Curmudgeon Gamer
03 December 2007
GameTap losing games
So GameTap is losing games. Their deals with the licensors are ending. We don't know why they're not continuing.
As the second poster in the GameTap forum thread said:
This is not a good sign for GameTap. The worst case is that they continue to hemorrhage games and run dry. If GameTap fails -- the biggest and best-financed online distributor of old and/or emulated games literally goes down the tubes -- then what conclusions do we draw? And where do people who want older games go?
When Loki Games died many people drew the conclusion that there wasn't a sustainable market for games on GNU/Linux. However a big part of Loki's death was mismanagement, like buying 20,000 Quake 3 tin boxes, which thrifty GNU/Linux users didn't want to buy. (For the record, I did buy one. Preordered even.)
So what would it be for GameTap? Failure of business model or poor management? Both? Something else entirely?
As for where we go from here, I hope it's back to compilation discs or untethered downloads (a la StarROMs).
As the second poster in the GameTap forum thread said:
I was under the impression once a game was on gametap it was there forever.Ha. There really is one born every minute...
This is not a good sign for GameTap. The worst case is that they continue to hemorrhage games and run dry. If GameTap fails -- the biggest and best-financed online distributor of old and/or emulated games literally goes down the tubes -- then what conclusions do we draw? And where do people who want older games go?
When Loki Games died many people drew the conclusion that there wasn't a sustainable market for games on GNU/Linux. However a big part of Loki's death was mismanagement, like buying 20,000 Quake 3 tin boxes, which thrifty GNU/Linux users didn't want to buy. (For the record, I did buy one. Preordered even.)
So what would it be for GameTap? Failure of business model or poor management? Both? Something else entirely?
As for where we go from here, I hope it's back to compilation discs or untethered downloads (a la StarROMs).
Labels: emulation, gametap, online distribution
--jvm at 08:57
Comment
[ 2 ]
09 September 2007
PS3 Compatibility of My PS2 Library
To follow up on my post about how well my PS1 library will play on a PS3, here are the results with the 90 games in my PS2 library, which you can check out at MobyGames. The 60Gb wins.
The results for the software emulation of PS2 games...
Here are the graphs:
I intend to keep my old PS2 around, so most or all of these games should be available to play on that system even when they don't work on a PS3. Still, for out of the box compatibility the 60Gb really seems like the system to get. We'll see how well MonkeyKing's feelings about the software emulation pan out...
For the 60Gb:That works out to 89 out of 90, or 98.9%, being playable with minor inconvenient issues on a 60Gb PS3.
84 games work just fine (93%)
2 have video corruption (2D movies)
1 has graphics corruption (2D or 3D game graphics)
1 has some sort of audio problem (corrupted audio)
1 has a fatal hang
1 doesn't work with some sort of extra hardware
The results for the software emulation of PS2 games...
For the 80Gb:That works out to 76 out of 90, or 84%, which are documented playable with minor inconvenient issues.
50 games work just fine (57%)
7 have video corruption (2D movies)
12 have graphics corruption (2D or 3D graphics)
12 have a fatal hang
1 doesn't work with some sort of extra hardware
5 have speed problems (running slowly)
1 doesn't work online
1 is not in Sony's database
Here are the graphs:
I intend to keep my old PS2 around, so most or all of these games should be available to play on that system even when they don't work on a PS3. Still, for out of the box compatibility the 60Gb really seems like the system to get. We'll see how well MonkeyKing's feelings about the software emulation pan out...
--jvm at 00:31
Comment
[ 8 ]
08 September 2007
PS3 Compatibility of My PS1 Library
Either model of the PS3 will probably play your PS1 games as well as the other. That's my conclusion after I checked the compatibility of the 128 PS1 games in my library, as cataloged on MobyGames. Here's the breakdown
If you'd prefer a graph, here you go:
Out of these 128 games, the 80Gb and 60Gb models have exactly the same compatibility issues. Although I've never seen it said somewhere, this leads me to believe that the PS1 compatibility is purely software, and has nothing to do with the PS2 hardware in the 60Gb PS3 model. Sony has a software PS1 emulator after all, the one used on the PSP! Moreover, when issues have been fixed with PS1 game compatibility, they're fixed by a firmware update.
So, there is no compelling reason to get either PS3 model over the other if your concern is PS1 compatibility.
Incidentally, I believeyou still can't play the downloadable PS1 games on the PlayStation Network with a PS3 at one time you couldn't play downlodable PS1 games on the PlayStation Network with a PS3. If indeed there is was a software PS1 emulator built right into the firmware, then I'm really puzzled about Sony's reluctance to make those PS1 games playable on both the PSP and the PS3. What's What was going on there?
I'm working on combing through my PS2 library. I'll have another post up when I get done.
105 work just fine (that's 82%)The number that probably really matters: 126 out of 128 will work with minor inconvenient issues. That's 98.4%.
4 have video corruption (2D movies)
8 have graphics corruption (2D or 3D game graphics)
4 have some sort of audio problem (usually just a wrong or truncated sound)
4 have a bug that can cause a hang (only a couple are truly fatal)
1 has a controller issue
2 have speed problems (usually running slowly)
If you'd prefer a graph, here you go:
Out of these 128 games, the 80Gb and 60Gb models have exactly the same compatibility issues. Although I've never seen it said somewhere, this leads me to believe that the PS1 compatibility is purely software, and has nothing to do with the PS2 hardware in the 60Gb PS3 model. Sony has a software PS1 emulator after all, the one used on the PSP! Moreover, when issues have been fixed with PS1 game compatibility, they're fixed by a firmware update.So, there is no compelling reason to get either PS3 model over the other if your concern is PS1 compatibility.
Incidentally, I believe
I'm working on combing through my PS2 library. I'll have another post up when I get done.
--jvm at 21:20
Comment
[ 3 ]
07 September 2007
Sometimes the 80 is better than the 60
I'm considering getting a 60Gb PS3 before the only way to get one is used, so I decided to hit up the new compatibility search engine Sony's put up just recently. In comparing the two models, I turned up one case where the 80Gb model (which uses software emulation for PS2 and PS1 games) does a better job: Atari Anthology for PlayStation 2. For the hardware emulation in the 60Gb, we get this:
Description: When the "Atari founder Nolan Bushnell" FMV plays, the audio plays approximately 1 second ahead of the video.For the 80Gb (software emulation), the report is
Description: No major problems for this title.Not a killer there, but it does leave me wondering what else will crop up in my collection. On balance, I'm seeing more issues with the 80Gb than with the 60Gb, so I haven't changed my plans. Still, it would be interesting to see a graphical comparison of some sort to visually evaluate how compatible each machine really is.
--jvm at 10:37
Comment
[ 7 ]
11 May 2007
On game preservation and GameTap
Simon of GameSetWatch has posted excerpts from a recent email conversation he and I had regarding GameTap and similar services, especially with an eye toward game preservation. You can go read it yourself.
I'll only add here that I meant to get in a mention of Save the Whales, a game which was reportedly distributed online-only and was almost lost to the digital abyss. Did I mention it was an Atari 2600 game? That's right, a game distributed through a modem to an Atari 2600 over 20 years ago. Anyway, it apparently wasn't a great game, but it didn't have to be fun to be important.
Ok, I'll add one more thing. That is not a picture of me in Simon's post. Honestly.
I'll only add here that I meant to get in a mention of Save the Whales, a game which was reportedly distributed online-only and was almost lost to the digital abyss. Did I mention it was an Atari 2600 game? That's right, a game distributed through a modem to an Atari 2600 over 20 years ago. Anyway, it apparently wasn't a great game, but it didn't have to be fun to be important.
Ok, I'll add one more thing. That is not a picture of me in Simon's post. Honestly.
Labels: atari, business, copyright, emulation, gametap, history, online distribution, steam, virtual console, xbla
--jvm at 00:50
Comment
[ 0 ]
03 May 2007
Virtual Console Adventures: The MK64 Bug
One of the things my local circle of gaming friends and I love is Mario Kart 64.
For my money SNES Mario Kart is a little better, but it's limited to two players. For multiplayer Mario Kart action, nothing matches the N64 version. Its battle mode provides a level of strategy unseen in what has become, in later installments of the series, a throwaway mode. Its race mode is also fairly awesome, despite some worrying design choices. It is a game that has kept us occupied for over a decade.
Last night, we were playing a few Mario Kart rounds on the Wii's Virtual Console, and we encountered a surprising flaw in the emulation. In one race on Moo Moo Farm, the game played at an obviously much higher speed than normal. I'm not talking about it just seeming faster through the Wii's increased framerate, it actually was a much faster race. The starting lights, instead of the measured "one... two... three", went by in less than a second, and during the race our velocities were likewise increased.
It was entertaining to play, once, but it wasn't accurate. We were lucky we were on Moo Moo Farm, a fairly laid-back course, and not, for example, Bowser's track. If we had been in a Grand Prix, a "real" game instead of a quick race, the playthrough would likely have been ruined.
Interestingly, the music and sound effects were not accelerated. One of us used a Star powerup during the game, and the invincibility music only had enough time to loop twice before the effect ran out. The next race, speeds returned to normal, and remained there until we stopped for the night.
We're not sure what circumstances triggered the speed-up. The story is that some people who have purchased Mario Kart 64 were later offered a mysterious update for it in the Wii Shop Channel. Nintendo is notoriously tight-lipped about what goes into these updates, and I hear that sometimes, like with Star Fox 64, they actually seem more like downgrades, rolling back some of Virtual Console's already-meager framerate improvements. If SF64 runs off the same emulator it is not unreasonable to assume that it will also suffer from speed spikes once in a while.
I'll probably check online for an update to see if it addresses the problem, but will it? It occurs so infrequently that we'll really never know if the flaw has been fixed or not unless it happens again. Nintendo has taken pains to keep the mechanics of Virtual Console hidden from the player, ostensibly for usability's sake, but there is a limit to what can be explained away in the name of simplicity, and it seems in this case that Nintendo is more trying to hide the details of Virtual Console's flaws by not talking about them.
But that is really a crappy way to treat one's customers. We deserve to know what the benefits and drawbacks to updating are before pressing the fatal button. C'mon Nintendo, give us some credit here.
For my money SNES Mario Kart is a little better, but it's limited to two players. For multiplayer Mario Kart action, nothing matches the N64 version. Its battle mode provides a level of strategy unseen in what has become, in later installments of the series, a throwaway mode. Its race mode is also fairly awesome, despite some worrying design choices. It is a game that has kept us occupied for over a decade.
Last night, we were playing a few Mario Kart rounds on the Wii's Virtual Console, and we encountered a surprising flaw in the emulation. In one race on Moo Moo Farm, the game played at an obviously much higher speed than normal. I'm not talking about it just seeming faster through the Wii's increased framerate, it actually was a much faster race. The starting lights, instead of the measured "one... two... three", went by in less than a second, and during the race our velocities were likewise increased.
It was entertaining to play, once, but it wasn't accurate. We were lucky we were on Moo Moo Farm, a fairly laid-back course, and not, for example, Bowser's track. If we had been in a Grand Prix, a "real" game instead of a quick race, the playthrough would likely have been ruined.
Interestingly, the music and sound effects were not accelerated. One of us used a Star powerup during the game, and the invincibility music only had enough time to loop twice before the effect ran out. The next race, speeds returned to normal, and remained there until we stopped for the night.
We're not sure what circumstances triggered the speed-up. The story is that some people who have purchased Mario Kart 64 were later offered a mysterious update for it in the Wii Shop Channel. Nintendo is notoriously tight-lipped about what goes into these updates, and I hear that sometimes, like with Star Fox 64, they actually seem more like downgrades, rolling back some of Virtual Console's already-meager framerate improvements. If SF64 runs off the same emulator it is not unreasonable to assume that it will also suffer from speed spikes once in a while.
I'll probably check online for an update to see if it addresses the problem, but will it? It occurs so infrequently that we'll really never know if the flaw has been fixed or not unless it happens again. Nintendo has taken pains to keep the mechanics of Virtual Console hidden from the player, ostensibly for usability's sake, but there is a limit to what can be explained away in the name of simplicity, and it seems in this case that Nintendo is more trying to hide the details of Virtual Console's flaws by not talking about them.
But that is really a crappy way to treat one's customers. We deserve to know what the benefits and drawbacks to updating are before pressing the fatal button. C'mon Nintendo, give us some credit here.
Labels: bugs, classic, emulation, mariokart, mariokart64, nintendo, pr, virtualconsole, wii
--JohnH at 10:57
Comment
[ 8 ]
01 May 2007
Will Tomb Raider Anniversary be the first big business model deathmatch?
So GameTap's PR contacted me regarding this post (which I've hopefully corrected) and pointed out that GameTap will offer Tomb Raider Anniversary through its subscription service and, apparently, the new online retail service. That's certainly an important distinction, and I regret that I missed it originally because it makes the situation even more interesting.
Now, we don't know for sure that Steam will have Tomb Raider Anniversary concurrently with GameTap's subscription service and brick-and-mortar stores, but just suppose for the moment that it will. Then Tomb Raider Anniversary could well offer a comparison of business models we've never seen before:
For average Joe User with broadband access, I get the feeling that GameTap's on-demand play offers the best deal. You can sign up for a single month, play the game, and then drop the service (or switch to the free ad-driven version). If you take two months to finish it because you have a life outside games, then you end up dropping $20 on it, maximum. If owners of the boxed Windows version can get away with spending as little as $10 even after they play and sell the used game, I'd be surprised. I don't think Steam will be pricing this kind of brand new game at $10, although they should be offering it at a discounted price if they know what's good for them.
It pains me to say that GameTap offers a better value, mind you, but there you go. For Joe User, mind you, but not for me.
Now, we don't know for sure that Steam will have Tomb Raider Anniversary concurrently with GameTap's subscription service and brick-and-mortar stores, but just suppose for the moment that it will. Then Tomb Raider Anniversary could well offer a comparison of business models we've never seen before:
- Boxed sales at brick-and-mortar stores
- Virtual game sales through Steam and GameTap
- On-demand play through GameTap
For average Joe User with broadband access, I get the feeling that GameTap's on-demand play offers the best deal. You can sign up for a single month, play the game, and then drop the service (or switch to the free ad-driven version). If you take two months to finish it because you have a life outside games, then you end up dropping $20 on it, maximum. If owners of the boxed Windows version can get away with spending as little as $10 even after they play and sell the used game, I'd be surprised. I don't think Steam will be pricing this kind of brand new game at $10, although they should be offering it at a discounted price if they know what's good for them.
It pains me to say that GameTap offers a better value, mind you, but there you go. For Joe User, mind you, but not for me.
Labels: business, emulation, gametap, online distribution, tomb raider
--jvm at 16:13
Comment
[ 2 ]
GameTap to offer untethered downloads?
Updated below. Followup here.
From an interview at Next-Gen.biz this morning (my emphasis):
If anyone from Turner is reading, how about letting us in on some details of the new sales model? I'd be really interested to see what GameTap will offer that is different from what Steam and other download services are doing. Use the Contact Us link at the top of the right sidebar.
Update:
GameDaily has some other interesting data about GameTap. In particular, they say that membership is up almost 300% over 2006. I will try to go back and see if there was any information in 2006 about how many subscribers they had.
Also, they appear to be offering Tomb Raider Anniversary for on-demand play the day it launches through the GameTap subscriber service. You might recall that TRA was already coming to Steam (although it isn't clear if it's coming at launch). Certainly it's not new to see the same game on different services -- practically every one out there has a licensed version of Pac-Man -- but it is unique for the same, brand new game to show up on more than one service on launch day. Very interesting.
From an interview at Next-Gen.biz this morning (my emphasis):
[GameTap general manager Stu] Snyder also says that GameTap would be moving its TV programming from its client to the web, as well as launching a digital retail store where users will be able to buy and download new and cataloged games for keeps.That's quite possibly the best thing I've heard about GameTap in a while. If the downloads are untethered -- i.e. don't require a network connection to run and can be archived and reinstalled later without communicating with GameTap -- then I'll be really impressed. I doubt it will be as nice as downloading legal ROMs from StarROMs, data that could be used on any system with any suitable emulator. We'll see.
If anyone from Turner is reading, how about letting us in on some details of the new sales model? I'd be really interested to see what GameTap will offer that is different from what Steam and other download services are doing. Use the Contact Us link at the top of the right sidebar.
Update:
GameDaily has some other interesting data about GameTap. In particular, they say that membership is up almost 300% over 2006. I will try to go back and see if there was any information in 2006 about how many subscribers they had.
Also, they appear to be offering Tomb Raider Anniversary for on-demand play the day it launches through the GameTap subscriber service. You might recall that TRA was already coming to Steam (although it isn't clear if it's coming at launch). Certainly it's not new to see the same game on different services -- practically every one out there has a licensed version of Pac-Man -- but it is unique for the same, brand new game to show up on more than one service on launch day. Very interesting.
Labels: business, emulation, gametap, online distribution
--jvm at 09:54
Comment
[ 1 ]
29 January 2007
Sony's PSOne on PSP: punishing the faithful...again
Sony needs to fix the PSOne emulation situation on the PSP right now.
There is now a firmware downgrader for every PSP ever sold, including my own which has been upgraded to firmware version 3.03. Anyone who owns a PSP and an older copy of Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories (I do) can then install a copy of the PSOne emulator that Sony has been selling through its PlayStation Store. Then you can rip your very own PSOne games and play them with the emulator.
The catch is that redistribution of the emulator is probably illegal. I'd guess that it has also been hacked in a way that allows it to use any game image, which probably violated the DMCA at some level and certainly the license agreement that came with the software. So, for reasons other than not wanting to brick my PSP, I'm going to stay away from hacked firmware and the emulator.
Sony needs to remedy the situation right now, or else risk deeply angering some of the fans of its hardware and software. (I count myself among those.) As it is, the folks willing to partake in copyright infringement (distribution of the emulator) are getting the most from their Sony hardware.
To fix this, Sony needs to:
Perhaps there is some other means by which Sony can stop slapping the fans in the face, but it needs to fix the situation and fast.
There is now a firmware downgrader for every PSP ever sold, including my own which has been upgraded to firmware version 3.03. Anyone who owns a PSP and an older copy of Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories (I do) can then install a copy of the PSOne emulator that Sony has been selling through its PlayStation Store. Then you can rip your very own PSOne games and play them with the emulator.
The catch is that redistribution of the emulator is probably illegal. I'd guess that it has also been hacked in a way that allows it to use any game image, which probably violated the DMCA at some level and certainly the license agreement that came with the software. So, for reasons other than not wanting to brick my PSP, I'm going to stay away from hacked firmware and the emulator.
Sony needs to remedy the situation right now, or else risk deeply angering some of the fans of its hardware and software. (I count myself among those.) As it is, the folks willing to partake in copyright infringement (distribution of the emulator) are getting the most from their Sony hardware.
To fix this, Sony needs to:
- Make the PlayStation Store available to PSP owners.
- Sell the emulator to me at some reasonable price. Let me suggest no more than $60, although lower is better. And upgrades/improvements should be free.
- Include a game ripper with the emulator or sell it separately. I don't care.
- Sell pre-ripped images of games (guaranteed to work) for a modest fee (say $4).
Perhaps there is some other means by which Sony can stop slapping the fans in the face, but it needs to fix the situation and fast.
--jvm at 11:09
Comment
[ 11 ]
Feedburner
