Forums

Topic: So you think digital is here to save YOU money?

Posts 1 to 20 of 54

Starscream

Think again.

http://www.next-gen.biz/news/ea-sports-wants-to-[span]E2%80%9...

EA Sports boss Peter Moore has said that the company plans to explore subscription and microtransaction models as it looks to generate greater revenue from its sizable consumer base.

"I think we need to move much quicker, in particular with Madden, through a digital world," Moore said at the Morgan Stanley Technology conference in San Francisco, according to IGN.

"What you should be looking for from me is 'How do I get an extra $4 or $5 dollars?', which is high margin digital revenue from that install base rather than continue to sell more packaged goods," he added.

"What we're starting to do now is actually start to see growth on next-gen platforms, and perhaps more importantly you're going to see digital subscriptions, digital microtransactions; all those things that we seem to be able to drive hard against all our franchises, against the Madden consumer."

Nice - you not only are paying 20% more for a HD copy of Madden, now you do not even get the whole game in the box. This is EAs new operating strategy you may or may not be surprised to know EA lost money last year, despite being the 2nd biggest 3rd part publisher of games behind Activision.

EAs plan to turn that around is pay DLC - they stated earlier this year they plan to have pay DLC and/or subscription online fees in EVERY game they sell. How much are YOU going to pay for what you used to get as part of your software purchase? I can't wait to see how people defend this one - it is 'great' when retail game releases become platforms unto themselves - a base from which to sell more software.

And it REALLY sickens me when people whine about Nintendo not 'catching up' in this online marketplace. Ugh. You do not know how good we have it. Also this is going to widen the gap between the blockbuster games and medium sized 3rd party games - instead of buying different additional software, more and more often your money will be tied into buying additional software from the major EA (or whichever major publisher) game that is already 'purchased'.

This is bad for the industry - more erosion for the overall health of the industry, less variety, and less power for the consumers. For whom the bell tolls, it keeps tolling for console gaming....

Edited on by Starscream

More than meets the eye!

Luigi-la-bouncy

Hopefully this is just EA and not the general movement of gaming. Let's face it they are always tring to squeeze more money out of the condumer however they can, so this shouldn't suprise us. It doesn't mean that everyone else is going to copy them. Blame EA, not digital distribution as a whole, and try not to support them if you can.

Luigi-la-bouncy

Starscream

It is obviously the general movement of gaming, especial on LIVE the leading console subscription online service.

How long until Nintendo turns?

How long until playable Luigi is a pay DLC?

Or World 9?

Or Mario Kart is $5 a month to play online?

The message being sent by gamers is ' WE LOVE THIS MAKE US PAY MORE AND MORE WE DO NOT EVEN CARE IF WE OWN THE GAME!!!! WE LOVE USERS FEES AND SUBSCRIPTIONS!'

Look at PS3k - locking people out of their systems over a date bug....DRM, ya gotta love it in console gaming!

More than meets the eye!

Luigi-la-bouncy

Why would Nintendo turn into EA?They make lots of money and EA don't. Also Activision make loads of money from games like MW2 which is a complete retail package, without any extra costs.

The consumer is in control. We are not idiots and won't waste our money on things we don't want. I remember gaming in the 16bit era when SEGA was charging more and more money for there add ons (SEGA CD, 32X etc.) and look what happened to them. Gamers are not junkies who keep opening their wallets on account of addiction. They are more aware than ever of what consitutes value for money and I don't think that's going to change. If people love Madden so much that they want to buy more and more content then that's fine. But if they feel they're being ripped off they will just abandon it and move onto something else. Basically there is so much competition out there for gamer's money I don't think it's possible for these big corporations to hook us in and rip us off.

Vote with your wallet guys.

Luigi-la-bouncy

SpentAllMyTokens

Isn't there going to be a lot of DLC for the new WarioWare? I know there's a WW title connected to it. It may be sooner than you think. I'll be pretty angry if there turns out to be lots of PAID DLC for WarioWare. Honestly, if this is the FIRST place Ninty decides to start upgrading their online (more payments, no better features), then I'll be kinda ticked.

Honestly, I just don't buy games with paid DLC, and if one really was a must have, I wouldn't buy the DLC. If companies can't turn a profit off of it, they'll stop doing it.

I am way too lazy to think of something clever.
My Backloggery

Reala

Digital does save money in a number of ways, VC can save money for collectors, especially on select titles and downloads, also saves money for developers, you don't need a huge budget for most puzzle games, so wiiware for that genre amongst others like retro revival titles is ideal.

DLC I like the idea of having new content for my fav games, breathing new life into them with new levels, items, characters etc, as long as it is in fact new content that is, paying to unlock content you already own however, that I'm not in favor of, double charging is all that is, DLC when handled right can be great and give you reason to return to your game, I really don't mind paying for more of what I like, and really hope Nintendo's next console has more of it.

Edited on by Reala

Reala

Starscream

Reala wrote:

Digital does save money in a number of ways, VC can save money for collectors, especially on select titles and downloads, also saves money for developers, you don't need a huge budget for most puzzle games, so wiiware for that genre amongst others like retro revival titles is ideal.

DLC I like the idea of having new content for my fav games, breathing new life into them with new levels, items, characters etc, as long as it is in fact new content that is, paying to unlock content you already own however, that I'm not in favor of, double charging is all that is, DLC when handled right can be great and give you reason to return your game, I really don't mind paying for more of what I like, and really hope Nintendo's next console has more of it.

As for the first part of you r post - absolutely backwards, I am afraid. Collectors LOVE to spend money to have the ORIGINAL product. Collectors would be the last people in the world to be interested in the VC, they have the original consoles and carts at home. Why do collectors pay hundred or even thousands of dollars for rare game carts? Because the value is IN the physical product.

Joe Blow gamer had it made last gen - compilations. Much better value than user agreement downloads. Of course we see some compilations this gen, but they will continues to diminish I am afraid....

As to you 2nd part of your post. Will you be getting extra content, or paying for the same content twice? What about code bsed DLC that is on the disk already - LOL! Madden is Madden, if they really cared about your value, you could download new rosters for your old game purchase. That is not what they are talking about here. They will piece and parcel the existing product. You will get less for your initial purchase.

And it is really disheartening to here you wish Nintendo to go down this slippery slope (and how far down the hill are we, it will only get steeper!) but you are entitled to your opinion. I just wonder - are there more of you or of me? On the internet, of course, I am a minority. And of course the game media is absolutely worthless as game advocates, heck alls they do is hype the piss out of the next big thing, the next big game, We all know, Zelda, Mario, Metroid Call of Duty, GTA, Resident evil, HALO, Gran Turismo, Left 4 Dead - even mediocre choose your own adventure, highe production value non game dreck like Heavy Rain will garners TONS of 10's - what perfection? What about Heavy Rain is perfect? Lol, it is all hype, cause this is the FUTURE! Lol, yeah right. Every gen is the same, look at Sonic Adventure, the awesome scores that P.O.C. got. Lol, again and again. Save the dreamcast! Save the 360! Beat the drum for hardcore gaming! The FUTURE!!!!

Game media outlets will get behind anyhting companies like Sony or Microsoft or EA do. Because they are young and dumb, and just flattered to get to be a voice box, they dont care abuot themselves, their customers, or what the message means. This is the future and they will lockstep behind.

I am willing to bet Nintendo Life had no tough or serious questions to ask at the media summit - they just play games and ruch to their laptop to hype them, like teenagers at the Master Thompson Youth Center on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movie. Don't ask tough questions or think critically, as Master Thompson ordered the crowd after a beat down of one of the youth - 'GO! - PLAY!'

'GO! - PLAY!'

'GO! - PAY!'

/end rant - sorry it had to be said Nintendo life - you write idiotic editorials about the imaginary 'seal of quality', but nothing on game ownership rights. At least you can SELL retail shovel ware. Where are you on this? Where are you?!?

More than meets the eye!

Sean_Aaron

Check out the recent Bonus Round@Gamet... on the future of the industry and this is pretty much stated to be the way things are going because that's the only way they can continue to produce big-budget games (at least that's the argument) and continue to have revenue growth for shareholders.

One idea that was put forward was having a rather basic game for free, whilst players who want additional content like weapons and such could pay for it. The downside is paying more ultimately for the same content as you get today, but the upside is that more people would be able to play and enjoy more games without the initial big pricetag (great for younger/poorer gamers).

This mainly seems to apply to the big online games, which I frankly don't care about. I'd rather see a return to smaller budget releases like WiiWare and DSiWare myself, but big-budget online games seem to be what's popular with the younger crowd - whattaya gonna dew?

BLOG, mail: [email protected]
Nintendo ID: sean.aaron

Reala

Serious collectors may like to own the originals, I would too really, but will settle for a digital collection myself, and I imagine there are quite a few collectors who love the VC, again nothing beats owning the originals, but VC keeps a lot of us happy, as for EA just plain don't care about them, haven't bought a single EA game since the 32bit era, not all DLC is unlocking stuff you own, some of it can be really worthwhile, the pick & mix nature of DLC I also like, don't care for cosmetic changes like costumes so wont buy it, do like having more levels though so would be happy to buy those, if the money spent encourages the developers, to keep churning out more of what I like then great.

Reala

Knux

@Starscream-That was uncalled for, Nintendo Life is professional. More professional than anybody else on the internet, you might want to reconsider thinking before you type useless nonsense in the future. As for your anti-digital crusade, you are wrong.

The only reason collectors like buying games is either to own them or to make more money off of reselling those games. But, there are plenty of people who PREFER digital over retail, including me. The reason I like using the Wii is because of the VC and WiiWare over retail games. Same thing applys to my Xbox 360 and PS3. I would rather not have a SNES, Genesis, and NES plugged in, when I can play those games on the VC. As for DLC, it depends on the context. As Reala said, I would gladly pay for extra contents in games I love.

Take Mega Man 10's DLC content for example. I'll be more than glad to pay for the DLC, it is certainly worth paying for. As for EA, I don't care for Madden anyway. The series has not been that great anyway. Nintendo will never use DLC to rip-off people because Nintendo prefers retail in the first place [that's why Nintendo released New Super Mario Bros. Wii on retail]. Also, DLC extends a game's life a long time. Fallout 3's DLC is a great example. Anyway, this topic is pointess.

Edited on by Knux

Knux

Sean_Aaron

Starscream wrote:

I am willing to bet Nintendo Life had no tough or serious questions to ask at the media summit - they just play games and ruch to their laptop to hype them, like teenagers at the Master Thompson Youth Center on Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Movie. Don't ask tough questions or think critically, as Master Thompson ordered the crowd after a beat down of one of the youth - 'GO! - PLAY!'

'GO! - PLAY!'

'GO! - PAY!'

/end rant - sorry it had to be said Nintendo life - you write idiotic editorials about the imaginary 'seal of quality', but nothing on game ownership rights. At least you can SELL retail shovel ware. Where are you on this? Where are you?!?

If by the "media summit" you mean the event in London that was a show-and-tell affair - not really a news conference with a Q&A section that I'm aware of; if there was I don't see how your issues would even be relevant since NOTHING Nintendo showed has anything to do with DLC or the move to microtransactions. With regards to "ownership rights" the last time I checked every piece of packaged software sold for the last 15-20+ has had a "license to play" attached to it. You may think you "own" the software and can do what you like with it, but legally that's not the case. If you don't believe me try setting up a game rental shop using your own collection without making arrangements with the game companies and see what happens.

I'm sure if someone on staff is really bothered about the situation they might well write an article about it. From my perspective it's a business and the business will make those decisions deemed necessary to make a return for the shareholders - as publicly-traded companies that's the bottom line. If I like a game, I buy it, if I like the additional content available for download I buy that too; if I don't then I don't. It's not the end of the world because of an industry shift to microtransactions and downloadable content as an attempt to regain profitability.

I think the best way to voice your opposition is to not buy those games, but writing a rant in a gaming forum probably isn't going to be that effective. Carry on!

Edited on by Sean_Aaron

BLOG, mail: [email protected]
Nintendo ID: sean.aaron

SpentAllMyTokens

Hyper+Knuckles wrote:

Also, DLC extends a game's life a long time. Fallout 3's DLC is a great example. Anyway, this topic is pointess.

You can now get the Fallout 3 GOTY edition new for $30 online with all the DLC. Game companies make you choose: Be a hardcore fan and play an unfinished game on release, and we'll bleed your wallet dry for extra levels. Alternatively, you can wait a year or two, and we'll release the full game for you to buy at retail for half the price the original game was.

Why can't everything just be released at once? Alternatively, why not take the time and effort put towards DLC and direct it towards a full fledged sequel that's worth the retail price? Either way, you get more than you do with DLC addons.

There is really no form of media that's cheaper in downloadable form than in physical form. Books, music, movies, all cost just as much to download, if not more, than it would be to go to a store and buy a physical copy. Companies are either so concerned about piracy with downloads that they punish legitimate buyers, or they've realized that people are stupid enough to pay extra for convenience even though the company can very easily provide a virtually unlimited supply with minimal cost.

Downloads work well for games that are too small to be retail titles and out of print older games. WW and VC are great mediums and are generally cost effective (although Ninty is more expensive than most other services). However, DLC for games is a ripoff pure and simple. It's nice that it provides flexibility for those who don't want the whole package, but it screws over those who do. It's easier to charge someone $5 ten times, than it is to charge them $50 at once, so they can give you less for your money at the end of the day. Be careful what you're buying and make sure you feel it's worth the cost. Otherwise they'll just keep ripping you off.

As for online subscription fees, is it really possible to sustain the servers and bandwidth needed for online games through just the cost of the initial purpose? If it's not, than I don't see the problem in paying for a subscription necessarily, as long as I get some very sweet online.

Edited on by SpentAllMyTokens

I am way too lazy to think of something clever.
My Backloggery

Reala

I Kind of expect more from sequels nowadays than an expansion pack, DLC expansions are great IMO, they aren't sequels but more of what you played with maybe a few tweaks, before you'd often had to wait ages on a sequel, if they actually put the effort in that is, but with bloated budgets DLC seems to be almost necessary in some cases, if I enjoy the game I don't feel it to be a rip off, MLaaK with all DLC costs more than the average retail game, but I've played it for 130+ hours so far, to me its money well spent.

Edited on by Reala

Reala

Magi

There's also the ecological standpoint that everyone seems to be forgetting. All that plastic...
I'm all for digital distribution when a COMPLETE game is released. I definately don't want a half-finished game released digitally for 50 bucks then I have to spend another 30+ buying the rest of it later. As has already been mentioned, if a game I REALLY enjoyed as been out and I've done all I can with it, I would love to see some additional content rolled out to reinvigorate the game. Things that might get me to play another 5-10 hours for 10 or 15 bucks. (Heck, I pay 10 dollars now to go see a movie and it only keeps me entertained for about 2 hours. Then if I really like the movie, I have to go spend ANOTHER 20ish or so dollars buying it again.) By that model, games are underpriced as it is when you figure the entertainment : hour ratio.

edit: After further consideration, I'd even be down with paying for partial games if they were "partial-price". For example, in the case of Madden Football, maybe allow me to spend 10 bucks and have access to one team or one division to play online. Maybe 25 bucks gets you the whole NFC. Maybe 50 bucks lets you play the game offline AND online with the entire NFL as well as some retro-dream-teams. The possibilites really are endless. Of course, this all depends on the company releasing the game having a little integrity.

Token+Girl wrote:

As for online subscription fees, is it really possible to sustain the servers and bandwidth needed for online games through just the cost of the initial purpose? If it's not, than I don't see the problem in paying for a subscription necessarily, as long as I get some very sweet online.

Guild Wars (although they are doing some rather creative things lately to get some additional revenue). Also, Diablo 2 when it initially came out. Right now, I think the server fees are being covered by WoW and it's very possible that Diablo 3 may be pay2play, but for years D2 stood on its own and was free to play online on battlenet.

Edited on by Magi

Magi

brooks83

I really don't care about EA sports games, so if they can sucker money out of people over the new Madden game so be it. Just remember people, you vote with your dollars. If you are so against a company charging money for DLC, there's a simple solution...don't buy it! As for collectors, I do think they would much rather have the original games, unless there are a few games that are extremely rare that they can only get on the VC. I mean, I couldn't picture a serious game collector wanting you to come over and check out his VC collection, that just sounds kinda lame. He probably already owns most of the VC games in physical form anyways.

brooks83

Percentful

You seem to complain about a lack of "tough questions", so let me ask some for you.
Why do you react to something like this? In another thread, you say that we don't have the "authority" to predict what nintendo will do, then you go and make a thread predicting the future of Nintendo DLC. You also complain that nintendo life "writes idiotic editorials" when in reality, this thread is completey hypocritical nonsense. You also assumed that the Media Summit was a gaming conference without knowing anything about it, and then compared Nintendo Life to "teenagers" because you assumed they didn't ask any tough questions. You didn't even consider the fact that there might not have been a Q&A session.
/rant

Just let it happen.

3DS Friend Code: 5026-4947-0924 | Nintendo Network ID: Percentful

brooks83

The staff of Nintendo Life is the real deal. I don't know how much they make, if anything at all, running this site, but they are a group of video game enthusiasts that do this for one reason: they love video games. I may not always agree with their opinions, but I respect them. To come on here and insult their lack of tough questions is so childish and disrespectful. If you want to ask tough questions, then start up your own video game site and do it yourself. I mean, what would you have asked? "Are you guys gonna start ripping of consumers with ridiculous DLC?" That tough question probably would have gotten you laughed at.

brooks83

brooks83

Link-Hero wrote:

Also, digital copies do save you money especially if you look in the right places, and are much better than physical copies. If you go to VC for example, you can get many different awesome classic games for a cheap price. Sure you CAN find them cheaper, but that isn’t very common or easy to come by.

I highly reccomend this new site called eBay Just because Gamestop doesn't sell them anymore doesn't mean they are hard to find. Craigslist is a good place to find old games too.

brooks83

Percentful

Let me give you an example of how digital copies can save you money. My favorite game, Electroplankton, is very rare. If you search "electroplankton" on Gamestop or Craigslist [where I live, at least], nothing comes up. On Amazon, Electroplankton sells new for US$137. On Ebay, the cheapest copy I found was $17, and by the description and user feedback, it was obviously counterfeit. It's REALLY hard to find a copy for a good price. With DSiware, I can get all of them for US$20. That means I save at least US$20 [the lowest priced copy I found was $40]. Not exactly a scam , is it?

Just let it happen.

3DS Friend Code: 5026-4947-0924 | Nintendo Network ID: Percentful

Sean_Aaron

With regards to Madden, would it not be better to simply download updated players/stats on an annual subscription than buy a brand new full-price release EVERY YEAR? I mean, surely that has to be a good thing right?

I can say that we don't get paid anything. The directors have a small pool of money from ad revenue that pays for the site and not much else. Someday hopefully we'll get paid, but I'm not holding my breath. People that write for the site are into the community, gaming and writing. I'm hoping to be at the NoA press office in Redwood Shores in June and I'll ask them some questions, but digital distribution is only of interest to me in terms of transferability from one hardware platform to another; not the big issue questions being discussed in this thread.

BLOG, mail: [email protected]
Nintendo ID: sean.aaron

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.