Ok...now I am Miffed (Xbox360 XBL) CNN.com article

B

Bowhuntr11

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Sep 18, 2006
Messages
8,289
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/05/24/xbox.360.price.reut/index.html


Mark Rein, vice president of "Gears" developer Epic Games, said in an interview on video game Web site 1up.com that the studio would have preferred to give away the maps, but Microsoft, which published the game, decided to charge for it.
Click to expand...

Yeah we have seen that before(in a old thread)...but here is Micrsoft's response?

Microsoft Xbox Live group product manager Aaron Greenberg said few gamers complained about the add-on features and that the charge helped Microsoft recoup the cost of developing games and running the expensive online service.

"We are like the complaint department. We hear from the small minority that are not happy," he said.
Click to expand...

So what am I paying $50 for then? That doesn't help run the expensive online service? And it sounds like they are only having a "few" complaints about this?

In my opinion either
A) Charge $50 for the Service and give the extra content free
B) Dont charge for the XBL service but charge for extra content

But you know what...Sony said Fu*k it and lets just give them free crap since they bought the system...I give Sony major props for this.
 
Bowhuntr11 said:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/fun.games/05/24/xbox.360.price.reut/index.html




Yeah we have seen that before(in a old thread)...but here is Micrsoft's response?



So what am I paying $50 for then? That doesn't help run the expensive online service? And it sounds like they are only having a "few" complaints about this?

In my opinion either
A) Charge $50 for the Service and give the extra content free
B) Dont charge for the XBL service but charge for extra content

But you know what...Sony said Fu*k it and lets just give them free crap since they bought the system...I give Sony major props for this.
Click to expand...

I heard about that already, but what really pissed me off is this:

LINK

bisoft Marketing VP Tony Key says, "The (downloadable maps) are very profitable for us. If you're a 'Rainbow' guy and you don't have the maps, then you can't play a match." With Xbox Live being Microsoft's secret weapon against rival consoles, that says a lot. Reuters estimates some three million users are on the system and are purchasing this type of material regularly. "I doubt there will ever be a Clancy game without the Xbox Live component any more. It's now a key part of the game's DNA," Key affirms.
Click to expand...

These devs no what they're doing. everyone knows that once a new map pack comes out and people start to download it, the number of games you can join is severely limited. especially in ubisoft games. it's fuckin disgusting and ill never dl dlc ever again. if this keeps up ill just not bother with games that do this at all. Even though Ive been a big sony critic since the ps3 dropped, if they dont go done this road, ima give ms a big fuck you and go back to my PS roots.

sadly though i heard sony is doing the same thing w/ motorstorm
 
Yea, I'm not happy with the trend in DLC. Put simply, if I feel the game is complete at launch (example: Oblivion), I have no problem paying for DLC, but if the game is short, or slim on features, but fully priced, then I have a problem paying for content that I feel should have been in the game (example: maps for Gears of War). Especially since new games are now $60 instead of $50. I've been voting with my pocket book. I just don't buy it and I am waiting a bit longer to buy a game. I like to make sure that the game itself it complete and full featured before I pay full price for it. Otherwise, it gets put in the "price drop" watch file, if it is a game that I still want.
 
ne0-reloaded said:
sadly though i heard sony is doing the same thing w/ motorstorm
Click to expand...

I heard it was the developers who were going to maybe charge for the motorstorm updates...not Sony though. Sony doesn't require you to charge for content, like MS does. If the developers want to charge for content, then that's their decision. At least this is to my knowledge, which is known not to be the best.
 
The thing that really turns me off in regards to Xbox Live is that generally I only play one game online at a time. I might try a few others, but usually I only stick with one.

With Xbox Live and Marketplace, not only to I have to shell out $60 for the game, but to even enjoy half the game I just paid for, I have to pay an extra $50 for a year of Live. And then, on top of that, I have to pay for any subsequent map packs or constantly be booted from servers.

It's like, at one point I was contemplating a 360 to play Gears of War online, but how much money would I be into Microsoft for just to play one game?

$60 for Gears
$50 for a year of online play
$10 for map packs

I'd be paying $120 to play one game. I just can't justify that, not when I've played UT2004 for 3 years, got a huge amount of bonus content from Epic for free, not to mention a million maps, models, and mods from the community, and I never once had to pay anything more than the $40 I plunked down for the game on the release day.

Oh yeah, that was for the special edition too, which came with a metal tin, a headset, and video training modules. And how could I forget the $20 rebate from EB, which pretty much brought me to a grand total of $20 spent. $20 for 3 years of online gaming, with ten times the amount of content you'll ever see in Gears of War.

I guess it's alright for people with money to burn, but I can't justify it.
 
Bowhuntr11 said:
I heard it was the developers who were going to maybe charge for the motorstorm updates...not Sony though. Sony doesn't require you to charge for content, like MS does. If the developers want to charge for content, then that's their decision. At least this is to my knowledge, which is known not to be the best.
Click to expand...

when i said sony, i didnt mean sony the company. just mean that the ps3 is doing the same thing. shoulda explained myself better. i hope your right about sony not forcing anyone. im almost done with ubisoft completely. i love the graw games but its fuckin ridiculous man. graw2 was so damn short, was severely bug ridden causing constant freezes, and charges you for damn near everything.
 
ManCannon said:
The thing that really turns me off in regards to Xbox Live is that generally I only play one game online at a time. I might try a few others, but usually I only stick with one.

With Xbox Live and Marketplace, not only to I have to shell out $60 for the game, but to even enjoy half the game I just paid for, I have to pay an extra $50 for a year of Live. And then, on top of that, I have to pay for any subsequent map packs or constantly be booted from servers.

It's like, at one point I was contemplating a 360 to play Gears of War online, but how much money would I be into Microsoft for just to play one game?

$60 for Gears
$50 for a year of online play
$10 for map packs

I'd be paying $120 to play one game. I just can't justify that, not when I've played UT2004 for 3 years, got a huge amount of bonus content from Epic for free, not to mention a million maps, models, and mods from the community, and I never once had to pay anything more than the $40 I plunked down for the game on the release day.

Oh yeah, that was for the special edition too, which came with a metal tin, a headset, and video training modules. And how could I forget the $20 rebate from EB, which pretty much brought me to a grand total of $20 spent. $20 for 3 years of online gaming, with ten times the amount of content you'll ever see in Gears of War.

I guess it's alright for people with money to burn, but I can't justify it.
Click to expand...

thats exaclty how i feel. i remember playing ut2003 on dialup back in the day and getting pissed because every game i joined required me to download constant maps. i wish to god that would happen now. the value of the 360 seems to be dwindling every year. wasnt the 360 supposed to be about "choice?" when in the hell did i chose to have my pockets raped?
 
ne0-reloaded said:
when i said sony, i didnt mean sony the company. just mean that the ps3 is doing the same thing. shoulda explained myself better. i hope your right about sony not forcing anyone. im almost done with ubisoft completely. i love the graw games but its fuckin ridiculous man. graw2 was so damn short, was severely bug ridden causing constant freezes, and charges you for damn near everything.
Click to expand...

It really goes both ways with DLC, I think. I think 360 and PS3 owners will all hold hands in corus gripping about it. I think the major problem is that games that are designed to have DLC are shorter and will have less features that we used to see games have at launch. In short, they are designed to sell DLC. The problem is, that they are full price. The only games they can't really do this for, seemingly, are RPGs. Although, I think episodic RPGs are going to happen sometime in the not too distant future, where chapters are downloaded and you pay as you go.
 
theNoid said:
lol optional content... Why are you complaining again? :confused:
Click to expand...

because for games like graw, its no optional. when graw1 came out, i played on xbl constantly. tons of games showed up. the map pack came out and in a couple weeks my list of available games went in the single digits. they force you to buy this stuff by severely limiting you online.

the VP of ubi said it:

Punk Ass Bitch said:
If you're a 'Rainbow' guy and you don't have the maps, then you can't play a match
Click to expand...
 
Bowhuntr11 said:
So what am I paying $50 for then? That doesn't help run the expensive online service? And it sounds like they are only having a "few" complaints about this?

In my opinion either
A) Charge $50 for the Service and give the extra content free
B) Dont charge for the XBL service but charge for extra content

But you know what...Sony said Fu*k it and lets just give them free crap since they bought the system...I give Sony major props for this.
Click to expand...

I agree with you here.

The truth is that microsoft asks you pay for live but they have no dedicated servers for games. Everything is done p2p. One console hosts while the other consoles communicate with that host in a game. This gives the host an advantage in some cases. Anyone who has played halo2 or gears of war online knows what I'm talking about.

So if microsoft insists on charging extra for content and claim the service is 'expensive' Then what is it going towards? We know its not routing games because a light weight program can do that. If irc and aim and other instant messenger servers are free of charge, then the server that takes care of this mundane task should be free as well.

Not to mention that microsoft charges extra for xbox360 games while the same game released on the PC costs 16% less. Even for games published inhouse.
 
cornfield said:
I agree with you here.

The truth is that microsoft asks you pay for live but they have no dedicated servers for games. Everything is done p2p. One console hosts while the other consoles communicate with that host in a game. This gives the host an advantage in some cases. Anyone who has played halo2 or gears of war online knows what I'm talking about.

So if microsoft insists on charging extra for content and claim the service is 'expensive' Then what is it going towards? We know its not routing games because a light weight program can do that. If irc and aim and other instant messenger servers are free of charge, then the server that takes care of this mundane task should be free as well.

Not to mention that microsoft charges extra for xbox360 games while the same game released on the PC costs 16% less. Even for games published inhouse.
Click to expand...

I don't have a big problem paying for XBL. Its cross-game matchmaking, ease of inviting and joining games even when you are in an entirely different game, is worth the $5 a month for me. XBL is ever present when you are playing on the 360. Its a pretty complete suite. I DO agree with the gripe about hosts though. The game host is always going to have an advantage. I hope that with Live gaming coming to Vista, that dedicated servers are possible.

PC games costing less is no big surprise. All console manufacturers charge a licensing fee to produce a game for the console. This is how consoles actually make profit. For PC though, you don't have that fee. I think that the game maker actually makes more per unit from PC game sales. If I remember correctly, $10 is less than the actual licensing fee. New console games are now at $60 pretty much accross the board. I think developers find $50 is a better price point for PC games and they would prefer you bought it there, if you have the option.

None of this is a defense for DLC for incomplete games, though.
 
I didn't think it was a big deal at first, I held the whole well its extra stuff I don't need so I can't complain about it.

But when I noticed while playing that at times it seemed impossible to find a good game because everything was using the new items which required a purchase that annoyed me.
And the trend scares me into thinking they will start limiting games from the get go even more than before
 
-Change multiplayer gaming to silver.
-Change the "Any DLC must have a price tag" idea around and allow it to be up to the developer. I do not buy into the making other companies look bad if some give away DLC for free, let the companies that want to sell me something create a package that is worth the charge and there wont be any compairison.
-Some dedicated servers.
-Gold members each year get a default of 400-500 MS points to spend as they wish.

as it stands paying $50 a year thus far is not worth it for what we get.
 
$50 for a 400-500 MS points? The way you propose there's no reason to pay for gold at all. You wouldn't be very good at marketing.
 
But you know what...Sony said Fu*k it and lets just give them free crap since they bought the system...I give Sony major props for this.
Click to expand...

its just that though. crap. the problem is that there's a HUGE Disparity between what you get for free and what you pay for.

id rather pay for microsoft's option than get what sony's giving for free.

and btw, speak with your dollar or stop bitching. don't like it? don't buy it.
 
I guess I'm one of the lucky few that doesn't give a rats ass about playing on Live with a bunch of 12 year olds...I rent my games, play the single player and then get another one. My free silver account does just fine and I can still download all the demos/arcade trials. The only extra that I've paid for is one HD movie download..
 
Online needs to be free like the pc. I've been playing online on the pc for years and seeing how they charge that much for it on a console is rediculous. We need a p2p inferstructure like someone else said like the pc. I hate payying for online. I already pay for the cable modem bill then on top of that gotta pay for some crappy fee then more for download content. A rip off if you ask me. It doesn't cost that much at all to run a network just to connect to and enter in a password and let the consoles handle the servers. Pc's can create the servers and we could put mods and stuff on it. I think that way would be good. We need a more open approach rather than being spoon fed everything and being so limited with tunnel vision of what microsoft is trying to give us their point of view.

I think thats why the wii is selling so many units now is since its cheaper. Sooner or later the xbox is going to come with a credit card reader like this
ps3-edy.jpg


Sooner or later will will be charged for everything the way things are going. I think nintendo's approach is much more reasonable. Free online playing for now when it comes out for now :). We should have already paid for online server when we bought the console. They are just using excuses just to get you to slide you credit card. What i am saying is that they should become open-source and allowing consoles to become servers and basically have it like the way pc's have it where we do all the work and they just handle the logging in and stuff with friend lists and all that.;)
 
This is the same "evil" MS that told EA it could NOT charge players for uniforms (Madden / NCAA) that were included in previous gen games for free.

Everything is not what it seems when it comes to LIVE....the devs get to finger point because MS has the final say so, but you certainly don't see them depositing the money they receive back into our bank accounts. This is a 50/50 game they are playing, the devs are equally to blame for leaving out content that should be there in the first place (regarding DLC that quite obviously SHOULD have been in the final retail game).

Ultimately though, you are complaining about an optional purchase....thats like complaining about a free mod for a PC game if you dont like it. Just dont purchase it
 
I'm absolutely sick of this "If you don't like it, don't buy it" crap. That argument just doesn't work here, not when you're paying $60 for a game, then $50 to play online, and then an additional $10 whenever the devs decide to make another map pack, which you pretty much have to purchase to remain competitive as 90% of the servers will be using them.

LIVE is cost upon cost, and you either have to eat it whenever they decide to charge you more or end up not being able to play the games you already purchased. It's totally and completely ridiculous.
 
well its your only choice. either you pay for it, or you don't. the hand of god isn't coming down upon you and MAKING you do this.
 
jester1176 said:
well its your only choice. either you pay for it, or you don't. the hand of god isn't coming down upon you and MAKING you do this.
Click to expand...

I believe the point is that I cannot play for more than 10 minutes on the same GoW, R6V, or Halo 2 server on the service that I PAID FOR without being booted because I don't want to pay extra to get something that should have been included in the first place. My God, this pisses me off the more I think about it.
 
Expect to see this alot, when you support the microtransaction box 360 you bring it on yourself.
 
You're pissed because everyone else is buying the maps and you don't want to have to. Cry me a river. You're a victim of the desires of the majority of the players for whatever game we're talking about, not a victim of any company.
 
joemama said:
Unless you just feel that you have to play online...there really isn't any reason to re-up.
Click to expand...

I haven't played online in a long time, matter of fact I have not turned on the 360 in a month. I have been way to busy and will be for a few more months. I will probably pick it back up in july when vacation starts for me.
 
Ididar said:
You're pissed because everyone else is buying the maps and you don't want to have to. Cry me a river. You're a victim of the desires of the majority of the players for whatever game we're talking about, not a victim of any company.
Click to expand...

im not mad because everyone is buying map packs, im mad because i cant play a game if someone on the team has a map pack and i dont, even if we never play on any of those maps. its bs. the logic theyre using is specifically targetting people who don't have these maps to limit what games they can play so theyre forced to buy the maps. the vp of marketting . when i got graw2, i couldnt play the single player campaign because it constantly froze sometimes not even 1 minute into the campaign. theres multiple thereads on the xbox and ubi forums. and what did ubi do? they release a new mappack instead of fixing the fuckin game i spent 60 for.
 
ManCannon said:
The thing that really turns me off in regards to Xbox Live is that generally I only play one game online at a time. I might try a few others, but usually I only stick with one.

With Xbox Live and Marketplace, not only to I have to shell out $60 for the game, but to even enjoy half the game I just paid for, I have to pay an extra $50 for a year of Live. And then, on top of that, I have to pay for any subsequent map packs or constantly be booted from servers.

It's like, at one point I was contemplating a 360 to play Gears of War online, but how much money would I be into Microsoft for just to play one game?

$60 for Gears
$50 for a year of online play
$10 for map packs

I'd be paying $120 to play one game. I just can't justify that, not when I've played UT2004 for 3 years, got a huge amount of bonus content from Epic for free, not to mention a million maps, models, and mods from the community, and I never once had to pay anything more than the $40 I plunked down for the game on the release day.

Oh yeah, that was for the special edition too, which came with a metal tin, a headset, and video training modules. And how could I forget the $20 rebate from EB, which pretty much brought me to a grand total of $20 spent. $20 for 3 years of online gaming, with ten times the amount of content you'll ever see in Gears of War.

I guess it's alright for people with money to burn, but I can't justify it.
Click to expand...


10 times the amount of content? Pfft, more like 100 times. However Epic has given GoW more than they gave UT2004. The big thing is that the community makes the maps that epic does not. Epic has given GoW like what... 6 maps and a new gametype right? Thats after 6 months that the game has been out. UT2004 got 2 maps and 2 vehicles after 3 years?! Meh...
 
Ididar said:
You're pissed because everyone else is buying the maps and you don't want to have to. Cry me a river. You're a victim of the desires of the majority of the players for whatever game we're talking about, not a victim of any company.
Click to expand...

I doubt a majority have purchased the map pack.
 
Seems to me many of the companies have the content done and could put it on the dvd but just remove what originally could have been in the game and charge for it!
 
Luke_Skywalker said:
Seems to me many of the companies have the content done and could put it on the dvd but just remove what originally could have been in the game and charge for it!
Click to expand...

The worst was when EA put the content on the DVD, but charged you to unlock it. Especially considering the next-gen versions had half the content of the simultaneous PS2 release.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top