Archive for September, 2011

Weekly News Roundup (25 September 2011)

Sunday, September 25th, 2011

Welcome to yet another edition of the WNR. Hope you’ve had a good week. It was mainly an uneventful week for me, except my graphics card broke early on the in the week, and so I had found the perfect excuse to do a little bit of upgrading. Faced with restrictions in budget, card length (my old Antec Sonata Designer case would only fit a card 23cm/9″ or less), power supply constraints (although my Antec EarthWatt 500W, with dual 17A rails on the 12V, is not the worst around), I eventually settled for a Radeon 6850, upgrading exactly +2,000 from my old Radeon 4850. While my Intel E8500 is now the bottleneck in certain games, it’s definitely great to be able to play most games at 1080p without having to turn down the details (or as in my old card’s case, all the way down to 1360×768 @ medium just so it doesn’t crash the faulty card). A quick, cheap, and not so nasty upgrade is sometimes a great way to give some life back to an old PC.

More than expected number of news items this week, so let’s get started.

Copyright

In copyright news, it’s hard to know where to begin. I guess we should start with the source of the problem, the money. More precisely, the money flowing into Washington and other capitals of the world, as the copyright lobby spends millions scaring politicians into believing  “net piracy plague” hype.

It was revealed this week that the MPAA spent $470,000 in lobbying in the last quarter alone, mainly to promote the hugely controversial PROTECT IP act, which if you’ve been following the WNR, you should already know that it has come under attack by a variety of professionals, from engineers, to entrepreneurs, to law professors. The idea of messing around with the foundation of the Internet, the domain naming system, just so the billion dollar movie industry can feel a little bit better, without actually solving any real problems, is I guess what these professionals are most concerned about. Basically, the MPAA has convinced politicians that the few harmless flies are actually killer bees, and that the only way to solve the problem is to launch a tactical nuclear strike (except in this analogy, the nuclear strike would probably solve the fly problem, whereas PROTECT IP won’t do anything to piracy).

What surprised me more was that, despite being only a fraction of the size of the movie industry, the music industry via its lobby group the RIAA actually spend almost three times as much money – $1.25M, in just one quarter. And somehow, this was still down on last year’s $1.4M, in the same quarter. Had the RIAA simply spend the money they’ve spent on lobbying and DRM, on actual innovation, they would have been the ones making the iPod and running iTunes, not Apple. Instead, they spend a million plus trying to get new legislation through that would allow labels to receive royalty from radio station airings – once upon a time, labels were happy to just get free airings for promotional purposes, but not any more I guess.

Rapidshare logo

RapidShare will hope its recent lobbying spending of $260,000 is enough to convince Washington politicians not to kill off the file sharing industry

The same story also showed some lobbying from the other side, specifically, by Rapidshare. If PROTECT IP passes, they have the most to lose, since they will probably be the first website to get filtered, after having appeared in all the copyright blacklists. There would be far too much collateral damage if lawmakers outlaw public file sharing, because while I do admit Rapidshare has its fair share of pirated files, it’s also an essential service for many others to share large files without having access to your own FTP server. I can’t see how you can have a public file sharing service without the problem of piracy cropping up, but it’s not as if Rapidshare doesn’t have tools for rights holders to get infringing files removed – it’s just that rights holders don’t want to have to do the work to get them removed. Automatic filters are easy to escape by real pirates, but makes false positives hard to avoid – think of the YouTube false positive copyright thing and times it by about 1,000, since at least with YouTube, some kind of audio/visual analysis could be performed, while it’s harder with generic files.

The world’s second most famous music pirate, Boston University student Joel Tenenbaum, is back in the news this week as the RIAA’s appeal of an earlier reduction in damages, to “only” $67,500, was rejected by the appellate court. But not because they supported the original jury rewarded $675,000, but because they thought that Judge Nancy Gertner has jumped to the constitutional issues  a bit too early in citing the reason for the reduction, when there were other legal recourse that should have been taken before going down this route. It appears that the appeals court agrees that $675,000 was inappropriate, and in their summary, even urged Congress to consider reducing the excessive statutory damages in relation to copyright infringement (but we’ll be lucky if Congress doesn’t do the opposite, and increase statutory damages). This is become a bigger issue, because back in the day, most copyright infringement lawsuits were related to commercial infringement, and so the statutory damages are relevant to those types of cases. Today, most copyright infringement cases relate to non commercial infringement, such as illegally downloading a 99 cent song for free, and so $150,000 per act of infringement doesn’t really fit the “crime” any more. A sensible copyright reform would introduce a new tier of penalties dealing specifically with non commercial infringement, because a fine of $150 per act is enough of a deterrent for those that actually fear the law on the matter (most don’t, even with $675,000 in damages as a potential outcome). And so for now, Tenenbaum faces $675,000 in damages again, which will of course be appealed.

But Boston University students aren’t the only ones having money trouble these days. Righthaven’s refusal to pay the $34,000 in legal fees it owns to Wayne Hoehn, possibly through lack of ability to pay, has forced Hoehn’s attorneys to petition the court to send US Marshals to seize Righthaven assets in response. Now that would be a beautiful sight to behold, wouldn’t it? Righthaven took the risk in trying to scare Hoehn into paying a settlement fee, only for Hoehn to refuse to lie down and fight his way to a win in court, and so it’s only fair that Righthaven should pay up. After all, they’re the ones who send letters threatening tens and hundreds of thousands in damages, if people don’t settle. They should have taken their own advice and settled, if they didn’t want to pay up (except I think the judge refused them the right to do so, heh).

Over to Europe right now, whose financial system should collapse any day now, but before then, there are some deck chair shuffling that needs to happen. In Italy, MPs from Berlusconi’s party (why is the guy still prime minster?) want to introduce the world’s first “one-strike” system, where people may get kicked off the Internet for just a single allegation of copyright infringement. Sometimes I think politicians are actually just using copyright as an excuse to kill off the Internet, as the Internet is  making it harder to rule against the wishes of the people. And also to hide your bunga bunga parties. You know what this is? It’s fascism. And we all know how Italians deal with fascists (well, eventually, anyway).

SFI Logo

The SFI's IP address being used for piracy should not be proof that the institute was engaged in piracy

On to Sweden, and the Swedish Film Institute has just gone through what hundreds and thousands of individuals have gone through, after the SFI was accused of pirating films because its IP address had been found in one of many BitTorrent swarms. It would be hard for the SFI to go with the “my router was hacked” excuse, because no hacking did occur, but because they operated a public Wi-Fi, and because the agency tasked with collection IP addresses aren’t cooperating with the SFI on the investigation, it has been extremely difficult for the SFI to find the source of the piracy. And if this doesn’t prove that an IP address does not equal the identity of the individual(s) who made the infringement, then nothing will. And if public Wi-Fi is now going to be the target of anti-piracy operations, then that’s taking a huge step backwards in terms of the Internet everywhere approach that we’ve become used to (and which many websites, like Facebook or FourSquare, rely on).

And this increasing perception gap between how the world works now, and how the copyright lobby/politicians want things to work, is probably why the German Pirate Party has won 15 seats in the Berlin regional elections. With their Swedish counterpart winning a seat in the EU parliament, pirate parties around the world could become the new Greens, as the issue of Internet privacy and rights become more and more important.

High Definition

In HD/3D news, next week should bring us the Star Wars numbers, an early signs show that it will be a big one. I’m a huge Star Wars nerd, having watched the originally trilogies at least 50 times altogether (and the new prequels trilogies about 6 times), but I’ve actually not pre-ordered the set. It’s not a protest at George Lucas or anything, but while Star Wars on DVD was a special moment for me, I’m a bit more meh about Star Wars on Blu-ray for some reason. Probably because, upscaled, the DVD edition still looks quite good, and from early reviews, while the Blu-ray version definitely looks better, the classic trilogies aren’t the “hi-defy” experience that many would be expecting. It’s not only the age of the film that the cause, but I think not going with a new transfer, given advances in technology since the last one, seems like a step backwards. Which is why I suspect we’ll get a new transfer in time for next year’s 3D version of the films, which means a new Blu-ray set (hopefully with the remastered films in 2D, as well as 3D), and so it’s hard to get too excited. I will still probably get it, I mean I got the LotR theatrical mess on Blu-ray.

Plus, I’m finding it difficult to get the time to watch movies these days, got a dozen or more on Blu-ray that’s still under shrink wrap.

For 3D news, this week, YouTube announced a new feature in which you can convert any existing or new uploaded 2D video to 3D. Cool if you like this sort of thing, but the 3D hype is definitely dying, and the 2D to 3D conversion could be the jump the shark moment for the format, because really, it’s an admission by YouTube that nobody is uploading any real 3D content.

GamingAnd finally in gaming, those that saw and agreed to the new PSN user agreement, without reading it (obviously didn’t watch that South Park episode), may realise that they’ve signed over more than they realised.

Sony apparently sneaked a clause which makes it a lot harder for people to join in one of the many class action lawsuit against Sony for the PSN data theft. Those that signed the agreement will have agreed to go through binding individual arbitration before being allowed to join any class action lawsuit, with a Sony appointed arbitrator. If you don’t sign the agreement, then you won’t be allowed to use PSN, but you can opt out of the arbitration only by sending a letter to Sony HQ detailing your wishes, and within 30 days of signing the original agreement, and of course, all of these details were “hidden” in the wordy user agreement. I’m not going to comment on whether this is an underhanded move by Sony or not, but all I will say is that this is exactly what you would expect from such a company, and probably why it’s such an attractive target for hackers.

Diablo III

Diablo III could be a great game, but Blizzard are doing all they can to ruin it with "always-on" DRM and MMO restrictions, without any of the MMO benefits, in the single player mode

Diablo III is an eagerly awaited game, and Blizzard has a great reputation as a game producer. But the company’s insistence on using always-on DRM, they say for anti-cheating purposes, not anti-piracy, could really hurt their reputation, not to mention sales of the game. A recent play of the beta version seems to show a lot of quirks related to the always-on DRM, including the inability to pause games, and game glitches whenever the connection goes down (and it went down a lot, thanks to the flaky beta Blizzard servers), and eventually users get  thrown back to the main menu, losing unsaved progress. Hopefully, the final version will not be as “crippled”, but without adding in a true offline mode, Blizzard is always going to set themselves up to fail. The good news is that there’s still a lot of time between now and the game’s release, so enough public pressure could make Blizzard do the right thing.

And that’s all that was for the week. I’m off to play Starcraft 2 in 1080p, extreme quality mode (which is more than playable at 50/60 FPS on my new 6850, at least when the on screen unit count isn’t too high). See you next week.

Weekly News Roundup (18 September 2011)

Sunday, September 18th, 2011

The NPD analysis for August 2011 was written up by me during the week, and you can read it here. My (possibly flawed) maths predicts that the PS3, thanks to the $50 price cut, would have nearly matched or even exceeded the Xbox 360 unit sales figure, had the $50 price cut arrived earlier in August (and if the sales increase effect has been consistent throughout August). At $250, the PS3 is great value, considering it’s a competent Internet enabled media hub and Blu-ray player. The only problem is that Internet enabled media hubs and Blu-ray players (sometimes the same device) are not too expensive these days, and a lot of TVs have them built-in. So really, game consoles should be judged on their merits as game consoles, and I have to say both the Xbox 360 and PS3 are equal in these regards. So there’s really no real urgency to have a Blu-ray add-on drive for the Xbox 360, even though I had a dream last night they were already available to buy in the shops.

Copyright

Let’s not waste any time and start with the copyright news. I spent Tuesday writing a news article, which could really have been a blog entry by itself, debunking the series of pro-copyright stories I was seeing in our local News Corp controlled media, all based on a press release from the Intellectual Property Awareness Foundation (IPAF), a foundation I’ve never heard of before.

Turns out, the IPAF’s board has includes from a News Corp controlled company, Foxtel, which just happens to have a virtual monopoly on the subscription TV market (the MPAA is also on the IPAF board). Said monopoly would be seriously hurt if the market was opened up via the Australian government’s proposed high speed fibre network (NBN), which via multi-casting, would force Foxtel to actually compete. Which is why The Australian, a News Corp newspaper, has been running anti-NBN stories almost every day for the past year or so. The piracy issues comes via a recent story which tried to link the NBN to increases in piracy (fast Internet = torrentz, lol), which may be the case. But piracy is also competing with subscription TV, which despite the high fees (USD$50 per month for the most basic subscription), still carries tons of ads and worse, new release movies and TV shows aren’t even part of the standard package (you’d have to pay up to USD$120 a month to access new movies and TV shows, and then, only selected shows – HBO shows like True Blood are delayed by weeks if not month, despite subscribers having to pay for the privilege – as I said, monopoly).

Three Strikes

The MPAA backed IPAF may be using misleading stats to suggest ISP intervention would solve the piracy problem, while another interpretation of the same data shows the reverse

And so when the IPAF claims that via a survey of some 1,600 Australians,  72% would stop net piracy if their ISPs started to send warnings against infringing activity, the so called “strikes” of a “three-strike” system. This seem to suggest that “three-strikes”, or graduated response, would be quite a success in Australia. The problem is that similar surveys in the UK and France, one is considering three-strikes, while the other has already adopted it, show that the actual percentage of affected users is in the range of 4% to 6%, nothing like the 72% the IPAF is claiming. And so when you look closely at the data, it seems the IPAF’s conclusion is extremely flawed, if not the polar opposite to what is actually being claimed. This is because while 28% did say they would not stop pirating stuff on the Internet if their ISPs started warning them, only 22% of the same group of people actually say they had ever used file sharing tools for piracy. While the 22% is not the entire number for all types of Internet piracy, as it does not include direct downloads, streaming, but file sharing tools like BitTorrent clients are the only tools that ISPs can monitor, and so it is the relevant number to look at. But it seems, from the survey data, that the 22% of people who used file sharing to pirate things before ISP intervention, would actually increase to 28% after ISP intervention (the 28% that are firmly saying they won’t stop pirating after ISP intervention).

Of course, this would be the wrong conclusion to draw from the data, just as it would be wrong for the IPAF to claim that 72% would stop pirating due to ISP intervention, because 78% aren’t even using piracy methods that could be tracked by ISPs, or have ever pirated anything at all. This is because 28% that say ISP intervention won’t stop their pirating behaviours may not be the same 22% that were pirating before – the survey can be interpreted in many different ways without knowing the overlap between the data points. The only piece of survey data that would actually have been useful – that is out of the 22% using file sharing tools for piracy, how many would actually stops after ISP intervention – is missing. Is it missing because this was a flawed survey, or is it missing deliberately because the data points didn’t match the conclusion that the IPAF had wanted when they commissioned the study, nobody really knows.

But the only conclusion you can really draw is that ISP intervention would not be the cure-all that the industry thinks, or at least want others, to believe it is. So that’s two debunks in two week, after last week’s MPAA info-graphic claiming pirates would spend an extra $1,000 if they were forced to stop pirating. An important point I missed in regards to last week’s debunk is that, when the MPAA claims $xxx billions lost to the US economy due to piracy, is it really lost? Or are people just spending it on other things, things they cannot pirate as easily as say a movie or a MP3 or a software package? And if they indeed spent that “extra” $1,000 on things like groceries, and other living expenses, or even other entertainment products such as eating out at a restaurant or new furniture, then nothing, absolutely nothing, is lost to the US economy. And even in the extreme case where they put the extra $1,000 in the bank, then that money eventually gets put back into the economy anyway via the bank’s investments. And so the “$58b loss to the US economy due to copyright theft” only makes sense if the American people are somehow hiding the $58b they’ve saved via piracy under their mattresses, with no present or future intention to actually spend the money. And for all the problems with the US economy at present, the average citizen having too much employment, earning too much money and not spending it, in my opinion, is not a problem.

And so I feel that the financial implications of the Internet piracy problem has been exaggerated. While there is definitely a financial impact from piracy, make no mistake about it, there’s also an impact on the economy, probably a greater one, from an industry that refuses to adopt to the new way of doing business on the Internet. And unfortunately, some of the new ways of doing business, the ways that consumers have chosen, are not as profitable as before (at least not as profitable to the same companies as before). Take music, for example. Album sales have been the mainstay of the music industry for years, and accounts for a large majority of their revenue. But now, in the MP3 age, track sales are what it’s all about, and naturally, the music industry will have to accept lower profits. And a large part of the new revenue streams are going to different companies too, Apple for one gets money for both hardware and downloads. And instead of accepting the new reality, and trying harder to get people to spend more money buying more tracks (a difficult task, because think of all the albums you’ve purchased, and how many tracks from these albums that you never actually wanted to pay for), they’ve laid the blame on piracy, and spent huge amounts of money trying to solve the piracy problem, through technically insane ideas such as DRM, and through political lobbying. The movie industry are in better shape because selling, renting movies, whether done via tape, disc or downloads, is basically still the same thing. Revenue may take a hit because people do expect cheaper and cheaper offerings (and because movies and TV shows are more expensive to make these days, and not necessarily better for it), but there’s also the potential there to extra more money from people by making them consume more, as the consumption process is much easier than before (you don’t even have to get up from your couch to buy/rent a movie, if you have the right set up). But, unfortunately, the movie industry is also blaming piracy for all their problems (despite earning record profits year after year).

And so they’ve paying vast sums of money to agencies such as the Dutch BREIN to fight piracy cases in court, and to lobby others to “get in line” when it comes to piracy issues. BREIN’s latest campaign sees them urging payment providers such as PayPal to do more on web piracy, including seizing funds for websites that BREIN says are conducting in copyright infringement. The thing is, if BREIN has a court order, I’m sure payment providers such as PayPal would be more than willing to oblige, but is BREIN really saying that in the absence of a court order, that PayPal should still take action, just because BREIN has a “bad feeling” about the website? This seems to be the case, because BREIN also wants PayPal to help identify the operators of “bad” websites – if they don’t even know who is running the website, and where these people are located, I seriously doubt they can convince a court to issue an order to freeze funds. Basically, it’s the same old tactic of shifting responsibility to more and more companies, as if there’s one thing agencies such as BREIN hates more than piracy, it’s actually having to work hard to stop piracy.

Jeremy Hunt

UK's Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt says ISPs, search engines, advertisers and payment providers are all responsible for net piracy

But at least BREIN are paid to do and say the things they do and say, but when politicians come out with the same sort of rubbish, then it’s much more worrying (but to be fair, they may also be paid by the industry to do and say the things they’re doing and saying).  This week, the UK’s Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, that’s Hunt with an H, delivered a speech at the Royal Television Festival in which he also repeated some of the same statements (threats?), that BREIN has been talking about, saying that payment providers, and advertisers, should do more to stop web piracy. Hunt labelled piracy “a direct assault on the freedoms and rights of creators of content to be rewarded fairly”, and suggested that the only solution would be to launch a direct assault on the freedoms and rights of all citizens, as he wants to “streamline” the legal process in regards to copyright infringement, another way of saying that due process should be curbed to make it easier for people to be prosecuted for copyright theft. Hunt also thinks that search engines and ISPs should filter and block content, but only at the say so of the court, although Hunt did suggest that even websites that merely “promote unlawful distribution of content” could be targeted as well.

Staying in Europe, we have the story that the EU has extended music copyright from 50 years to 70 years, meaning that recordings made in 1961 whose copyright would expire this year, would now get a reprieve until 2031. Which unfortunately means I have to mention Cliff Richard in the WNR for the first, and hopefully, the last time. This is because Sir Richard is actually the man leading the fight to allow musicians to live off their past successes just a bit longer, and probably an appropriate representative to these kinds of artists. To be fair, this isn’t really much of a problem, because it’s not easy to live off something you did 50 years ago, and if the only thing stopping you from continuing to do it for another 20 years  is some arbitrary limit, then maybe the artists do have a point. The problem is with the more obscure works, where there’s no more financial benefit in said work to remain copyright protected, then there’s a real danger of the work being lost forever, simply because there’s also no financial benefit to preserving the masters in good condition by the recording label. The record labels won’t release the songs, won’t spend money to preserve, and artists cannot get the copyright back on their own work. The new EU law changes does allow artists to renegotiate copyright on such works after 50 years, but many works fall into this situation a lot sooner than 50 years.

We also have more development in the Hotfile lawsuit. Typical with these kind of lawsuits, the defendants will usually launch a counter suit in order to try and get the other side to back down on certain demands, and Hotfile have just done this, although it seems they do have a few legitimate gripes with the way Warner Bros. “abused” their anti-piracy tool. It seems that Hotfile did have a working anti-piracy system, in which rights holders can get a ‘Special Rightsholder Account’ that allows them to delete shared files independently of Hotfile. A Warner Bros. rep was given such an account, but instead of deleting the identified infringing content, even files that Warner did not hold rights to, all because the name of the file was similar to a work that did belong to Warner Bros. Also interesting was that WB actually approached Hotfile to set up an affiliate relationship, in which removed files would be linked to a Warner Bros. online store. And Hotfile alleges that, due to this financial incentive on Warner’s behalf, they removed a popular open source file and replaced it with a link to their online store. I don’t think Hotfile will get anywhere, and even if they win, it won’t negate the fact that they’re probably going to be punished severely by the court for their “promotion” of piracy related activities (giving money to people who upload the most popular files, seems not such a great idea considering the common knowledge that the most popular files are probably one of the 2 P’s – porn or pirated. Or both). But it’s interesting to see that Hotfile at least had a working relationship with some rights holders, and the tools for removing infringing content has been in place all this time.

Not much a happening in HD/3D, and I’m already a bit over my word limit, so let’s skip it and move onto …

Gaming

… gaming. And nothing much happening here either, other than what I’ve already covered about the NPD stats. There was one interesting news story, but one that only affects Australian gamers, for now. Microsoft has saw the need to discount the Xbox 360 here in Australia, by only AUD$ 50, compared to the PS3’s AUD$150 discount.

But shops are already selling both consoles way below their recommended retail prices, and if the internal Microsoft data reveals that the PS3 is starting to outsell the Xbox 360, I suspect we’ll see the price cut extended to other regions as well. The only reason why I don’t think Microsoft will cut prices in the US is that they do have enough games lined up to ensure the Xbox 360 probably wins this holiday period, so any discount now would worsen the inventory situation, which always flares up at this time anyway. The only thing worse than not being able to sell enough consoles due to low demand, is to not be able to sell any consoles because you don’t have enough stock due to high demand.

My brain, my eyes, my fingers all hurt, so it must be time to stop writing for this week. See you in seven.

Game Consoles – August 2011 NPD Sales Figure Analysis

Tuesday, September 13th, 2011

Welcome to the August 2011 edition of the NPD US Video Game Sales Analysis, where we look at video game sales, both hardware and software, for the month of August 2011 based on data collected by the NPD. Half way through August, Sony surprised the market with a $50 price cut for all of its PS3 models, and so for the first time, we can actually analyze the effect of this price cut and see if it allows Sony’s PS3, languishing in third place amongst the home based consoles, to make a much needed comeback.

As NPD no longer releases full hardware sales figures, this feature is reliant on the game companies, namely Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony, to release their set of figures and based on “statement math” (that is, arithmetically calculate missing figures based on statements made). For August 2011, these are the statements made by the gaming companies:

  • Xbox 360 sold 308,000 units, “maintaining the # 1 console spot in the U.S. for 2011” (source: @majornelson)
  • Xbox 360 holds 43% home based console market share (Microsoft statement)
  • Wii sells “more than 190,000” units (Nintendo press release)
  • Sony blames “inventory restraint” for sales in the first half of August, but “PS3 hardware sales were very strong the last two weeks of the month following the $50 price cut” (Sony statement)

Knowing both the Xbox 360 and Wii hardware numbers, and also knowing that the Xbox 360 held 43% of the home based console market share, the PS3 hardware sale is calculated to be an estimated 218,000 units.

And so the figures for US sales in August 2011 are below, ranked in order of number of sales (August 2010 figures also shown, including percentage change):

  • Xbox 360: 308,000 (Total: 28.4 million; August 2010: 356,700 – down 14%)
  • PS3: 218,000 (Total: 17.5 million; August 2010: 226,000 – down 4%)
  • Wii: 190,000 (Total: 36.3 million; August 2010: 244,300 – down 22%)
NPD August 2011 Game Console US Sales Figures

NPD August 2011 Game Console US Sales Figures

NPD Game Console Total US Sales Figures (as of August 2011)

NPD Game Console Total US Sales Figures (as of August 2011)

My prediction from last month was:

With the PS3 price drop coming in just a few days ago, this is just the sort of major event that makes predictions extremely difficult. There’s no doubt in my mind that the PS3 won’t come last again (Wii has the third spot amongst the home based consoles locked up), but the main question is can the PS3 outsell the Xbox 360? The price cut being only $50, and with no new console coming with the price cut like two years ago, maybe it will just come short, but it will be a close run race that’s for sure. For games, again, there’s nothing really of note. Usually at this time of the year, Madden NFL dominates, but with the Madden NFL 12 coming at the end of August, it may not have enough time to make such a major impact this time, although it will probably still be the best seller based on pre-orders alone. No More Heroes: Heroes’ Paradise for the PS3 and Deus Ex: Human Revolution seems to be the only two other notable releases in August.

The PS3 didn’t come last, and the Wii did, but this was an easy prediction to make. But it appears I overestimated the effect of the $50 price cut, and with Xbox 360 sales growing compared to July, the race wasn’t a “close run” one at all, with the Xbox 360 still comfortably retaining first place amongst the home based consoles.  For software, Madden NFL 12’s delay meant that it was not even included in August’s stats as it fell outside of the NPD August sales window (August is counted as a 4 week reporting period by the NPD, lasting from the 31st of July to the 27th of August), while of the two notable new releases, Dues Ex: Human Revolution was predictably the top selling title.

Let’s focus first on the PS3 numbers, and just how much of an effect the $50 price cut has had. On the surface, it looks like the effect was minimal, but dig a little deeper, and the sales bump will seem a bit more robust. Since the price cut only occurred half way through August, the first thing we need to do is to establish a marker for pre price cut sales. Generally (and historically) speaking, there is very little difference between July and August sales, but August tends to sell a few more consoles than July. Since nothing dramatic actually occurred for the Xbox 360, and the only effects being negative (due to price drop of PS3, encouraging more gamers to buy the PS3 over the Xbox 360), the rise of 360 units from 35-day reporting period of July to the 28-day reporting period August 0f roughly 11% could indicate “normal” seasonal growth.

Or not. So let’s take half of this number and say that, had the PS3 not had a price cut, it too would have grown 5.5%. This would make PS3 sales roughly 156,000 units for the whole month of August, or 5,571 units per day, had the price drop not occurred. The price cut was announced on the 16th of August, and so leaving the price cut only 12 days to affect the August NPD figures (again due to the premature end of the NPD reporting period at the end of august), with the first 16 days of the month “business as usual”. This means that prior to the price cut, 89,143 PS3 units were sold, leaving 128,587 being sold after the price cut. This means an increase from 5,571 units per day to 10,716 units per day (127,587 divided by the 12 days of the price cut) after the price cut, practically doubling sales as a result. This means that had the PS3 price cut lasted for the whole 28 day reporting period, PS3 sales would be almost exactly 300,000 units, only 8,000 units shy of the Xbox 360. Had I simply assumed that PS3 sales would have stayed completely flat between July and the first 16 days of August, PS3 unit sales may have reached as high as 311,000 units.

September would have told us a lot more about the full effect of the PS3 price cut, but the Xbox 360 exclusive ‘Gears of War 3’ should help Xbox 360 hardware numbers more than any other PS3 release would do for the PS3 hardware numbers. And with similar high profile releases that generally favour the Xbox 360 in the coming month, the bump from the PS3 price cut may just fall short of making the PS3 more popular than the Xbox 360 during this holiday period.

For the Xbox 360, a solid 11% rise from July to August allowed it to sit comfortably as the best selling home based console, but as noted earlier, it could have been different if the PS3 price cut had come earlier. Hardware sales are down some 14% compared to the same month last year, but again, this is mostly due to the “Slim” sales bump back then.

For the Wii though, August was just as bad as July, and it looks like from this point onwards, it will be third place out of three.  The Wii declined the most compared to August 2010 than any of the other consoles, which means that the rumours surrounding the rushing of the Wii U to market, and the “development hell” (source: n4g.com) that ensues, might show Nintendo is more worried about the Wii decline than they’re letting on.

For game sales, August was a disappointing month, due to the lack of new releases, and the delay of Madden NFL 12 to the September reporting period. So Deus Ex: Human Revolution was actually best selling title across all platforms, even though it was only released for 5 days in the August reporting period. The ‘Just Dance’ franchise continues to be the best selling Wii exclusive titles, but in better times, a Nintendo first party title, like Mario Kart (now bundled with consoles) or Wii Play would have been one of the titles. Here’s the full software sales chart for August:

  1. Deus Ex: Human Revolution (Square Enix, Xbox 360, PS3, PC)
  2. NCAA Football (Take 2, Xbox 360, PS3)
  3. Call of Duty: Black Ops (Activision Blizzard, Xbox 360, PS3, Wii, NDS,PC)
  4. Phineas and Ferb: Across the 2nd (Disney, NDS, Wii, PS3)
  5. Cars 2 (Disney, NDS, Wii, Xbox 360, PS3, PC)
  6. Just Dance Summer Party (Ubisoft, Wii)
  7. Just Dance 2 (Ubisoft, Wii)
  8. Lego Pirates of the Caribbean (Disney, Wii, Xbox 360, NDS, PS3, 3DS, PSP, PC)
  9. The Legend of Zelda Ocarina of Time 3D (Nintendo, NDS)
  10. Zumba Fitness (Majesco, Wii, Xbox 360, PS3)

Time to make a prediction. I think the Xbox 360 will still come out as the top selling console for September 2011, mainly due to ‘Gear of War 3’, but the PS3 will definitely come closer than it did this month, and with ‘Resistance 3’, it too might benefit from a platform exclusive. The Wii will be third. Games wise, ‘Gear of War 3’ looks set to be a top seller, despite being a platform exclusive release. ‘Resistance 3’, on the other hand, doesn’t look to have the same effect, although it will still sell well. Combined platforms sales may even push ‘Dead Island’ to the top of the charts.

See you next month.

Weekly News Roundup (11 September 2011)

Sunday, September 11th, 2011

It’s hard to believe it’s been 10 years already. So much has changed since then, hasn’t it? I remember I was watching The West Wing, of all shows, when the breaking news alert interrupted the episode (and I never did finish watching that episode until I purchased the DVD box set, some 8 years later).

As for news this week, not a lot, but good in quality always makes up for quantity. And after last week’s acidically toned mega long post, I think this week’s will be a lot “better”, well, hopefully shorter anyway.

Copyright

Copyright news up front, I’ll start with a news post that I’m actually quite proud of, because I actually spend like more than 10 minutes “researching” it (aka copying what others reputable news organisations have posted), and it also involved use of arithmetic and statistics, two of my favourites things based on the stuff I like to write on a regular basis (NPD analysis, and weekly Blu-ray stats analysis).

Big DVD Collection

This is what the MPAA thinks a movie pirate's movie collection will look like if they stopped pirating, by spending $1,000 more every year on legal goods

But full credit to the MPAA for releasing the info-graphic that I based my “analysis” on, which came to the conclusion that, if the MPAA’s numbers in regards to piracy rates and the cost to the economy are true, it means that every pirate would be spending $1,000 more every year buying legal content. The MPAA’s “statistics” are mostly conjecture, and (in my opinion, wildly inaccurate) estimations. Because you can’t really estimate losses due to piracy, because this would require knowing what pirates would do if they did not pirate any more. This is impossible to calculate because, one, you can’t guess what a group of largely independent people will and will not do, and two, there’s not way to stop piracy and force these people to “do the right thing”. But let’s give the MPAA the benefit of the doubt and let’s say their figures are correct, then what the MPAA is effectively saying is that probably 25% of all Net users in the United States are pirates, and that each pirate is costing the creative industries $1,000 per year, per person, to get to the $58 billion yearly losses that the MPAA mentions. If the MPAA counts every instance of copyright theft as a loss of revenue for the full price of said product, then $1,000 is probably about right. But this is misleading to the extreme, as it would be like saying if jewel thieves didn’t steal $1m worth of diamonds from a jewellery store, they would have purchased the $1m worth of diamonds (I wanted to use my usual car theft analogy, but I think I’ve gone over my allowed quota for the year). And any theft analogy is incorrect anyway, as file sharing is not theft – it’s not paying for stuff you should have, like reading a magazine at a news stand without paying, but it’s quite different than say shoplifting the same magazine.

What’s more disturbing for me, as opposed to a rather harmless, but propaganda-ish infographic, is the MPAA getting involved at the law enforcement level when it comes to anti-piracy operations, even those that are outside of the US. Of course, infographics and misleading stats help the MPAA scare politicians into giving them this sort of access, so this cannot be discounted either. What brings me to this is the news this week that newly leaked Wikileaks documents show the MPAA and the IFPI, two lobby groups, all involved in high level discussions with South Korean anti-piracy law enforcement agencies, and with ICE detailing their operations against warez topsites, the sites that are acts as the point of origin for pirated content on the Internet. On one hand, you might say that having an industry group involved in tackling the industry’s own problems makes sense, but if it’s the industry’s problem, then why is a government agency and two governments, spending precious tax payer resources, to tackle the problem that many experts say are the industry’s own creation anyway, due to outdated business models? This whole idea comes from politicians believing that copyright theft *is* a $58 billion per year problem, but it isn’t, and it’s not costing 300,000 jobs a year. If you want to make such flimsy conclusions from nothing but wild guesses, then I have a few more I would like to make, such as that piracy creates jobs by allowing website operators to make money to provide  content to people who had no means to pay for it in the first place. And the people enjoying pirated content end up spending their money on other more essential services and products, and their money won’t end up in the pockets of greedy studios who are already making record profits, or end up giving more money to rich, spoilt Hollywood stars and autotuned pop musicians.

And if the government is to spend tax payer resources to help a well to do industry, while others are struggling, and to do it at the expense of one of the most innovative and fast growing industries, the Internet industry, then this will hurt the economy even more. Which is why a “who’s who” of the Internet business has come out attacking the MPAA/RIAA backed PROTECT IP act, which, despite the controversy, is gaining support in Congress (lobbying money helps soothes the aches from migraines, back aches, and lack of conscience). The founders of Twitter, Zynga, FourSquare, and key people from StackExchange, LinkedIn, and Tim O’Reilly, yes, *that* Tim O’Reilly, has signed a letter asking Congress not to go ahead with PROTECT IP, as it could hurt small Internet businesses, and the broad nature of the act means that it could hurt innovation as well. This comes after more than 100 law professors also signed an open letter asking Congress to reconsider, and after Internet pioneers and top engineers also writing a similar letter urging caution when it comes to messing around with DNS. Hmm, it seems that open letters are not a very effect form of mass action, or the US is run by politicians that don’t care for expert opinion as much as they care about where their next campaign contribution is going to come from. Or both.

Righthaven R.I.P.

Is Righthaven about to file for bankruptcy?

But there’s also good news for those that believe in karma, as Righthaven might have to file bankruptcy due to their recent legal and financial setbacks. Not only has judges started to see through Righthaven’s scheme, which in my opinion, is nothing more than a money making scheme, they’ve started punishing Righthaven by rewarding damages *against* the firm. Righthaven’s biggest mistakes is that they haven’t been able to avoid going to court, and they haven’t been able to do so because the people they’re suing weren’t willing to give up so easily. It’s one thing to sue movie pirates, but to sue those that are interested enough in the news to copy/paste articles and post it on their own blogs, is just asking for trouble. These are clearly opinionated people, who love a good fight, and will stand up for themselves out of principle, even if it end up costing them more money in the process – and these are not the right “targets” for mass copyright lawsuits. And then there’s the news that Righthaven’s second largest client, MediaNews Group, has now pulled out, leaving Stephens Media, which are also the money behind Righthaven, as their only big client. And even that money may no be as forthcoming as before, as Righthaven have apparently asked a judge if they can delay paying the $34,000 or so they owe to one of the “targets”, as they’re having trouble coming up with the cash. If Righthaven does go under, nobody would shed a tear for them, as to paraphrase the new MediaNews Group chief, it was a stupid idea to being with.

It’s not the first time Christofer Sundberg has spoken out against gaming DRM, but it’s always good to hear from developers on the issue. Sundberg is the founder of Avalanche Studios, the makers of the Just Cause series amongst other games. And this week, Sundberg let the world know what he thought of the latest trend in using “always-on” DRM. Suffice to say, he’s not a big fan, mainly because in his opinion, in this day and ages when piracy is rampant and people have a lot of “choice”, even if some are illegal, if publishers are not providing extra incentive for consumers, then they’re doing something wrong. “Always-on” DRM in fact takes away incentive for consumers to pay for games, and even those that do, will have to rely on pirate solutions to play the game without annoying interruptions. For Sundberg, it’s also about trust, and he believes that “always-on” DRM basically says to the paying customer: “Thank you for buying our game, we trust you as far as we can throw you”. Instead, developers and publishers should listen to gamers, even though that don’t buy the games, more – listen to their suggestions, make them feel like part of the development process (because they are a part of it, the end “using it” part of it at least). But Sundberg also stated that it’s mostly up to publishers as to what kind of DRM to use, and if Avalanche’s publishers decide to use “always-on” DRM, there’s not much he can do about it, even if his whole studio will be up in arms against such a move. And this also reminds me to play Just Cause 2 a bit more, since I haven’t really played it after getting it on Steam – I’m such a reverse pirate when it comes to games sometimes, I buy a lot (usually on sale), and then never play them!

High Definition

In HD/3D news, it’s a contractual obligation for the  WNR to cover a rumour about Blu-ray coming to the Xbox 360 at least once twice a year, and so with much regret, I bring you the latest rumour.

To be fair, it now makes a lot more sense for Blu-ray on Xbox 360 than even just a year (and a bit) ago, mainly due to the new, slimmer, quieter, faster, stronger (and now less shiny) Xbox 360. And with games coming on multiple DVDs, perhaps Blu-ray is also finally needed for games, although due to noise and loading speed issues, it’s always better to install games to the built-in HDD – so you really only need to do a single disc swap for a game that requires 2-discs, during the install process, and while Blu-ray removes the need to do this, the extra cost of getting the add-on drive would negate any benefit when it comes to gaming, leaving only the benefit of being able to play Blu-ray movies. But with Blu-ray standalone players available for so cheap these days, you can get a budget standalone for the expected $50 cost of the add-on, and so having a Blu-ray add-on doesn’t even make that much sense for movies either. And with Blu-ray competing against Microsoft’s preferred streaming platforms, that’s another reason why Microsoft is in no hurry to launch a Blu-ray enabled Xbox 360.

Gaming

And that brings us finally to gaming. The NPD report for August is out, and I should have the analysis up in a few days. While only Microsoft and Nintendo provided hardware data for this month, Microsoft again provided some extra info that allows for the PS3 numbers to be deduced.

Despite the PS3 $50 price cut (coming in at the middle point of the month), the Xbox 360 was still comfortably the best selling home based console of the month, selling some 41% more units than the now discounted PS3. This is probably why Sony felt the need to withhold sales data yet again, because many, including myself, predicted the PS3 to at least give the Xbox 360 a run for its money this month, but it did not happen. Maybe, with a full month of discounting on hand, the PS3 will put up more of a fight, but September is a huge month for the Xbox 360 due to the release of Gears of War 3, and with Battlefield 3 and MW 3 coming in October and November respectively, these will again heavily favour the Xbox 360, so it looks to be a good holiday period for the console, even if Kinect Star Wars has now been delayed until after Christmas.

And on that note, I shall end this week’s WNR. See you in a week’s time.

Weekly News Roundup (4 September 2011)

Sunday, September 4th, 2011

We’re in the final stretch, nearing the end, it’s so sad it has to come so soon. It feels I’ve only gotten to just know you, yet we have to part soon. So so soon. 2011, I hardly knew ye.  It is kind of ridiculous how quickly 2011 has gone by, although I guess not so much for people of Australia, New Zealand, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Japan, Syria, Somalia, the US, and pretty much everywhere else and for everyone else that’s had something major happen to them in 2011, natural or otherwise. You know what 2011? I don’t think me, and many others, will miss you all that much to be honest.

With an intro like that, you might think that there’s again not much news happening, but actually, this week is quite news-tastic I have to say. So let’s not waste more word count on the intro, and get into the news straight away.

CopyrightAs you would expect, we start with copyright news. What do you think would be needed to convince everyone that copyright protection on the Internet has gotten a bit out of control? That copyright laws are so biased towards copyright holders these days that it’s totally unfair for the rest of us? What would it take for people to realise that there is this huge overreaction to the “piracy” problem? The answer? When a 13 year old Pakistani takes down Bieber and Gaga.

While neither the age, nor the jurisdiction, of the person responsible to taking down the official Vevo uploaded music videos of these mega stars has been confirmed (yeah, as if anything sprung out of the Internet’s 24 hour rumour mill  ever becomes confirmed, or need confirmation for it to become fact), but the now banned YouTube user iLCreation, did just that, and it took quite a while for YouTube to react, and only when Vevo (owned by music industry giants Sony and Universal Music) took a more proactive role in getting the video reinstated, did the videos resurface again. If it was someone else, like you and me, and not two of the 4 major record labels asking for reinstatement, then perhaps those videos would never again be seen again (which, to be fair, is not a total disaster). Google/YouTube will be asking themselves how it happened and what they can do to prevent it happening again, although they can conveniently blame the victims here, Sony and Universal (and Warner and EMI), for forcing YouTube to be over-sensitive to copyright concerns in the first place. Just like planking and cone-ing, perhaps takedown-ing could be the next big YouTube thing, where people can compete and see who can take down the most popular legal videos, and for how long. It’s not incitement if I have no real power of persuasion. Or an audience.

Google

By making people type "RapidShare" out manually, has Google really stopped piracy?

So it was either a well calculated thing, timing wise, or an extraordinarily poor one, that Google this week announced that they’re winning the war against piracy. Unfortunately missing the “Mission Accomplished” banners aboard an aircraft carrier stage, Google nevertheless delivered a report on their progress on their various anti-piracy tools, processes and features, all designed to help content holders feel a little more safer at night, and a little less litigious during the day. I don’t know if the number of acts of piracy that removing the keywords “rapidshare” from Google’s auto-suggest and auto-complete function is even quantifiable, but Google seems to think it’s helped. And they’ve now made it possible for content owners to request and have removed infringing content within 24 hours, in which time Google’s lawyers have to fully examine each DMCA takedown request, do the relevant background research, contact the relevant technical departments to implement the ban, all the while filing the appropriate paperwork to record the entire incident to allow for future appeals. I’m imagining some kind of poultry factory farming scenario with chickens replaced by lawyers, and feed replaced by a conveyor belt of  money (well, they are still lawyers), and the produce being the “In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act, we have removed 1 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org.” message you see now and then below Google search results. The next step for Google, as hard as it may be, would be to actually prevent themselves from profiting from piracy websites. If they can do this, maybe they will then get a nice and shiny badge from the MPAA and RIAA for all their efforts, even if it may not actually stop any lawsuits or anything (but the lawyer factory farm would definitely pay for itself if that happens).

From willing self-harm, to full on murder, we move onto the news that Hotfile has been ordered to hand over pretty much everything in their possession to the MPAA, to presumably help them build a stronger case against the file hosting website. Hotfile described this early on as “murder by litigations”, and when the MPAA asked the Judge whether it was okay to do it to Hotfile, the judge this week basically said “alright”. And so, Hotfile will now have to hand over the IP address of every uploader and downloader, even for files that are perfectly legal and for users outside of the jurisdiction of the court. And as if injury wasn’t enough, insult had to be added, as Hotfile will also have to hand over a bunch of financial information. It appears though that the MPAA isn’t really that interested in suing individuals, although the very top affiliate probably should start seeking legal advice, but for other uploaders and downloaders, they’re only requested the 3 of the 4 sets of decimal numbers, or enough to identify the country of origin only (I suppose jurisdiction does become an issue after all). Not attempting to win understatement of the year award or anything, but things aren’t looking good for Hotfile.

BayFiles

Pirated downloads will definitely exist on BayFiles, even if they follow the law to the letter as promised

But while one file hosting company may be on the way down, another is only just getting started, and it has a pair of famous founders. The names of Peter Sunde and Fredrik Neij might sound familiar, and it’s because they’re two of the co-founders of The Pirate Bay. And together, they’ve launched BayFiles, a new file hosting service that will compete with the likes of RapidShare, and for now at least, Hotfile. Just what the music industry and Hollywood needs, another TPB production, and now an even easier way to upload files and share them with others. But they needn’t be too worried, at least no more worried than they are towards the likes of RapidShare. So still very much worried I suppose. BayFiles will comply fully with the DMCA, and will be as legit as any file hosting service can be, removing files and banning accounts when requested to do so, but not before. And that’s the crux of the issue though, is that the content holders want websites like BayFiles to do the “search and destroy”, while websites like BayFiles, who are mostly more than happy to ‘destroy’, want content holders to at least do the ‘search’ (as they’re really the only ones who know, with absolute certainty, what we are searching for in the first place). But any S&D operations performed by BayFiles, and staying in the vernacular for now, will have a high chance of  “collateral damage”, blocking and removing perfectly innocent files just because it was named wrong, or had the wrong bits and bytes in it (to be fair, if you’re really going to go and name a ZIP file containing your work related spreadsheet as “rise_of_the_planet_of_the_apes_dvd_screener.zip”, then perhaps you need more help than a file hosting service can provide, or you really do want to get fired, and are working towards this noble goal by implementing your own reverse boss button). And if services like BayFiles do not exist, then it’s back to the days of spending half an hour sending an 8MB attachment only to get a rejection notice because the recipient is blocking the type of attachment, the size of the attachment, or has a full inbox, and then you get mad and smash your monitor with your keyboard, and gets fired immediately on the spot and has to have security escort you out of the building, after which you go to the nearest bar, gets drunk as a skunk, passes out on the sidewalk outside of your former employer’s building, only to wake up the next day, in your urine stained work clothes, as your former co-workers pass you by on their way to work and look at you with both pity and disgust – you check your phone and there are dozens of text messages from your wife, with the last one saying “I’ve had enough, I’m leaving and taking the kids”. All of this because of the MPAA/RIAA.

Speaking of urine stains (never really thought I would ever write this phrase in the WNR), Wikileaks (heh, leaks) has served up yet another delicious piece of Australian info, regarding the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft’s (AFACT) lawsuit against Australia’s third largest ISP, iiNet. I say Australia, but I really mean America, because it turns out, surprise surprise, the MPAA was the brains behind the lawsuit, even though I had simply just assumed that to be the case anyway in my past reporting without any actual evidence or sources (journalist see, journalist do, journalist no have time for background checking). Anyway, it turns out I was right after all, and leaked US Embassy cables show not only did the MPAA run the show, they also wanted nobody else to know it was them running the show, except if I “knew”, then I gather everybody else “knew” as well. So it wasn’t so much the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft as it was Americans Forcing Australians into a Court Trial (it’s the best I can do with my severely mushy brain today, as I was sure there’s a better word starting with ‘F’ I could use here). The cables also revealed that the MPAFACT didn’t want to sue our largest ISP, that would be the evil behemoth of a corporation known as Telstra (aka Helstra, Tel$ra, a***holes – note the three asterisks, for we here in Australia use the more civilized British form of English, you jumper wearing, lift using, petrol guzzling lorry driving barbarians), because Telstra was a company willing to “fight hard and dirty, in court and out” – touche.

And now for something completely different. Valve’s Gabe Newell is no fan of DRM, except when his company uses it, and he’s once again attacking other companies for taking DRM far too seriously. It seems a curious trends that famous gaming people, most of them work for companies that have a great track record for delivering excellent games, are all not too fussed about DRM, and yet the companies that are well know for coming out with disappointing release after release are the ones hell bent on making the paying customer’s experience as painful as possible all in the name of fighting piracy (I’m excusing Blizzard from the list, even though they’re messing around with “always on DRM” for Diablo III, as they say they’re not doing it for anti-piracy, just for anti-cheating). And while pointing out that Valve’s Steam platform is practically one big DRM engine that locks gamers to the Steam platform, forces users to wait ages to download game updates before playing, allows publishers to use their own DRM on top of Steam’s DRM, and all sorts of nasty DRM like symptoms, you still have to say that gamers, generally, still like the Steam platform. Getting the ‘Steam’ out of a game is not easy if there are no official non-Steam versions of the game, but otherwise, it’s not intrusive DRM on the level of SecuRom or UbiDRM. And while the Steam platform, as with any platform really, is a pain to have to be locked to, there are other benefits such as in pricing (Steam sales are awesome. AWE$OME!!), achievements for games that support it, in-game browsing for those that, like me, prefers to cheat our way to gaming success via walkthoughs, the newly added screenshot taking thingy, and lots of other cool features. You either hate it, or you learn to live with it and eventually love it, but at least some do love it, unlike the totally unnecessary UbiDRM (yes, Ubisoft do provide an enhanced online experience with features that some may like, such as online game saves, and these feature do need an Internet connection – but for every single second of play? It’s like one of those competitions where you can win a car if you’re the last person to take your hands off of it, except here, your “prize” is the ability to play the game you purchased with your hard earned money). But basically what Newell is saying is that as long as gamers are happy, you can get away with a lot of DRM-like stuff, and you know, that’s fair enough.

High Definition

In HD/3D news, oh George, what have you done again. Mr. Tweak It is at it again, and the new Blu-ray version of the Star Wars trilogy (and the crappy prequels), will be different again to the DVD version, which is different to the Special Edition VHS, which is different to the original theatrical release.

You know you’re an a*** when you’ve got an entire Wikipedia page devoted to the thoughtless changes you’ve made to your own film, and but I guess critics of fanboys like myself do have a point in that it is “his film”, after all. Actually no, they’re not right. It’s not his film, no more than Citizen Kane was Orson Welles’ film, no more than the Statue of David belonging solely to Michelangelo. Film is a shared medium, and our combined experiences when viewing essential the same piece of content is what makes it one of the greatest icons of the 20th century. It would be like if Leonardo Da Vinci rose up from the dead and started making changes to the Mona Lisa! The civilized world would be outraged if that were to happen, also slightly frightened by the sight of a zombie Renaissance Man, and slightly confused wondering why he hasn’t decomposed completely by now.

Vader Nooooo!!!

Lord Vader's reaction when he heard that Lucas was messing around with the original trilogy again

So when, in the last WNR, I mentioned that George Lucas would change creepy puppet Yoda in Episode I to the slightly comical digital version used in Episode II and III, I didn’t really give a crap because, I mean, it’s Episode I. Nobody cares about the prequels, and Mr. Lucas should feel free to chop and change all he wants – maybe he will eventually make the worst movies ever made watchable. But if you go and change Return of the Jedi, and not only that, but probably the most important scene in the entire film universe, by mirroring a line of “dialogue” taken from one of the worst scenes in the entire Star Wars film universe, and already the butt of a many Internet jokes, then you’ve officially gone over to the dark side and nothing, not even adding “No” in post-production, can redeem you. This is the changed scene by the way, so for those that are curious, but don’t want to buy the expensively priced Blu-ray set to find out how disappointed they should be.

Look, some will say the reaction to the change is an overreaction, and they may be right. But why change, what for me, was a perfect scene. The pleading of the son, the true evilness of the master unmasked, and the silent, determined, change of heart from the father, from the dark side back to the light. Perfect. Vader does not need dialogue to make it clear what was going through his mind, why he was doing what he was doing, and the silence actually enhances the scene. Well, not any more. In the words of Simon Pegg, what a f**king shame.

GamingAnd finally in gaming, Sony is taking advantage of the recent PS3 price cut by doing some rebranding, and distancing themselves from the whole PSN fiasco. Nothing too drastic, but it seems the arrogant and slightly misleading (from a class action lawsuit perspective) “It Only Does Everything” has been changed to “Long Live Play”, and the awkward and curiously name Qriocity service has been renamed Music Unlimited, and along with the PSN, now all fall under the Sony Entertainment Network banner, along with Movie Unlimited for, um, movies. Only the PSN doesn’t follow the naming convention, yet, so don’t be surprised if it’s renamed Gaming Unlimited at some point, although not now because it would be far too obvious a PR exercise right now.

For the slogan change, it’s good Sony are trying to move way from the previously, highly arrogant and, plainly false one from before. But a cheetah doesn’t change its spots overnight, not if the leopard has anything to say about it, and another Sony exec has been caught calling the Xbox 360 “inferior technology”, and accusing Microsoft of using developer requirements to protect the aforementioned inferior technology. The Sony exec was responding to a Microsoft exec saying how multi-platform titles were usually better on the Xbox 360 because of Xbox Live and DLC exclusives. Both have their points, but Microsoft’s console was not the “inferior technology” that has had to drop prices recently just so it can stop being third in a three way race.

Wow, that was a bit longer, and more caustic, than I thought it would be. On some days, you get into this groove when writing, and you know what, it’s fun to just go along with it, enjoy it, until the very real threat of defamation lawsuits pull you back a bit. This was one of those days.

See you next week.