Images/date/200708: Difference between revisions

From JJSWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(No difference)

Revision as of 09:48, 21 June 2008

images/date/

src=20070801x360million.png

There was some discussion about whether X360 could reach a million in Japan.  I took the sales so far, and faked up a model of how it could make it if its year-on-year declines were slim enough.  Don't think it's kept up with this, though.

src=20070806ayafoster.jpg

The art for Parasite Eve 3 reminded me of a poster for that Jodie Foster movie.  Then I found a Parasite Eve 1 art that had a closer similarity in position.

src=20070810mokuds.png

src=20070810mokups3.png

src=20070810mokuwii.png

src=20070810mokux360.png

Moku mocked up some sort of system wars badges; I made them avatar size.

src=20070815famitsuspwolf.png

File name includes spwolf.  I must've been mocking some prediction about Wii slowing down and PS3 speeding up.

src=20070821widefull.png

There was a bit of a shitstorm when it was noticed Bioshock's widescreen mode showed less image than the 4:3 mode.  I was on the side of "No aspect ratio necessarily shows more."  My first example image was this, where I showed a 4:3 image contained within a 16:9 image contained within a 4:3 image... and so on and so on.  Regardless of which ratio you go with, there's always a way to "zoom out" and show more for the other ratio, or "zoom in" and show less.

src=20070821wide1.jpg

My other example.  First, a shot framed for widescreen...

src=20070821tall1.jpg

Then a 4:3 version of it.  Since cropping the sides would lose important stuff, it makes sense to give it extra-but-unnecessary image on top and bottom.

src=20070821wide2.jpg

"But widescreen should have more!  I got this TV to see MORE!" complains someone.  And this is their result: a wider version of the 4:3 image.  Now everything is just zoomed out more, rather than focused on the important part of the original picture.

src=20070827shapematters.png

This was in a discussion about userbase growth, and why a faster growth of userbase will mean a lower tie ratio: the average user will have had their system for less time.  In this example I show 3 systems that each reach 12 million at the same time, but at different speeds.  A slowly, B quickly, and C even more quickly.  It makes sense that if the people who own each system behave similarly, A will still have sold more software than B, which will still have sold more software than C, simply because more owners of those systems have had it for a longer time.