Infrapink

yet all of the comments below their post prefer physical

Comment sections are not a representative sample. These are people who actively follow Sony news and care enough about physical media to leave angry comments.

I prefer physical media myself because I’m a middle-aged fogey, but if you want to see how PlayStation players as a whole are buying games, you have to look at Sony’s financials. Since Sony are a publicly traded company, those are publicly available

The relevant data is on page 12 of this supplemental document

In FY 2025, Sony made G¥121,159 on physical game sales and G¥949,799 on digital game sales. Those numbers exclude DLC, which is listed separately (and combined with lootboxes). In short, Sony make 7.8 times as much on sales of digital games (excluding DLC and microtransactions!) as they do on physical games. To put it another way, physical game sales make up just 11% of Sony’s revenue from game sales (again, excluding DLC and microtransactions). And that figure has been trending downward ever since the PS3.

The obvious caveat here is that lots of indie games never get physical releases, which skews the ratio toward digital. That’s true, but the same page of the document shows that of games that get physical releases, 76% of sales are still digital.

The fact of the matter is we’re a dying breed. Most people today either prefer the convenience of digital games or are just indifferent. Comment sections may say one thing, but actual data shows a massive trend toward digital games.

Found a source!

OK, so Disney licensed their characters to OpenAI for three years so they can be legally used in Sora-generated videos; I figure Disney gets a cut of OpenAI’s revenue proportional to how often people use Disney’s characters. This includes Pixar, Marvel, and Lucasfilm in addition to core. The article says that some vetted Sora-generated videos will go up on Disney+ (so nothing violent or sexual). And apparently they’ll be doing something with OpenAI’s stuff on Disney+.

So it’s a contract, but they didn’t buy a company. Well there goes that hope.

Nintendo don’t use generative LLMs because of the copyright issues. Disney are even more lawyertastic than Nintendo. Hopefully a small batallion of Disney’s lawyers will show up at Squenix’s offices and tell them to cut that crap out.

Are too

No, I’m actually quite big.

I genuinely think Daikatana is a decent (but flawed) game.

It’s a prequel starring Phoenix’s Japanese ancestor in the 19th century. I haven’t played any of the games so I don’t know how it translates. I do know that Sherlock Holmes had to be renamed Herlock Sholmes because copyright can be ridiculous.

My epidemiology professor explained it to me.

In principle, iffy results would be countered by other scientists researching the same area, but you know, replication crisis.

Also, scientists are human. If a company offers to fund their research, they feel gratitude and want to find results which benefit their funders. They probably won’t fabricate results, but the interpretation will be biased.

The Game Gear has an entire CFL bulb behind the screen. A popular mod is to swap it out for some LEDs, which consume an order of magnitude less power.

I’m an emacs -nw kind of guy.

But if I have to pick one of your options, nano

You can if you wish. I’m giving the reason why Nintendo in particular is unusually litigious.

There’s a backstory!

The whole video is worth watching and the channel is great, but here’s the TL;DW.

When Nintendo released Donkey Kong in America in 1981, Universal Pictures sued them for copyright infringement on that grounds that Donkey Kong was too similar to Universal’s King Kong. Nintendo won because their lawyer, named Kirby, pointed out that back in 1933, RKO pictures successfully proved that the novel King Kong was public domain, so they didn’t have to pay the author any royalties or licensing rights.

While they won, the experience was traumatic for Nintendo of America at the time. They were not lawyers; they were mostly Japanese programmers and engineers, and they really didn’t want to go through such a costly legal case again. The solution was to aggressively defend their own brand so that nobody would ever be in any doubt as to who owns the copyright and trademarks.

Oh, and then there’s money. Nintendo have some of the most valuable IPs on Earth; other companies would kill for just one thing as popular and recognisable as Mario, Zelda, Animal Crossing, Splatoon, StarFox, or even Metroid, let alone Pokémon. People also bring up that they’re loaded, and that’s true, but Nintendo’s war chest isn’t anywhere near as big as the likes of Sony and Microsoft. In a protracted legal battle, Nintendo would run out of money first, so again, their solution is to aggressively attack anything that could remotely weaken their own brand so as to stave off bigger legal battles in the future.

Isn’t WOW a subscription?

What did/does he do?