ASDA Not Selling RDR?
Price cutting not allowed?Published 20/05/2010 at 16:00.
By Chris C [cc_star].
Rumour: Brad Pitt For Red Dead Movie [17]
Red Dead Redemption DLC Screens [9]
Red Dead Redemption Time Lapse [29]
Latest Stories (more)
Fake Alert: Sony Haven’t Banned Anyone Over Jailbreak, Yet. [10]
Sunday Thoughts: Reviewing Reviews [66]
Review: Metroid: Other M [30]
There are reports that the UK’s second biggest supermarket chain ASDA, will not be stocking Red Dead Redemption in-store. Long time TSA member GamerRiley gave his local store a ring to find out if they would be stocking it from midnight he was told they “won’t be stocking the game”.
Obviously that’s quite baffling for a title which is expected to be the biggest selling game of the year so far, so he inquired further as to why and was told that ASDA wanted to sell the game at a specially reduced launch price (presumably a below cost supermarket special that we have all come to know and love) but they were told they had to sell it for a minimum price.
I’m no legal expert but I’m of the opinion that price fixing of any kind is illegal so we would be surprised if this is the case, also we obviously aren’t privy to talks between the companies so we can’t be clear on the arrangements between ASDA and TakeTwo (Rockstar’s publishers). I have made a couple of phone calls myself which lend weight to the point that all is not well between the two companies and they may indeed have had a falling out over RDR’s pricing.
In phoning my two nearest ASDA stores to query RDR’s release date and availability, one said they didn’t have it in stock and the other said they weren’t stocking it but didn’t know why.
Long time readers of TSA will know I hold the supermarket’s pricing strategies in contempt and although launch day price reductions are a short-term win for cash strapped gamers, of which I myself have been a beneficiary (thanks Sainsbury’s for MW2). I believe it could actually lead to reduced competition and higher prices in the long run through independents going out of business. The issue here is that something could have happened which could leave large amounts of gamers paying more than they otherwise might have this launch weekend.
Let us know in the comments below if your local ASDA has the game in stock, or any reasons they have given for not stocking it.
Not logged in
Log in to join the TSA Community, see your PS3 Trophies, check your PMs, take part in TSA Meets and earn TSA Points.
Most Comments This Week
- TSA’s Guide To PlayStation Move [69]
- PSN Store Update: 01/09/10 [63]
- Sunday Thoughts: Reviewing Reviews [61]
- COD: Black Ops Multiplayer Revealed [57]
- October PlayStation Plus Content Announced [55]
- Arkham City Screens Are Amazing [52]
- MS Raise Xbox Live Price [51]
- WRC 2010 UK Debut Trailer [46]
- New Xbox 360 Pad Confirmed [46]
- Guest Writer: Fixing My Dead PS3 [45]
Gastos84 | 20/05/2010 16:04
Team TSA: Writer
4238 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I hate what the supermarkets do with these low low launch prices, although I can see why many love them.
We had that whole discussion last year about Supermarkets etc but I think in this case the only company it’s going to hurt is ASDA. If they can’t get it there they will venture to TESCOS or they will just get online.
Interesting situation, though.
Gastos84 | 20/05/2010 16:09
Team TSA: Writer
4238 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
Thinking about it, the only reason that TakeTwo would risk leagl problems with price fixing issues would be to help out the reatilers that are offering various pre-order incentives. Other than that it would be ASDA taking the hit on profits with a reduced selling price as I’m sure their purchase price would remain the same and ASDA would have helped the game reach those all important record numbers and sales figures that companies seem to crave these days.
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:11
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
There’s no better advertising than for a game to sit at the top of the charts.
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:32
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
ASDA wouldn’t be taking a hit on profits. The point is they sell the game cheap and lose money on that, but it gets people into their shops, who then end up spending money on other things, which gets ASDA the money back they lost on the game. It’s called loss leading, all supermarkets do it with lots of different products, ASDA have lead the market in this department for years. They wouldn’t sell games at a loss like they do if it wasn’t in the interests of the company (no, not the one from Heroes!).
Gastos84 | 20/05/2010 16:37
Team TSA: Writer
4238 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I’m aware that it’s seen as a loss leader but if the FIFA and MW2 situations are anything to go by the majority of gamers that used ASDA just popped in and out for the game. Defeats the point especially if people were going to go to ASDA to do their shopping anyway.
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:06
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
It this is true there will be trouble as price fixing is illegal and certainly looks like price fixing
bajere | 20/05/2010 17:11
Member
2675 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
It not price fixing if they refused to sell wallmart copys of the game. its price fixing to do it as they wont sell it for a certain price tho. Apple dont allow there products to be sold by just anyone. LONG shot, as i dont see why Take2 wouldnt allow ASDA to sell the game for any other reason…
To be honest i dont see the problem in Supermarkets selling games for £25. If asda want to make a £20 loss, then let them?!?! Take2 still get the same amount of money. If asda where selling them for £25 more than the rrp and making a massive margin then i would understand
cc_star | 20/05/2010 17:15
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Not supplying to a company is perfectly fine, but of pricing is the reason then TakeTwo could be on dodgy ground.
It would take a complaint from ASDA to instigate any action, but I doubt they’ll go that far considering supermarkets themselves are the recipients of many OFT investigations
X201 | 20/05/2010 16:16
Member
506 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
“I’m of the opinion that price fixing of any kind is illegal”
I think you should phone Apple and tell them.
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:18
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
UK LAW
Price fixing and the law
Competition law prohibits almost any attempt to fix prices – for example, you cannot:
agree prices with your competitors, eg you can’t agree to work from a shared minimum price list
share markets or limit production to raise prices, eg if two contracts are put out to tender you can’t agree that you’ll bid for one and let your competitor bid for the other
impose minimum prices on different distributors such as shops
agree with your competitors what purchase price you will offer your suppliers
cut prices below cost in order to force a smaller or weaker competitor out of the market
The law doesn’t just cover formal agreements. It also includes other activities with a price-fixing effect. For example, you shouldn’t discuss your pricing plans with your competitors. If you then all ‘happen’ to raise your prices, you are fixing prices.
There are exemptions to the law and some agreements are not prohibited by competition legislation, particularly between companies with insignificant market shares. However, there are very few occasions where an agreement concerning price-fixing would be allowed.
Consequences
The law is enforced by the OFT, which can impose a fine of up to 10 per cent of your turnover. It can also apply for company directors to be disqualified.
If you are found to be part of a cartel you could even face criminal prosecution and jail
GamerRiley | 20/05/2010 16:26
Member
885 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2008
So Asda can sell the game for whatever price it likes, yes?
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:32
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Yes but at the same time there’s nothing about stock having to be sold to Asda so TakeTwo couldn’t be prosecuted for that but they could if other shops where agreeing to a minimum price. The punishment could be up to 10% of their turnover which is a huge amount
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:34
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Yes it can, but take two cannot tell ASDA they’re not allowed to sell their product for less than £X. That would be an attempt by take two to fix the price of their product, which is against UK law.
bajere | 20/05/2010 17:14
Member
2675 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
@tonycawley:
Same as Apple. its an unsaid term. ” you can sell our gear, but we will stop supply if you sell to cheap…Now sign the contract ;) ;) “
cam the man | 20/05/2010 22:42
Member
2906 TSA Points | Member since: May 2009
Isn’t price setting not the same as price fixing?
If it was Sony, Nintendo & Microsoft wouldn’t be able to set the price for consoles, especially when first released.
double-o-dave | 20/05/2010 16:20
Member
1272 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I spoke to my 2 nearest Asda stores about an hour ago and they both say they received an email telling them they are not stocking the game BUT you can order the game from Asda online.
Don’t bother asking Tesco as you can see the conversation I had with them on the RED DEAD REDEMTION forum. And yes thats ‘REDEMTION’ :)
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:24
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
So they AREN’T stocking it in-store then, the only reason I can think of is that ASDA wanted to offer it at a price that would have pleased their customers and TakeTwo/Rockstar weren’t happy with that
GamerRiley | 20/05/2010 16:27
Member
885 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2008
That’s the impression I got from the guy I spoke with.
double-o-dave | 20/05/2010 16:31
Member
1272 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
If thats a last minute thing there must be a massive container somewhere with a whole bunch of games in. Even better if this was decided earlier today, its means the lorrys would of already been on their way to the stores so if I see an Asda lorry in a lay-by on my way home I could hi-jack it and it would more than likely have a few hundred copies in it
double-o-dave | 20/05/2010 16:33
Member
1272 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
Jesus – apologies for the bad english there, and the spelling too… Lorries!
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:35
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Asda don’t run the online store, its run by the hut group who also run other online store like zavvi and lovefilm.
bunimomike | 20/05/2010 17:53
Member
10300 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
Seems the way here in Cardiff. Been over to the mahoosive (and relatively new) store and not a sniff of the game. No pre-order boxes or “it’s coming out tonight”, etc. Nothing. Oh well. I was hoping to return with great news but as of one hour ago RDR won’t be making an appearance in the green and white stores.
cc_star | 20/05/2010 18:07
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Eurogamer are running the story now saying that ASDA stores WON’T be selling the game at all, with the subtle hint to a problem with the supplier-retailer relationship.
So that’s that then!
GamerRiley | 20/05/2010 16:24
Member
885 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2008
As I stated in the forum, that was the response I got when I questioned the guy face to face, not on the phone, at the customer service desk. He knew straight away what I was talking about and was very honest with his answer.
As for the buying games at supermarkets argument, the whole reason for this was so that a few of us in the forum would have a session on the games online mode at around 12:30 Friday morning. The only place where we can purchase the game to do that is the big 24hr supermarkets. As for independent shops, I’d love to buy from them, it’s just that where I live there aren’t any!
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:29
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Sucks for bargain hunters then, which may have included me if it was cheap enough there’s no way I’m paying up to £40 for something of only limited personal appeal to me but a supermarket price war may have got my interest :(
Downey92 | 20/05/2010 16:30
Member
654 TSA Points | Member since: Jun 2009
Have Tesco got it? If so for how much? Anyone know?
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:33
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Not much under SRP if the undertones to this story are true
Apnomis | 20/05/2010 17:17
Member
1768 TSA Points | Member since: Sep 2009
I preordered it online at Tesco Entertainment with a discount voucher and Quidco for well below the RRP, worked out at about £27 I think. Which is to me is a fair price given that they f**ked up the PS3 version…
Charmed_Fanatic | 20/05/2010 16:30
Member
3043 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
2nd biggest supermarket? Whats the 1st??
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:34
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Tesco, it is said the £1 in every £8 spent in the whole of the UK is spent at a Tesco store
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:36
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Correct.
Charmed_Fanatic | 20/05/2010 16:39
Member
3043 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2009
wow, did not know this! Bet Tesco’s happy
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:45
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
cc-star, how did you edit your comment? Originally you only said Tesco, now you’ve added more detail. I can’t edit my comments, or can I and it’s just me being thick again?
jimmy-google | 20/05/2010 16:53
Member
2825 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
About 0.000001p of every pound I spend is in Tesco.
skibadee | 20/05/2010 17:47
Member
15748 TSA Points | Member since: Oct 2009
he is a Writer for TSA.
hazelam | 20/05/2010 16:34
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
they call it RECOMMENDED retail price for a reason.
and how can you be against these supermarket prices because they will adversely affect smaller independant stores, yet you support action designed to kill preowned sales which would hit smaller independents just as hard.
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:43
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Everyone sells under the RRP/SRP but it looks like ASDA weren’t allowed to sell for massively under or a price of their choosing, which may even be illegal.
I don’t support actions preventing used sales if you’re referring to 2nd hand/pirate passes which don’t prevent used sales in the slightest, but I do support actions of developers getting their fair share o.O
hazelam | 20/05/2010 17:19
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
don’t prevent used sales in the slightest? they cut out half the game for preowned buyers, you don’t think that will have an effect?
and they get their fair share when the game is sold, why is it that suddenly they’re not satisfied with that?
suddenly their cut when the game is sold isn’t good enough.
why is it our property and our risk if anything goes wrong but theirs if we decide to sell it on.
once i’ve paid for a game it’s mine and the publisher can get lost unless they want to also take responsibility for it, and we both know that’s not going to happen.
will you still support the drm when we have steam style totalitarian drm with games locked to a single user forever?
sorry if that’s a bit aggressive but i think drm is an affront to my rights and absolutely unacceptable, so i tend to get militant about it, and a lot of other things too now i think about it, it’s nothing personal, honest >_>
cc_star | 20/05/2010 18:04
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
It is their (the publishers/retailers) property until we choose to buy it, if I don’t like what they’re selling I won’t buy it.
If I buy it in the knowledge that its resale value is gimped, I really can’t see the problem as I made that purchase decision armed with that knowledge.
Likewise if I buy it Used in the knowledge I can’t play online without paying extra, then I had that knowledge before I bought it, its not like I’ve purchased anything and been conned.
Of course pirates are a key target of this, lets say 1m copies of PSP LBP have been sold, but the online activity (AND COSTS) is the equivalent of 10m users. This now can’t happen with PSP MNR, as the online pass prevents it.
This goes for the EA, Ubisoft & THQ games mentioned and probably all future games, the principle losers are pirates, secondary to that there will be some re-balancing of used pricing which may take some time this then could have a knock-on effect to new pricing.
ps. I don’t mind games being locked to user, as long as they’re not locked to a system – if that becomes the case I’ll join you in raging against the machine
hazelam | 20/05/2010 18:53
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
you don’t mind games being locked to a single user?
so you do in fact support actions that would kill the prowned market and all the independent stores that rely on it?
hazelam | 20/05/2010 19:00
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
and pirate are not the key aim of this, drm does not work against piracy, that’s been proven time and time again, if anything it increases piracy as people wont put up with unjust drm and will download pirate titles.
you’ve shown a very hypocritical nature in this article cc, you disaprove of supermarkets selling games at below cost prices because they will harm independents, yet you’ve taken advantage of those prices, and you support drm that would kill the preowned sales and the independents that rely on them
bunimomike | 20/05/2010 19:04
Member
10300 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
If the used market becomes unattractive to me then I, for one, will game less. This isn’t a knee jerk reaction. Just that I don’t have enough money every month to enjoy the games I want to and the likes of eBay are precious to me. Don’t get me wrong, things might not change that much… just saying. :-) If they nobble online play for anyone but the original purchaser then I hope the price to others is suitably lower as oppose to something resembling RRP then extra on top for the online component.
cc_star | 20/05/2010 20:16
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
No one is stopping shops buying a used game for a price from an individual and then selling it for a higher price thus making a profit.
You are being a doom-merchant and spreading FUD if you think they are.
Thus there will always be a Used game market, there may of course be some price balancing but people won’t sell for too little and shops won’t pay too much so that will sort itself out.
The principle losers through online pass, as per my example above are the pirating community whose (non-existent) rights you seem to defend to the hilt at every single opportunity, in every single story (even unrelated ones) on TSA.
hazelam | 20/05/2010 20:53
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
you stated yourself that you’d be ok with a system that locks a game to a single user, that makes trading in impossible, with that drm there will be no way to resell your property.
this has already happened with pc games, many of then can never be sold on because of these drm systems, that’s a fact.
and you’re the one who’s always implying the connection between legal trading and illegal piracy when they’re two totally seperate things.
i’ve never defended piracy, i’ve defended the rights of people over items they’ve paid money for, and i’ve stated that does not include pirating it.
you’re the one implying that buying a preowned game is little more than stealing from the developer, is that not spreading FUD? had to look it up.
always raising the spectre of piracy whenever the publishers do something that is of dubious legality and is definitely against the interest of the consumer.
cc_star | 20/05/2010 21:05
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
There is no f*cking way I’m implying that 2nd hand owners and pirates are the same thing…
When I have used the words ’2nd hand’ & ‘pirate’ in the same sentence it is because as far as the online component of games are concerned they both amount to a cost for the developers/publishers/server maintainers that they haven’t had the benefit of any sales revenue from.
Again I point out (in the vain attempt you’ll take notice and stop banging on about DRM)
“No one is stopping shops buying a used game for a price from an individual and then selling it for a higher price thus making a profit.”
“Thus there will always be a Used game market, there may of course be some price balancing but people won’t sell for too little and shops won’t pay too much so that will sort itself out.”
colossalblue | 20/05/2010 21:27
Team TSA: Editor
2087 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
at the risk of sticking my nose in on a debate which has enough momentum without me:
When you buy a game you don’t actually buy that content, you buy the rights to use that content, as with movies and music. Technically, you’re not buying the rights to sell that content on (and definitely not loan, publically present or rent it out) so there is no dubious legality involved. The law in the UK is clear, it’s just rarely enforced which is why when the rights-holders do try to get a bit of leverage their consumers think it’s an affront to the rights they never really had inthe first place.
The rights you’re buying with certain upcoming games are slightly different to the rights you bought with previous titles. As long as you know the score, your rights and options as a consumer are not infringed in any way. They are under no obligation to create, manufacture, distribute and retail the product you wish was available. They provide a product, you make the choice to buy it or not. Simple.
Of course, we all wish that everything was cheaper but shouting about how it should be isn’t going to make that happen. If enough consumers show their dissatisfaction by not buying the product then eventually things will change. If consumers continue unabated then the value-balance is obviously correct. Time will tell.
hazelam | 20/05/2010 21:28
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
if we get the tied to a single user drm that you seem to think is ok there will be no trade ins, that’s not scaremongering, that’s a fact.
“When I have used the words ‘2nd hand’ & ‘pirate’ in the same sentence it is because as far as the online component of games are concerned they both amount to a cost for the developers/publishers/server maintainers that they haven’t had the benefit of any sales revenue from.”
that’s simply not true, because every single preowned game was bought and there is only a single person using that title, whether that is the original owner or a second owner makes no difference, the game was bought and paid for, that is not the case with pirate copies.
there is no comparison.
seriously, how is the first user continuing to use the game any different than another user using the same game as far as the server is concerned.
it’s like running a train service, whether there’s a hundred people on the train or ten you still have to run the train.
although the analogy falls down as there’s no real similar option to trading in with trains, there’s just fare dodging which is much akin to piracy, but the main principle is the same.
they do not lose money, or maybe a negligible amount, what they don’t get is more money for the same game.
the shop however does have extra costs with trade ins, that being the cost of the games.
look, i’m not here to argue, i believe drm is wrong, you believe it’s not.
i look forward to hearing what you have to say though :)
cc_star | 20/05/2010 21:42
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Your train analogy is quite a good one
“it’s like running a train service, whether there’s a hundred people on the train or ten you still have to run the train”
As demand for a train decreases the train company will use fewer and fewer carriages
Is that any different to the company who run the servers, having 10,000 up on launch weekend and then removing 1,000 by the end of week 1, another 1,000 by the end of month 1, and then another few hundred servers every month until a few years later when hardly anyone is playing they turn them off?
The 2nd hand game market means there is a much longer tail to online activity than is built into current purchase prices
Should prices go up to reflect this, hurting the initial purchasers? Or should there be some sort of charge levied at the secondary market – I know which I think is fairer.
Roynaldo | 20/05/2010 21:58
Member
4371 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
I will throw in my 2 pence worth, simply because i can.
You both have super arguments. This is not a matter of greed nor is it a matter of consumer theft. This is a matter of resolve. drms are put for very good reasons. The problem is the consumer doesnt like it. Fact.
Everyone wants a bargain. You are stupid if you dont (or plain rich)
drms are starting to become common as far as i can tell over the past few weeks. Now will this come and bite the devs in the arse when the game doesnt sell well and the consumer is not willing to pay the extra cost to get online from the second hand market? only time will tell.
I dont like it, not one bit. Saying that though i do understand WHY. I cannot afford to be shelling out £5-10 (or whatever) to get myself online after i buy the game second hand. If I could afford that i would have got the game brand new at launch.
Right now it is reality that all gamers have to live with. When and if the devs get stung things might revert backwards to what most of us know and love. If you care that much though maybe boycotting these devs is the only step you can take.
hazelam | 20/05/2010 22:17
Member
6286 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
but CB, isn’t the rights to use the content an integral part of having the disc itself?
what are the definite laws regarding this and how it relates to drm, what are the actual rules? what are our rights?
you menitioned loaning, publicly showing it or renting it out, what about reselling?
i’ve tried looking online but i couldn’t find any definite answers.
and there is definitely some debate about the legality of drm.
i found a very interesting lecture about copyright and drm
http://www.tvo.org/TVOsites/WebObjects/TvoMicrosite.woa?bi?1272747600000
it’s about books mostly but it relates to digital media so there should be parallels.
the only thing that is clear is that nothing is clear, listen to the lecture and try to tell me either of us is absolutely in the right.
can you honestly say you know what the exactly laws are regarding this issue?
because i honestly cannot say that i know if drm is legal or definitely know what my rights are over my purchases.
i’m going with my gut here, and it tells me drm is wrong.
double-o-dave | 20/05/2010 16:36
Member
1272 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
Seems to me that not only have Rockstar bent the PS3 owners over and shafted us already but they’ve also stopped us purchasing the game at a discounted price too.
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:39
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Wow, that show’s a huge amount of misunderstanding on your behalf. Rockstar have nothing to do with the distribution of the game whatsoever, their part of this is done by making the game. Take Two are the distributors.
double-o-dave | 20/05/2010 16:45
Member
1272 TSA Points | Member since: Nov 2008
Whatever… Take Two then, I just play the dam things
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:46
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
We’ve been shafted by both development team and distribution team then?
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:46
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
Ok, I can understand that, just be careful about slating a company for something they have no control over.
tonycawley | 20/05/2010 16:48
Member
1718 TSA Points | Member since: Feb 2009
That’s more like it cc, assuming when you say “we” you mean PS3 users? I don’t get all this fuss about frame rates though, it was my understanding that the human eye cannot see any difference above 20 frames per second or so?
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:52
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Yeah we can… I think we see at over 100 fps (TVs commonly advertise 200 & even 600htz refresh rates), I can certainly see the difference between a 60 & a 30, and also when a game which is supposed to be 30 slows down to around 20
colossalblue | 20/05/2010 16:56
Team TSA: Editor
2087 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
We can’t “see” much of a difference above 30fps unless an on-screen object is moving quickly. If there is motion then it’s noticeable when the framerate is anything below around 80-90fps (in my experience). Anything below 60fps and the motion is interrupted quite severely and seems transparent, jerky or appears to have a flicker to it.
djhsecondnature | 20/05/2010 17:27
Kicking It
1697 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
It’s all circumstantial, but there has been tests showing that the human eye basically runs at over 200fps meaning anything less and we can see a difference.
bunimomike | 20/05/2010 18:34
Member
10300 TSA Points | Member since: Jul 2009
@tony
The human eye doesn’t see in frames per second at all. However, what we’re trying to do is have a game fool us into thinking it’s playing smoothly. Add to this that each frame is rendered perfectly (with sharpness, etc) as oppose to the motion blur we would see on a video/film where someone’s moving quickly and this is where we start to hit the grey areas. Finally, we get the whole light against dark and dark against light (and how that imprints on the cones in the eyes). Let alone if we’re seeing things through the periphery or through the 60° cone which we should be focussing through.
It’s a mine-field!
DJ-Katy | 20/05/2010 18:35
Member
1540 TSA Points | Member since: Apr 2009
I suggest you all read this:
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
funkyellowmonkey(ps3 id) | 20/05/2010 20:37
Member
617 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
interesting read katy! :)
colossalblue | 20/05/2010 16:52
Team TSA: Editor
2087 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
This all sounds like a variation on the “Levis Jeans” controversy in the late nineties.
Basically, Levis were hugely popular at the time (and quite expensive) and Tesco imported a load of them and sold them cheap. Levis blocked future sales to Tesco saying that a bulk-buyer selling their jeans that cheaply harmed their image. I think a similar thing happened with replica football shirts a few years later.
cc_star | 20/05/2010 16:59
Team TSA: Writer
12558 TSA Points | Member since: Forever
Very similar outcome for customers, but I believe they were halted because Tesco were buying from outside the EU (Turkey I think) and therefore were massively cheaper, here this looks like a case of a distributor controlling a retailers price – which could/should have OFT ramifications
bajere | 20/05/2010 17:27
Member
2675 TSA Points | Member since: Aug 2008
Apple have managed it for years…must be a legal loop hole somewhere