MudMan

I’m not sure about the digital-only stuff, but the OP is specifically talking about yt-dlp as an alternative to ripping the BRs, and I have to agree that ripping the disks will be easier and yields better results.

Hardware availability is the trickiest part, especially for UHD, but if you have a drive that will deal with the disks you have I certainly wouldn’t bother with the stream rip.

But hey, as a fallback, it’s good to have the option.

In fairness, the headlines written around this were generally atrocious, save a few (shout out to IGN and the original reporter, which may or may not have been techradar). Sure, in most of those you could read a more complete quote inside, but… staying at the headline isn’t just a gamer thing. Clickbait is dangerous for a reason.

And also in fairness, the point he’s making is still not great. I mean, he’s the guy in charge of their subscription service, so I wouldn’t expect him to be too negative on the idea, but he’s still saying that it’s a future that will come. Not that all models will coexist, but that a Netflix future for gaming is coming.

But yeah, gamers can be hostile without justification and often default to treating every relationship with the people making the games as an antagonistic or competitive one, which is a bummer. In that context, letting this guy talk was clearly a mistake.

Oh, it makes sense. I think there’s a place for subscription services, absolutely.

I don’t think a transition to subscription as the default model for gaming makes sense, though. Which was the point of the question and the implicit goal in the answer. And even if it did make practical sense (if people “got used to it”) it’d be bad for the art form and the industry on the aggregate.

Alright, I was only gently pointing it out because what he actually said is still a pretty bad take, but at this point it’s just annoying.

No, he didn’t say that.

He said that gaming subscriptions won’t take off UNTIL gamers get used to not owning their games. Wihch… yeah, it checks out.

The all-subscription future already sucks, can we at least limit our outrage to the actual problem? I swear, I have no idea why gaming industry people ever talk to anybody. Nothing good ever comes of it.

So far I don’t know of any services that will just hand you a digital file of a movie outside of physical media.

I say that’s a damn fine business opportunity, because I’d be all over it, but hey.

This basically, which at that point rolls all the way back around to piracy, so hey, if you find an easier way to access a comparable file maybe it’s all shades of grey anyway.

If they have access to remove the media from your library on their end, then it’s a license and not a purchase.

That doesn’t mean they don’t owe you access to it, though. The fact that there isn’t a word for “I’ve acquired perpetual access even if I can’t back up the file itself” doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have the right to continue to access the media. Or to demand that right to be upheld in court, for that matter.

I mean, you can “buy” stuff in Amazon Prime Video off service. Unlike Netflix or other platforms, they will let you “buy or rent” streaming movies, which is the same as finding the movie on the Amazon storefront and buying the digital copy instead of a physical copy.

Now, does that mean they won’t yank it? Not really. A digital license is a license, not a purchase. Is the word “buy” or “own” inaccurate? I’m hoping not, because like the Sony thing showed, platforms are desperate to not have the courts improvise what rights they owe the buyers on digital purchases.

I’m still buying my movies in 4K BluRay, though. And working on ripping all of them for streaming at home, now that I finally have the space.

I’m curious about the details, yeah. Maybe they’re plugging into some API or something? Breaking some safety measure? Otherwise I really don’t see how these threats aren’t empty. Suing somebody for breaking EULA terms does not have a great track record, and neither does modifying things you buy or making unauthorized software for computers.

But hey, if the guy says the project is coming down, then I guess the aggressive language did the thing they wanted it to do, even if it’s relatively toothless.

And you know what? It makes sense. A big part of making a moment of a media launch is to get like-minded people talking about it. It’s harder now that media is largely on-demand, so it’s great to have a place to go for the discussion afterwards.

Which is why staggered, inconsistent launches make no damn sense in the 21st century. When pirates can deliver a way to join that hype moment and you can’t, for the content you’re creating on the service your followers are already paying for you have entirely missed the point.

Hah. Not even. Between Youtube and Mastodon it was doing the job just fine.

Not like I don’t see all those posts anyway, this place isn’t THAT big yet.

Eh… what the hell is that link? The recommended videos on that place are WILD.

I had heard some rumblings about Rossmann being on some weird alt-right focused service, but I had honestly forgotten and I wasn’t expecting to get a faceful of it by accident. Yikes.

Pricing doesn’t hurt.

But yeah, people will pay for convenience. Nobody wants to dig around for pirated links if a simpler option is available.

But yeah, I hear you on international licensing. I try to keep up with Star Trek content and man, I don’t know how you can bungle up a licensig deal that much.

The latest bit of genius includes Amazon Prime listing three seasons of Lower Decks, but the third season consisting on a page that tells you they don’t have that season available, despite having had it before.

There is a fourth season. It’s not available anywhere.

I gave up and pirated it, knowing it will eventually show up in a service I do own. It was all getting spoiled for me in social media anyway.

Oh, man, I switched from Samsung to Sony because they still do all those midrange phone features in a flagship container.

I’d have gone full midrange, but I hang around mobile developers a lot and I was already getting crap for being on a four year old flagship (that was still in working order and I still use for other stuff). Now my Xperia is a conversation starter in those circles, for some reason and I still get to add storage and use my headphones and my screen has no holes in it.

I’ve bought people very nice phones for under $400 multiple times. Recently.

Flagship phones are grossly overpriced. The midrange is super nice and usable these days, though. It’s a side advantage of phone tech standardizing so much. And as you said, being a necessity for daily life it’s probably okay to spend at least a few hundred on one you’re going to use for several years.

Is this going to be another “the US has weird ideas about consumer goods” thread? Because it kinda sounds like one.

It’s not 2k at all. Last year’s 256G model, which is what I have, is 799 on Amazon, against 999 of the S23 ultra with the same spec. This year’s 1 V is 1399 on Amazon, which was the launhc price of the 1IV last year. I presume the S24 flagship will launch at about that price, too.

So yeah, it’s a flagship priced like a flagship.

The “niche phone” angle is the reviewer angle, I suppose, because they review phones like fashion accessories. My take on it was yeah, it’s the flagship most directly designed for photo enthusiasts who like manual settings and the Sony software. The features I want (swappable storage, wired headsets, front-facing stereo speakers, no notches or punch-holes) are all a side effect of making it a great phone for photographers. I don’t use the hardcore photo stuff, but the design choices made for that reason all suit me just fine.

Like I said, the only things I miss are Samsung’s great second screen support through Dex and the reassurance that point-and-click photography will get AI’d to death into something watchable no matter what. But the tradeoff is more than acceptable. I am genuinely very pleased with it. Some people reported heating issues with last year’s model, but I never hit those and they seem to be better this year.

I am in planes sometimes. I have no music subscriptions. I take RAW copies of my photos (which the phone does, that’s the flipside of the mediocre processing for the camera) AND I play a bunch of games on that thing during flights. Not even phone games, although that too. Emulation is a use case for me.

Plus, internal storage is sold at a massive premium. Why pay hundreds to dobule my 256 gigs of storage when I can pay tens for a terabyte?

Oh, and this thing does hotswappable cards, too. So yeah, if you want to record hours of 4K video, then swap cards and record several more hours, you absolute can. For extremely cheap.

Why would you NOT want expandable storage?

EDIT: For the record, since you raise it, I would lose no data from this phone if I lost it. I get the same remote wipe options you get elsewhere, and everything that needs to stick around does get a cloud copy, including that music and games. But the bonus is I still get very cheap offline access to all that data without having to download it each time and a ton of additional storage for high quality originals of my photos and recordings before free cloud storage has their way with them. Not to mention easy ways to move data back and forth without relying on networking. Again, why would you not want that?

Neither?

I moved from Samsung to Sony. I gave the Pixel a try, but it’s basically the same arbitrarily cut down hardware. Sony is making the last remaining flagship with a headphone jack and expandable storage.

I miss having Dex from Samsung, I miss having a more effective software for point and shoot picture processing. Other than that, I’m not looking back.