3 ms·

one step at a time. Bureaucracies and regulators move slow but it seems pretty evident that the wind is at least blowing into the correct direction this time. M

one step at a time. Bureaucracies and regulators move slow but it seems pretty evident that the wind is at least blowing into the correct direction this time. Might take another five years or so but in a lot of regions it seems like the control over devices and software is slowly breaking down. India, Japan, SK all have similar regulation passed or on the way.

lostlogin 2y ago
> similar regulation passed or on the way. With exclusions that suit them. As you say, the wind is blowing the right way, it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >With exclusions that suit them. Excuse them because they want their own rules and regulations on their territory and not the default US rules that ship with Google and Apple devices. That would be like Budweiser selling their beer in Europe with the condition you have to be 21 to drink it because that's how it is where they're from.
  - olelele 2y ago
    Except we have real beer in Europe:)
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment. what's the appeal? consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. These stores probably take 2-4 years to prepare properly. A dev won't use half their generation to get around a 30% fee. I think one understated part of the consoles is that that 30% does go into proper support, compared to apple/google that act more as gatekeepers. Larger studios knowing they can get on-site console developers to help debug, optimize, and maybe even fix API issues is well worth such a cut.
  - kibwen 2y ago
    > consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. Consoles remain alive way longer in poorer regions of the world. The lock-in from console manufacturers is designed to artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence. I don't want a single CPU in my home that I don't have the right to reprogram as I see fit. There's no reason for gaming consoles to be an exception.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      Sure. I 100% agree. But I wasn't arguing as a customer, I was arguing as a potential studio making a storefront on the console. Would I support that store for 5-10+ years for 3rd world countries? Would it even be profitable given exchange rates? The 1st world customers wants to keep advancing to the next generation. 3rd parties want to make money and mostly get it from 1st world countries. >artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence. Planned obsolescence isn't to stop producing a product you no longer want to sell. If there's one thing consoles are good at, it's supporting repairs well after the next gen rolls end. Nintendo just stopped supporting the Wii U (their worst selling console) repairs due to a lack of supplies, and that is about 6 years after they EOL'd it in terms of software support. Phone/PC manufacturers should take notes. Meanwhile, hardcore gamers have been complaining about the switch performance for years. They are disappointed there was no mid gen refresh. Consumer demand very much wants companies to keep making better hardware. >There's no reason for gaming consoles to be an exception. Personally, I just don't see gaming consoles as general computing devices. They could be, but they way they are presented/marketed aren't. So I have about as much desire to reprogram on my PS4 as I do my smart fridge (which probably is running some variant of Linux underneath, albeit embedded).

lostlogin 2y ago

> similar regulation passed or on the way. With exclusions that suit them. As you say, the wind is blowing the right way, it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment.

Rinzler89 2y ago
>With exclusions that suit them. Excuse them because they want their own rules and regulations on their territory and not the default US rules that ship with Google and Apple devices. That would be like Budweiser selling their beer in Europe with the condition you have to be 21 to drink it because that's how it is where they're from.
- olelele 2y ago
  Except we have real beer in Europe:)
johnnyanmac 2y ago
>it would be nice to see but console games get the same treatment. what's the appeal? consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. These stores probably take 2-4 years to prepare properly. A dev won't use half their generation to get around a 30% fee. I think one understated part of the consoles is that that 30% does go into proper support, compared to apple/google that act more as gatekeepers. Larger studios knowing they can get on-site console developers to help debug, optimize, and maybe even fix API issues is well worth such a cut.
- kibwen 2y ago
  > consoles at best last 8 years before the new generation. Consoles remain alive way longer in poorer regions of the world. The lock-in from console manufacturers is designed to artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence. I don't want a single CPU in my home that I don't have the right to reprogram as I see fit. There's no reason for gaming consoles to be an exception.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    Sure. I 100% agree. But I wasn't arguing as a customer, I was arguing as a potential studio making a storefront on the console. Would I support that store for 5-10+ years for 3rd world countries? Would it even be profitable given exchange rates? The 1st world customers wants to keep advancing to the next generation. 3rd parties want to make money and mostly get it from 1st world countries. >artificially shorten console lifecycles by cutting off supply of newly-manufactured older consoles and new games for those consoles. It's textbook planned obsolescence. Planned obsolescence isn't to stop producing a product you no longer want to sell. If there's one thing consoles are good at, it's supporting repairs well after the next gen rolls end. Nintendo just stopped supporting the Wii U (their worst selling console) repairs due to a lack of supplies, and that is about 6 years after they EOL'd it in terms of software support. Phone/PC manufacturers should take notes. Meanwhile, hardcore gamers have been complaining about the switch performance for years. They are disappointed there was no mid gen refresh. Consumer demand very much wants companies to keep making better hardware. >There's no reason for gaming consoles to be an exception. Personally, I just don't see gaming consoles as general computing devices. They could be, but they way they are presented/marketed aren't. So I have about as much desire to reprogram on my PS4 as I do my smart fridge (which probably is running some variant of Linux underneath, albeit embedded).