely amused by games. I just care a whole lot more about one than the other. It's how I feel, rightly or wrongly.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Groot

You're whining about digital ownership. You're fine with it when it's something you don't give much of a shit about (gaming) but it's horrific, tragic, damn near insulting for film companies to do it.

You can't have it both ways man. Either the 'rights issue' is a problem or it's not. You can't shrug it off over here and say it's bad over here.

Of course it is a issue. But you are asking me to care the same about gaming as I do about films. The onl6 gaming I truly care about is VR and that would be a nightmare to switch to different games on disc. It’s very easy switching digitally. That’s being practical. Film wise, that’s a non issue.

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I submit that movies and games are different products. The value and importance placed upon them can be very different. How they are accessed can also be quite different.

I see my hypocrisy regarding games as lying in my willingness to agree to the terms of use governing said games when I also criticize and refuse similar terms governing digital content.

It comes down to the fact that I am passionate about movies, but I am merely amused by games. I just care a whole lot more about one than the other. It's how I feel, rightly or wrongly.

See what I mean? You haven’t even been challenged for stating the same as me.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Of course it is a issue. But you are asking me to care the same about gaming as I do about films.

Don't you just hate when people take it upon themselves to tell you how much you should care about something?

That's the worst.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

See what I mean? You haven’t even been challenged for stating the same as me.

Just wait; only one target in the crosshairs at a time.

[flyry]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Sometimes it’s the same thing. Or worse! 240p

Sure...

Is 240p the future in your bipolar book today?

[Steedeel]

Originally Posted by octagon

Don't you just hate when people take it upon themselves to tell you how much you should care about something?

That's the worst.

Well, today proves people should start caring. So there you go. . You have all been warned.

This message was brought to you by the ASAA.

[Show spoiler]Anti Smart arse association

[Groot]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I submit that movies and games are different products. The value and importance placed upon them can be very different. How they are accessed can also be quite different.

I see my hypocrisy regarding games as lying in my willingness to agree to the terms of use governing said games when I also criticize and refuse similar terms governing digital content.

It comes down to the fact that I am passionate about movies, but I am merely amused by games. I just care a whole lot more about one than the other. It's how I feel, rightly or wrongly.

That's the point. It's what works for you. I'm sure there are people with massive gaming collections that don't like where it's heading for games the way way you guys feel about movies.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Of course it is a issue. But you are asking me to care the same about gaming as I do about films. The onl6 gaming I truly care about is VR and that would be a nightmare to switch to different games on disc. It’s very easy switching digitally. That’s being practical. Film wise, that’s a non issue.

Not really. I'm just asking you to acknowledge it's hypocritical and silly to berate it for one thing while finding it acceptable for something else.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Vilya

I see my hypocrisy regarding games as lying in my willingness to agree to the terms of use governing said games when I also criticize and refuse similar terms governing digital content.

There's nothing hypocritical about being okay with digital ownership of games but not movies. It's some of the 'don't thread on me, live free or die' rhetoric that gets a little dicey consistency-wise.

If my opposition to digital ownership of movies is based on the fact that I just don't like the terms then there's nothing necessarily hypocritical about turning around and accepting those same terms from a game company. It's ultimately no different than saying I'd pay forty bucks for a good steak but I'd never pay that much for a burrito.

If, however, my opposition is a matter of principle and I'm opposed to the very idea of companies arbitrarily cutting off access to products I've paid for then yeah, I would probably have a harder time tacking 'well, except for games' at the end of those proclamations.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Groot

Not really. I'm just asking you to acknowledge it's hypocritical and silly to berate it for one thing while finding it acceptable for something else.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by Groot

That's the point. It's what works for you. I'm sure there are people with massive gaming collections that don't like where it's heading for games the way way you guys feel about movies.

I want people to be happy with what they receive for the money they spend.

I want them to have full access to the content they buy and for a period of time that most would deem to be reasonable and fair. I recognize that few products come with lifetime guarantees.

I want the choice of physical media and digital content to remain as they both have their fans and both offer specific advantages. My preference and why is already well known.

Above even all of that, I want the art itself to be preserved.

Regarding digital purchases, I think it is important that people understand the terms of service that they are agreeing with. These terms displease me, but if others are fine with them, then they have made their choice of their own free will and that should be respected.

[Vilya]

Originally Posted by octagon

There's nothing hypocritical about being okay with digital ownership of games but not movies. It's some of the 'don't thread on me, live free or die' rhetoric that gets a little dicey consistency-wise.

If my opposition to digital ownership of movies is based on the fact that I just don't like the terms then there's nothing necessarily hypocritical about turning around and accepting those same terms from a game company. It's ultimately no different than saying I'd pay forty bucks for a good steak but I'd never pay that much for a burrito.

If, however, my opposition is a matter of principle and I'm opposed to the very idea of companies arbitrarily cutting off access to products I've paid for then yeah, I would probably have a harder time tacking 'well, except for games' at the end of those proclamations.

Thank you for that, but I do object to the arbitrary denial of access to purchased content as a matter of principle. I feel this way strongly when it comes to movies and television, but by agreeing to these very terms with games, I am exposing some hypocrisy here. The principle applies equally to both movies and games; I just care far more about the former.

I think providers of all digital content should specify, at a minimum, how long they will guarantee access to the content they are selling. It would avoid a lot of potential controversies if they would just be honest and forthcoming with this information.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Vilya

A product failing over time is entirely different than access being arbitrarily denied to a purchased product.

I have different expectations about how long different types of items should last based primarily on my experience with that item. I have no expectation that items I purchase will last until "the end of days." I do expect to have unfettered access until when, and if, they do fail.

I recognize that when I buy a disc that I do not own the movie, but rather I have a license to access the copyrighted content on that disc. The disc is mine; the content on it is not.

I have full control over access to that content for the life of the disc. The restrictions are very few and succinctly summarized in the FBI warning on most every disc. My experience has shown me that discs, generally, have a very, very long lifespan. No seller is ever going to revoke this access.

With digital, the license conferred upon purchase is a very tenuous one. The seller can revoke access at will, change the resolution at will, edit the content at will, change the terms at will, and many state that you waive your rights to sue them. Would all of this hold up in court? I don't know, but I will not agree to such one-sided terms regardless. If others do so knowingly, then, yes, that's their informed choice. Caveat emptor.

I decide on a case by case basis if the premature demise of a product, or lack of support for it, warrants any action on my part or whether I am better served by simply replacing that item. Having my access to something I purchased suddenly revoked on a whim of the seller is not something I would accept lightly.

This!

Originally Posted by Steedeel

It’s not a argument, it’s a fact. The quality is exactly the same for gaming. I don’t know what is so hard to understand?

The quality is the same, but the comparative issue is losing access to them. That is what we are talking about with movies here, and it applies to anything distributed digitally. It even effects physical games to varying extents due to updates, add on dlc, etc.

Originally Posted by Steedeel

Well they need players to actually participate in multiplayer so no they won’t. Completely different situation. Almost 90% games have multiplayer now.

You are pulling fake, made up statistics out of your ass. Yes, there is a sizable amount of games that are primarily multiplayer focused, but there are still a lot that either aren't or at least have both single and multiplayer modes (way more than just 10%). The vast majority of the games that I buy have substantial single player modes, and in some instances (i.e. fighting games) have local multiplayer in addition to online.

I don't need server support for online multiplayer specifically to play the vast majority of my games, but for a decent chunk of them, I do need access to re-download patches, dlc, etc.

It's one thing for gaming to not be that important to you in this regard, but your very flippant attitude towards it as even being a concern to anyone is extremely hypocritical.

[Dynamo of Eternia]

Originally Posted by Steedeel

The nature of games is people play them then move on. Once they are complete there is usually little appeal to playing again. Disposable, if you like. I dint see films in the same light.

I still own almost every game and system that I've ever had in my life going back to the Atari 2600. The very rare exceptions where I sold/traded something off I've mostly come to regret. Not everyone feels the same way about games as you do.

And the flip side of the coin, there are many who see most movies and television as "disposable" entertainment. They may have a select few that they want ongoing access to, but for most content, they are fine seeing it once. Maybe if it happens to be on Netflix or something down the road, they may opt to watch it again, but they aren't concerned if that doesn't happen.

You can prefer film. It can be more important to you. That is fine. Gaming can be less of a concern for you personally. That is fine. But to deny the issues as being fundamentally the same, and comparing the gaming issue to using "digital" in terms of checking the internet on a computer or ipad it just plain willful ignorance.

If anything, games are more impacted by this due to many games having patches and add-on content come out later for otherwise physical versions. If the on-disc content has a major glitch, then the content may not be very playable without a patch.

By contrast, whether someone buys a movie physically or digitally, the vast majority of the time they are getting the same movie from start to finish, and the people who opt for physical don't need digitally distributed add-on content to get the full experience.

[veritas]

The mental gymnastics for the last few pages have been rather impressive. I mean I get it the digital users are in to deep so they need to rationalize and coop with this in some way but still I saw at least 4 of the 5 stages of grief in the last 3 or so pages from a few people. We had denial, anger, bargaining and acceptance. I mean we actually have people saying I know I own something but its OK if you take it back from me after 5 years . I am sure depression would show up eventually also but those people are probably to depressed to type.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by Vilya

Thank you for that, but I do object to the arbitrary denial of access to purchased content as a matter of principle. I feel this way strongly when it comes to movies and television, but by agreeing to these very terms with games, I am exposing some hypocrisy here. The principle applies equally to both movies and games; I just care far more about the former.

I think providers of all digital content should specify, at a minimum, how long they will guarantee access to the content they are selling. It would avoid a lot of potential controversies if they would just be honest and forthcoming with this information.

Ya I would agree with that. Stop selling with buy or own and say 2 year minimum lease possibly more where it says buy currently and see how sales do. I don't really care if people want to lease rather crappy long term rentals at full price but a lot of people clearly don't think that's what they are getting they think they actually own these digital movies which they clearly don't.

Right now its like you go in to buy a car but it turns out according to page 58 in your contract you really just leased the car and once you pay it off its ownership reverts to the dealer.

[Groot]

Originally Posted by veritas

The mental gymnastics for the last few pages have been rather impressive. I mean I get it the digital users are in to deep so they need to rationalize and coop with this in some way but still I saw at least 4 of the 5 stages of grief in the last 3 or so pages from a few people. We had denial, anger, bargaining and acceptance. I mean we actually have people saying I know I own something but its OK if you take it back from me after 5 years . I am sure depression would show up eventually also but those people are probably to depressed to type.

That’s awesome. I’ll be sure to write in my suicide note that it was Apple taking my digital copy of Clash of The Titans away that finally did me in.