Path: chuka.playstation.co.uk!news From: Majik Newsgroups: scee.yaroze.freetalk.english Subject: Re: PS2 Dev kit Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 11:01:53 +0100 Organization: PlayStation Net Yaroze (SCEE) Lines: 50 Message-ID: <3B725F90.278371C5@127.0.0.1> References: <3B6A72B5.C98C7CB9@127.0.0.1> <3b6c1d6e.1206518802@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <9kh9pv$l511@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <3b6e5167.1219826968@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <9kj6cm$nog1@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <3b71d3d5.1318759035@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <9krfi6$3h312@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <3b77631c.1552058462@www.netyaroze-europe.com> <9krrte$3h318@www.netyaroze-europe.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.199.144.166 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; I) X-Accept-Language: en Matt Verran wrote: > > 1. As soon as you start expecting payment for a particular service, I > > have a feeling that your liability increases should something go > > wrong. > Slap a M$ style 'we are not responsible for anything if you choose to > download this software' end user agreement on it. That's all well and good for the lawyers, but given the 'restrictions' on OPM demos, is it _really_ necessary? And one thing I would hate to see would be a scene akin to the free/shareware scene on the PC, where you just _don't know_ what the software you're about to run is going to do. > > But if I remember > > well,a few years ago, some anime show in Japan was taken off the air > > for giving kids who saw it seizures. > I think it was pokemon, a big monster used some kind of attack that made red > strobey effects come out of his eyes. This is a pretty remote incident, I've > never heard of any legal cases against game software that have been won. Was it not "Battling seisure robots" or somesuch a la "Simpsons go to Japan" one of my favourite episodes "aahhh, we seem to be experiencing some minor Godzilla related turbulence at the moment..." > > [No cash for devs - SNIP] > Ick I'm against this, reward where reward is due, if people are paying money > then the developer should get money. Sony issue a cheque every month, it's > up to you to declare it for tax or whatever. Sony only accept finished games > and the money is entirely dependant on how many people pay for your game, In > effect sony are merely providing you with the hosting and payment handling, > and they are charging you per sale for the QA/overheads. Something like the royalties scheme musicians seem to benefit from, perhaps? > > [convincing publishers to go out on a limb for a snazzy NY demo - SNIP] > No, this is a way to get independant, single developer games to the public. > These games would never be picked up by publishers because they need to be > sold at such a low rate it's just not worth distributing/marketing them. Exactly! > Then again, maybe if SONY made the broadband delivery network open to anyone > we might be able to set this up all on our own. Publishers will be gagging > for simple innovative games they can offer for download. We'll all live > happily ever after. It's a nice thought :O) M.