Big Pink wrote on 2026-08-17, 17:43:

twiz11 wrote on 2026-08-04, 21:44:

vinyl is making a comeback

It's interesting that only old audiogram formats have come back not videograms, probably because the ears are much more forgiving than the eyes. When's Laserdisc coming back? Oh, that's right, hardly anyone bought it the first time round so there's no nostalgia to blind anyone to their glorious composite signal 😉

I actually own a few Laserdiscs because they're cheaper than buying a poster. As I have a very large DVD and Blu-ray collection, cool as they are I have no intention of forking out for a working LD player and praying it doesn't die.

i owned nothing as a kid and i was happy, now i own everything and im miserable because i have agency and got to take care of it all like a museum unpaid mind you

twiz11 wrote on 2026-08-17, 17:34:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-17, 17:11:

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2026-08-17, 15:43:

Resident Evil: Requiem Reaches Up to 55% Physical Sales in Some Regions

So much for Sony's misleading narrative.

You mean deceptive narrative, their numbers also included all DLCs and other online only content in an effort to bump up their narrative that people are only buying digital now.

Sony are a bunch of crooks and just like Google will happily remove content you have bought with little recourse or compensation for doing so.

shall we start a digital revolution? Imagine I buy a ps5 and the wow factor is dynamic content and updates, the game you played 10 years ago is not the same game today yay! the majority will buy it up because PS5 now appreciates in value

Consoles are depreciating asset just like cars, I was also perfectly happy with that original game I paid for and because I have a physical copy of it itll always be mine to do with as I wish.

Sony aligned Crunchyroll has dramatically reduced the footprint of its physical media web store offerings.

They are down to a single Blueray with just DVD and audio CDs .
Also a single game for sale

Related: Why I’m NOT Buying GTA 6

UCyborg wrote on 2026-08-24, 18:23:

Related: Why I’m NOT Buying GTA 6

for every 100 who state they will not buy gta 6 due to this issue

50 will buy it anyway
30 will buy it after a while
10 will buy it eventually when its cheaper
10 won't buy it

well, its not a real prediction but i think its broadly getting the point over

a bit like when something happens and lots of people online say "i've taken my business elsewhere" and "i'm never buying from them again" - yeah, most of them will after a while and companies know that.

gerry wrote on 2026-08-25, 11:47:

for every 100 who state they will not buy gta 6 due to this issue […]
Show full quote

UCyborg wrote on 2026-08-24, 18:23:

Related: Why I’m NOT Buying GTA 6

for every 100 who state they will not buy gta 6 due to this issue

50 will buy it anyway
30 will buy it after a while
10 will buy it eventually when its cheaper
10 won't buy it

well, its not a real prediction but i think its broadly getting the point over

a bit like when something happens and lots of people online say "i've taken my business elsewhere" and "i'm never buying from them again" - yeah, most of them will after a while and companies know that.

Sheep follow sheep unfortunately and humans with mob mentality are even dumber than a flock of sheep, no wonder these corporations find it so profitable to nickel and dime their consumers. GTA6 is going to be so monetised that 2K will 100% make sure they can extract every dollar they can from the people stupid enough to buy into that game, then they will do it again with 6 more re-releases of it in the coming years. I have no doubt 2K will find a way to make people pay for digital bullets and the ability to load them into a weapon. (Not to mention real world advertising is going to be a big thing in the game with ads and product placement everywhere)

GTA6 will never see the inside of my home ..never, 2K can go kick rocks.

Most people just don't care, especially if we're talking mainstream product. As with every medium, comparatively few take notice, and fewer care.

Would it benefit the longterm health of the film industry if everyone sought out the most obscure arthouse cinema to see new blockbuster at? Probably. Will anyone do it? Not if it's even marginally less convenient and straightforward, and most likely not if it's not massively more convenient (which it won't be).

such wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:04:

Most people just don't care, especially if we're talking mainstream product. As with every medium, comparatively few take notice, and fewer care.

Would it benefit the longterm health of the film industry if everyone sought out the most obscure arthouse cinema to see new blockbuster at? Probably. Will anyone do it? Not if it's even marginally less convenient and straightforward, and most likely not if it's not massively more convenient (which it won't be).

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

/SMH

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:36:

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

I watched it. I didn't know the source material very well, only the basic outline. Was it really that big of a deviation from the source, compared to the average movie adaptation? More than Peter Jackson's LOTR, esp. the last part? (never mind The Hobbit) Enough to call it "utter trash"?

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:39:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:36:

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

I watched it. I didn't know the source material very well, only the basic outline. Was it really that big of a deviation from the source, compared to the average movie adaptation? More than Peter Jackson's LOTR, esp. the last part? (never mind The Hobbit) Enough to call it "utter trash"?

Yes Nolan re wrote the entire end of the movie because the source material was not suitable for the modern audience, he also used an adaptation written by a feminist attempting to write it from a woman's point of view for his script, that said even she hated the movie as it went against everything Homer was trying to convey with the Odyssey. Other ..modern audience decisions were made along the way also such as replacing Achilles with Sinon in the movie so that Elliot Page could have a part in the movie, along with other dubious casting decisions which thankfully had next to zero screen time.

Worst of all . .there were ZERO Greeks in a Greek historical piece.

I have read the Iliad and The Odyssey and the movie was a cringe fest, I have no idea why he thought he could write it better than Homer did.. Aggrogance I suppose. (Go watch 2004's Troy, its a far better movie)

Anyway this is off Topic .

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:45:

(Go watch 2004's Troy, its a far better movie)

I did. A couple of times. And I like it. But that one went overboard with the storyline changes (Hector straight out kills Menelaus), and there weren't any Greeks either.
By that logic I would expect it to be trashed even more than Nolan's movie... *checks* yep, confirmed across all three major rating sites.

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:45:

Anyway this is off Topic .

Yeah, you're right. Back on topic:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 12:12:

GTA6 is going to be so monetised that 2K will 100% make sure they can extract every dollar they can from the people stupid enough to buy into that game, then they will do it again with 6 more re-releases of it in the coming years. I have no doubt 2K will find a way to make people pay for digital bullets and the ability to load them into a weapon.

How is it different from hundreds of other mainstream games. Is it just because it's the first time it happens in a GTA game? (honestly don't know, haven't been following the franchise after GTA:SA)

In a completely different franchise - I've played some Angry Birds games, and spent a good part of a year being addicted to the free-to-play-and-everything-is-monetized Angry Birds 2. I enjoyed some of the mechanics, and was able to get pretty far into the game, despite never spending a single penny on it. I guess I would be considered the worst kind of customer by Rovio. So they punished me by grind, and eventually I decided I don't want to do it anymore, and quit cold-turkey. However, I still enjoy from time to time the relaxing offline-only play of the classic Angry Birds games that I have legitimately purchased (for very little money).

So, in the end, you and I are probably quite similar in how we prefer playing and buying our games. Whatever the rest of the world wants do doesn't bother me...

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 14:00:

I did. A couple of times. And I like it. But that one went overboard with the storyline changes (Hector straight out kills Menel […]
Show full quote

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:45:

(Go watch 2004's Troy, its a far better movie)

I did. A couple of times. And I like it. But that one went overboard with the storyline changes (Hector straight out kills Menelaus), and there weren't any Greeks either.
By that logic I would expect it to be trashed even more than Nolan's movie... *checks* yep, confirmed across all three major rating sites.

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:45:

Anyway this is off Topic .

Yeah, you're right. Back on topic:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 12:12:

GTA6 is going to be so monetised that 2K will 100% make sure they can extract every dollar they can from the people stupid enough to buy into that game, then they will do it again with 6 more re-releases of it in the coming years. I have no doubt 2K will find a way to make people pay for digital bullets and the ability to load them into a weapon.

How is it different from hundreds of other mainstream games. Is it just because it's the first time it happens in a GTA game? (honestly don't know, haven't been following the franchise after GTA:SA)

In a completely different franchise - I've played some Angry Birds games, and spent a good part of a year being addicted to the free-to-play-and-everything-is-monetized Angry Birds 2. I enjoyed some of the mechanics, and was able to get pretty far into the game, despite never spending a single penny on it. I guess I would be considered the worst kind of customer by Rovio. So they punished me by grind, and eventually I decided I don't want to do it anymore, and quit cold-turkey. However, I still enjoy from time to time the relaxing offline-only play of the classic Angry Birds games that I have legitimately purchased (for very little money).

So, in the end, you and I are probably quite similar in how we prefer playing and buying our games. Whatever the rest of the world wants do doesn't bother me...

GTA6 will be in an entirely different monetisation ball park from every other game released thus far, First game to have a monthly subscription service to access content in the single player game. Say what you like, 2K are fucking scum bags and I don't think we have seen just how low they will go to get money and make money from players.

As for Troy .. I just said it was a better movie, in that I'm not wrong. As for the rating sites . .bought and paid for by the studios much like Metacritic is bought and paid for by the game studios, this has been common knowledge for a long time. Not really a surprise they are all kissing Hollywood's poster boy's ass, how else are they going to get paid.

Anyone trusting the MSM and Review sites needs to have a reality check done on them, anyone using them as evidence for anything also needs a reality check . .that's like using Wikipedia in your PHD dissertation as a credible source.

"Im tired Boss" is appropriate here, going off grid is looking more and more enticing, some place where I don't need to deal with the modern world.

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:39:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:36:

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

I watched it. I didn't know the source material very well, only the basic outline. Was it really that big of a deviation from the source, compared to the average movie adaptation? More than Peter Jackson's LOTR, esp. the last part? (never mind The Hobbit) Enough to call it "utter trash"?

The Odyssey is art from ancient Greece, with everything that entails. It is layered, and to a degree alien to us as we exist in contemporary reality. Nolan's film is The Odyssey as told by a contemporary westerner who cherry-picked stuff he liked in the adaptation process, possibly without care as to what anything in The Odyssey means or what it's there for. More specifically, this is an entirely imperialist American perspective. These can't be more different.

Personally, I don't even mind that it's The Odyssey made into a simplistic revisionist American war film (the same way Eastwood's Unforgiven is a revisionist western, though that film is simple in the best way possible: it is crystal-clear), but I do mind it's either insincere or just completely thoughtless as to what it's saying. The kind reading is that this movie is pretending that it's something it's not, and that if it were the thing it pretends to be it could be called... semi-competently made. In spots.

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

GTA6 will be in an entirely different monetisation ball park from every other game released thus far, First game to have a monthly subscription service to access content in the single player game.

Yeah, that pretty much kills it for me. But those who were used to paying for Xbox/Switch "Game pass" accounts will see nothing wrong with that...

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

Say what you like, 2K are fucking scum bags and I don't think we have seen just how low they will go to get money and make money from players.

I think maybe where you and I differ is that I just don't view commercial entities who try to make money as 'scumbags' just because they try to make money. As long as they don't force you to pay, and they don't misrepresent anything, and they don't cheat - I don't have a problem with that. You can choose not to buy, or not to play. Heck, you can even choose to pirate the game (eventually it always becomes possible), or wait 5-10 years for it to become DRM-free (many games do). This is not a basic necessity. Don't like the terms? Give them the finger, play something else and give your money to those who you find worthy.

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

As for the rating sites . .bought and paid for by the studios much like Metacritic is bought and paid for by the game studios, this has been common knowledge for a long time.

What, even Rotten Tomatoes?

Sony Reminds PS5 Owners Their Digital Games Are Licensed, Not Sold

Sony wrote:

The Software is licensed to you, not sold. You are granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and personal license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use on the system or device it was intended for.

The document goes on to explain that you’re not allowed to copy, hack, sublicense, or emulate the games.

Sony wrote:

Violating any of the above conditions will immediately void your license.

I wonder if EU lawmakers would have an issue with some of those terms.

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 19:25:

Yeah, that pretty much kills it for me. But those who were used to paying for Xbox/Switch "Game pass" accounts will see nothing […]
Show full quote

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

GTA6 will be in an entirely different monetisation ball park from every other game released thus far, First game to have a monthly subscription service to access content in the single player game.

Yeah, that pretty much kills it for me. But those who were used to paying for Xbox/Switch "Game pass" accounts will see nothing wrong with that...

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

Say what you like, 2K are fucking scum bags and I don't think we have seen just how low they will go to get money and make money from players.

I think maybe where you and I differ is that I just don't view commercial entities who try to make money as 'scumbags' just because they try to make money. As long as they don't force you to pay, and they don't misrepresent anything, and they don't cheat - I don't have a problem with that. You can choose not to buy, or not to play. Heck, you can even choose to pirate the game (eventually it always becomes possible), or wait 5-10 years for it to become DRM-free (many games do). This is not a basic necessity. Don't like the terms? Give them the finger, play something else and give your money to those who you find worthy.

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 15:04:

As for the rating sites . .bought and paid for by the studios much like Metacritic is bought and paid for by the game studios, this has been common knowledge for a long time.

What, even Rotten Tomatoes?

People thinking subscriptions for single player content is ok is a far bigger problem, they are the same people who think pay in 4 for DoorDash or Uber eats is ok. NONE of this is ok.

I am also on the side of not supporting Corporations who go out of their way to be Evil scumbags, Google, Meta, Microslop, 2K, EA, UBISoft ETC are all included, they don't just want your money they want ALL the money even to the detriment of society in general. I doubt they even care about their own investors with how some of them behave with money. If you are ok with how they behave then this is the line I guess and that's ok, you go your way and I will go mine.

Especially Rotten Tomatoes ..they are so deep in Hollywood they would need a 1500 ton crane to pull them out, Rotten Tomatoes is to movies what Metacritic is to games and both are bought and owned by the MSM, very likely the same MSM entity too.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2026-08-25, 19:35:

Sony Reminds PS5 Owners Their Digital Games Are Licensed, Not Sold […]
Show full quote

Sony Reminds PS5 Owners Their Digital Games Are Licensed, Not Sold

Sony wrote:

The Software is licensed to you, not sold. You are granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and personal license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use on the system or device it was intended for.

The document goes on to explain that you’re not allowed to copy, hack, sublicense, or emulate the games.

Sony wrote:

Violating any of the above conditions will immediately void your license.

I wonder if EU lawmakers would have an issue with some of those terms.

Perhaps they would, but to zero effect. I'm strictly a PC user and player. Such terms existed everywhere on the PC, even back when software was sold only in physical form. I think even the trivial provision of 'right to copy for backup purposes' had to be 'hacked in' via legislation/court precedent, not sure.

Maybe I just never cared much for any of this, because back when I was growing up, it was always possible to get almost any piece of software by 'extralegal' means, and at first very few people even understood that it's considered wrong/illegal. So the notions of using software and paying for software are permanently split in my brain.

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:39:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:36:

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

I watched it. I didn't know the source material very well, only the basic outline. Was it really that big of a deviation from the source, compared to the average movie adaptation? More than Peter Jackson's LOTR, esp. the last part? (never mind The Hobbit) Enough to call it "utter trash"?

No it was not. The oddyssey is a thousands year old porm that probably had so many variations from Homer's original oral accounts to this day that speaking of an authentic one true narration is absurd. Same people who shit on Nolan's Oddyssey tend to love Jackson's LOTR which actually changed the source material even more. Don't even get me started on Hobbit. This is all internet vitriol, the movie was good and the political messages it slipped in were subtle and imo well deserved. It is also not the firstntime Ulysses was depicted as a downbeat and traumatized war hero. The Return also did that, and even better.

Trashbytes wrote on Yesterday, 01:51:

Especially Rotten Tomatoes ..they are so deep in Hollywood they would need a 1500 ton crane to pull them out, Rotten Tomatoes is to movies what Metacritic is to games and both are bought and owned by the MSM, very likely the same MSM entity too.

yes their ownership certainly suggests "conflict of interest", that in itself doesn't mean every review is somehow corrupted but still, it doesn't look independent

appiah4 wrote on Yesterday, 06:58:

No it was not. The oddyssey is a thousands year old porm that probably had so many variations from Homer's original oral accounts to this day that speaking of an authentic one true narration is absurd. Same people who shit on Nolan's Oddyssey tend to love Jackson's LOTR which actually changed the source material even more. Don't even get me started on Hobbit. This is all internet vitriol, the movie was good and the political messages it slipped in were subtle and imo well deserved. It is also not the firstntime Ulysses was depicted as a downbeat and traumatized war hero. The Return also did that, and even better.

Hollywood has long depicted the past inaccurately (not reinterpreting but straight changes) to portray things a certain way in dramatizations , its bound to mess about with the classics even more. I understand the upset, the Hollywood treatment of someone's cultural heritage is sometimes seen as "get over it" and sometimes "you cant do that" depending on the topic, depiction, casting, audience and political persuasion. It's inconsistent at best, skewed & insulting & ideological at worst.

Joseph_Joestar wrote on 2026-08-25, 19:35:

Sony Reminds PS5 Owners Their Digital Games Are Licensed, Not Sold

Sony wrote:

The Software is licensed to you, not sold. You are granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, and personal license to play or use the Software for your private, non-commercial use on the system or device it was intended for.

The document goes on to explain that you’re not allowed to copy, hack, sublicense, or emulate the games.

I think its the fact those terms are now enforceable that gets people angry!

appiah4 wrote on Yesterday, 06:58:

dr_st wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:39:

Trashbytes wrote on 2026-08-25, 13:36:

The utter trash that is the Odyssey proved that point, that movie shit all over the source material then wiped its ass with it and people still paid to go watch it.

I watched it. I didn't know the source material very well, only the basic outline. Was it really that big of a deviation from the source, compared to the average movie adaptation? More than Peter Jackson's LOTR, esp. the last part? (never mind The Hobbit) Enough to call it "utter trash"?

No it was not. The oddyssey is a thousands year old porm that probably had so many variations from Homer's original oral accounts to this day that speaking of an authentic one true narration is absurd. Same people who shit on Nolan's Oddyssey tend to love Jackson's LOTR which actually changed the source material even more. Don't even get me started on Hobbit. This is all internet vitriol, the movie was good and the political messages it slipped in were subtle and imo well deserved. It is also not the firstntime Ulysses was depicted as a downbeat and traumatized war hero. The Return also did that, and even better.

LOTR was trash too but it was enjoyable trash, the Hobbit is best left forgotten in the archive of movies that should have never been filmed along with the Odyssey and Titanic.
As for the political messaging .. I don't need Hollywood doing that in Movies, I go to see a movie to have fun not be lectured to by the Elites of Hollywood on topics they have zero place talking about. Its like being told how to spend my money by the super rich ..the utter arrogance.

This is all off topic and runs the risk of getting the thread locked .. which is likely for the best.