Downloadable content backlash against companies like EA?
Moderators: Bill_Abner, ScoopBrady
The content on the disc you unlock by paying for it is a distribution issue. Whether it's on the disc or on a server, companies just see it as an efficient way to distribute content for more revenue.
Vista will have all editions on the same disc and you can buy a lower-priced SKU and then later upgrade to a higher-priced SKU by unlocking it (after paying extra of course).
Developers do not like the used-games market, especially when big chains like Best Buy get involved. So it's not only the bean counters who would want to reap additional revenues from people who buy used games. But I don't think that has to be the primary reason. There is reason enough if they can get extra money off the people who buy the games new.
I could care less about alternate jerseys or old stadia. But it could be argued that some stadia cost them money to license or capture. It's definitely the case with golf courses and probably race tracks as well. Stadium adds nothing to a football game. To a baseball game, yes, since the configuration of the foul lines are different. Obviously golf and race courses are substantive and enhances gameplay, whereas a football stadium (or a basketball or hockey arena) is completely cosmetic.
Vista will have all editions on the same disc and you can buy a lower-priced SKU and then later upgrade to a higher-priced SKU by unlocking it (after paying extra of course).
Developers do not like the used-games market, especially when big chains like Best Buy get involved. So it's not only the bean counters who would want to reap additional revenues from people who buy used games. But I don't think that has to be the primary reason. There is reason enough if they can get extra money off the people who buy the games new.
I could care less about alternate jerseys or old stadia. But it could be argued that some stadia cost them money to license or capture. It's definitely the case with golf courses and probably race tracks as well. Stadium adds nothing to a football game. To a baseball game, yes, since the configuration of the foul lines are different. Obviously golf and race courses are substantive and enhances gameplay, whereas a football stadium (or a basketball or hockey arena) is completely cosmetic.
- DivotMaker
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 4131
- Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 4:00 am
- Location: Texas, USA
I would have bought every course they put out if the game had continued to be supported. Extra courses are the lifeblood for any Golf game's longevity. If EA ever starts making courses available for download like they did in the past with their PC course packs, these courses will need to have a charge for them mainly because of the cost of development (GPS mapping, high resolution photography, videography, and other assiociated costs) but also the licensing costs. I hope EA gets away from their strategy for Tiger for this year and concentrates on the course add-ons, possibly PGA TOUR Pro add-ons and possibly licensed equipment add-ons that would not make it in the normal development time given the game.bdunn13 wrote: This nickel and diming us to death started with the xbox and I believe Links. I refused to buy an "extra" course for that as I knew where it would lead. Next Gen, pay more, get less.
- b_assassin
- Panda Cub
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:00 am
I also see nothing wrong with selling unlockables, provided those unlockables could have been accessed through normal gameplay. That is exactly what EA did with NFS: Carbon, but it wasn't messaged very well, so the gaming press and hardcore communities went hysterical over it (and it gave everyone another excuse to express their hate for EA).
I don't think that there has really been any significant sales backlash due to this microtransaction 'controversy', but the noise generated by the issue should serve as a warning to all publishers to be careful how they use it (and communicate it).
IMO, I don't view microtransactions as the egregious cash grab people make them out to be, I think it is just another avenue for publishers/developers to offset the ever increasing costs of making the games we play. The argument regarding choice is a valid one, so if you don't like paying for this additional content, then don't. I can't think of a game yet that has truly withheld 'substantive' game content for the sake of selling it off via marketplace, and until that happens I'll refrain from concerning myself with it.
As long as content being sold via microtransactions is both fair and additive, then I don't think it will be much of an issue moving forward. However, there is a fine line to be walked here by the publishers, so perpetuating this discussion will hopefully encourage them to use microtransactions wisely.
I don't think that there has really been any significant sales backlash due to this microtransaction 'controversy', but the noise generated by the issue should serve as a warning to all publishers to be careful how they use it (and communicate it).
IMO, I don't view microtransactions as the egregious cash grab people make them out to be, I think it is just another avenue for publishers/developers to offset the ever increasing costs of making the games we play. The argument regarding choice is a valid one, so if you don't like paying for this additional content, then don't. I can't think of a game yet that has truly withheld 'substantive' game content for the sake of selling it off via marketplace, and until that happens I'll refrain from concerning myself with it.
As long as content being sold via microtransactions is both fair and additive, then I don't think it will be much of an issue moving forward. However, there is a fine line to be walked here by the publishers, so perpetuating this discussion will hopefully encourage them to use microtransactions wisely.
- dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21620
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
I can guarantee you that the foul lines are almost identical in EVERY Major League stadium in baseball. The only thing that would change is the length. Now, if your argument had been...the walls in the outfield are different, resulting in different bounces and distances...then fine. But the foul lines are what you chose? Eeesh.wco81 wrote:To a baseball game, yes, since the configuration of the foul lines are different.
- dbdynsty25
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 21620
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Isn't that why we're paying 60 dollars vs. 50 dollars in the 'next generation' anyway? Why should they get to double dip on the increase in the pricetag for the consumer? Especially when they are double dipping by stripping out features/things that we were getting for our 50 dollars when we bought the game. Now they are charging more, giving us less, and charging us again. Bullsh*t I say.b_assassin wrote:IMO, I don't view microtransactions as the egregious cash grab people make them out to be, I think it is just another avenue for publishers/developers to offset the ever increasing costs of making the games we play.
- pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33890
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
I snicker at the idea that some sort of consumer "backlash" is going to stop companies from using the microtransaction model.
Think about how many new gamers have joined the hobby in the last year or two, especially with the dawn of the next gen. These people don't know anything but microtransactions or feature-stripped games for $60.
"Old guard" guys like us, who gamed in the 80s and 90s, will become as rare in a few years as seeing a car with a carburetor on the road today.
Microtransactions are here to stay -- for better or worse -- especially as gamers become accustomed to them, either grudgingly or happily.
Take care,
PK
Think about how many new gamers have joined the hobby in the last year or two, especially with the dawn of the next gen. These people don't know anything but microtransactions or feature-stripped games for $60.
"Old guard" guys like us, who gamed in the 80s and 90s, will become as rare in a few years as seeing a car with a carburetor on the road today.
Microtransactions are here to stay -- for better or worse -- especially as gamers become accustomed to them, either grudgingly or happily.
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
Foul territory, also size of outfield, the way the grass is mowed or not mowed, obstacles like that awful hill in one fo the new stadia, etc.dbdynsty25 wrote:I can guarantee you that the foul lines are almost identical in EVERY Major League stadium in baseball. The only thing that would change is the length. Now, if your argument had been...the walls in the outfield are different, resulting in different bounces and distances...then fine. But the foul lines are what you chose? Eeesh.wco81 wrote:To a baseball game, yes, since the configuration of the foul lines are different.
- b_assassin
- Panda Cub
- Posts: 230
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 4:00 am
Again, I think it comes down to choice. If a $60 game and/or purchasable add-ons doesn't provide enough value to you to justify the purchase, then I'd recommend not spending your money on it. I know that creating next-gen games is very expensive, but unfortunately I can't look at every game's production budget to judge for myself whether the cost justifies the price for me.dbdynsty25 wrote: Isn't that why we're paying 60 dollars vs. 50 dollars in the 'next generation' anyway? Why should they get to double dip on the increase in the pricetag for the consumer? Especially when they are double dipping by stripping out features/things that we were getting for our 50 dollars when we bought the game. Now they are charging more, giving us less, and charging us again. Bullsh*t I say.
I see your point on the cost argument, and it was a bit too simple for me to state that cost is the only driving factor behind microtransactions. I do believe that development cost is a major factor in pushing publishers to seek other revenue streams (in-game ads, microtransactions, etc.). Whether you, or other consumers believe that justifies the increase in prices is up to you. Cheers.

I think the issue with the NCAA and Madden uniforms is that the Xbox and PS2 versions already had them in the game for free, so the next gen gamer was going to be asked to pay extra (after already paying more for a game with less features) to get these uniforms. Plus, Microsoft had made it clear that it was not good form to charge for something that is available for free in another version of the game.
A year ago EA was blaming Microsoft and the lack of available 360 consoles for their lower profits. I think at this point Sony and MS can blame companies like EA for a lower level of next gen enthusiasm. Honestly, who went next gen to get a copy of Madden 07?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/11/15
A year ago EA was blaming Microsoft and the lack of available 360 consoles for their lower profits. I think at this point Sony and MS can blame companies like EA for a lower level of next gen enthusiasm. Honestly, who went next gen to get a copy of Madden 07?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/11/15
Yes, but outside of EA, I think a lot of us have been very happy with the 360 library, especially in the last few months. There are games like Dead Rising or Oblivion that the XBox just would not handle as well because of the hardware limitations.kevinpars wrote:A year ago EA was blaming Microsoft and the lack of available 360 consoles for their lower profits. I think at this point Sony and MS can blame companies like EA for a lower level of next gen enthusiasm. Honestly, who went next gen to get a copy of Madden 07?
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/11/15
EA is the only company that I feel has really dropped the ball with the 360, and that's mostly because Madden has been such a disappointment.
I don't think it is just Madden--NBA Live is atrocious by all accounts, and it looks like Superman Returns is a dud, too. NHL seems to be mostly a love/hate game, but at least they're trying something new with the analog controls there. But all of their games seem to have fewer features than their cheaper (and sometimes much cheaper) last gen offerings on top of sometimes crappier gameplay.Brando70 wrote:EA is the only company that I feel has really dropped the ball with the 360, and that's mostly because Madden has been such a disappointment.
EA needs to get their sh*t together soon. No matter what we think about their games, killer 360/PS3 titles from them will go a long way to getting the more general gaming market to adopt the new consoles.
But I'm with db on this, it is ridiculous that we're getting charged more for games that have shinier paint but less features than the previous editions.
xbl/psn tag: dave2eleven
I'd long stopped playing Madden 2007 for PS2 this year, only was playing it once a week for league games.
Madden 2007 for PS3 is much more playable, especially the defense.
I've been putting more time on that, not enough time on some of the demos I downloaded. I still have NBA2K7 unopened for about a week and got Fight Night yesterday by Gamefly but opted to play Madden instead.
Probably because NFL is in full swing and Madden 2007 for PS2 was so awful.
Madden 2007 for PS3 is much more playable, especially the defense.
I've been putting more time on that, not enough time on some of the demos I downloaded. I still have NBA2K7 unopened for about a week and got Fight Night yesterday by Gamefly but opted to play Madden instead.
Probably because NFL is in full swing and Madden 2007 for PS2 was so awful.
Call me an ass if you want, but to me things in Madden and NCAA like a much greater number of player attributes/ ratings, many more polygons per player and more and better player interaction animations, a greater degree of momentum to the players, vast improvements in the inside running game and passing game, and being able to play season games online against friends in Madden should be considered 'features.' Is it that they don't have their own listing in the game's main menu that they aren't considered 'features?'
Sure, crappy old stadiums like the Kingdome and extra uniforms can be neat, but if you don't want them enough to pay for them, then don't pay for them. The lack of a fantasy draft, I'm sure, does suck for those interested in such things, but I think improvements and additions to the core gameplay, which would be experienced by every person who plays the game, as opposed to things like a fantasy draft or the ability to change a player's shoes or gloves which are only missed by those who really want those things, ought to be considered when you poo-poo everything about the game. For my money, I'd rather they spend resources and energy improving the core gameplay than worry about historical team rosters or alternate uniforms. I'm not saying the gameplay is perfect by any stretch, but I can't ever go back to playing the old-gen versions of these games no matter how polished, because to me the vast improvements offered by the current-gen versions far outweigh those things that are wrong with them.
Sure, crappy old stadiums like the Kingdome and extra uniforms can be neat, but if you don't want them enough to pay for them, then don't pay for them. The lack of a fantasy draft, I'm sure, does suck for those interested in such things, but I think improvements and additions to the core gameplay, which would be experienced by every person who plays the game, as opposed to things like a fantasy draft or the ability to change a player's shoes or gloves which are only missed by those who really want those things, ought to be considered when you poo-poo everything about the game. For my money, I'd rather they spend resources and energy improving the core gameplay than worry about historical team rosters or alternate uniforms. I'm not saying the gameplay is perfect by any stretch, but I can't ever go back to playing the old-gen versions of these games no matter how polished, because to me the vast improvements offered by the current-gen versions far outweigh those things that are wrong with them.
i fully argee ..... but EA is always doing that crap, pretty much think they can put out anything and people will buy it. NHL is a great game, needs more but good, I think the best EA title this year is Fight Night 3.... looks fantastic and fun.Dave wrote:I don't think it is just Madden--NBA Live is atrocious by all accounts, and it looks like Superman Returns is a dud, too. NHL seems to be mostly a love/hate game, but at least they're trying something new with the analog controls there. But all of their games seem to have fewer features than their cheaper (and sometimes much cheaper) last gen offerings on top of sometimes crappier gameplay.Brando70 wrote:EA is the only company that I feel has really dropped the ball with the 360, and that's mostly because Madden has been such a disappointment.
EA needs to get their sh*t together soon. No matter what we think about their games, killer 360/PS3 titles from them will go a long way to getting the more general gaming market to adopt the new consoles.
But I'm with db on this, it is ridiculous that we're getting charged more for games that have shinier paint but less features than the previous editions.
Yes, but as a company they did well with NBA 2k7 and College Hoops. You don't feel like they phoned it in. MLB has a lot of design issues, not so much effort issues.matthewk wrote:You must not play baseball games. Take Two really dropped the ball with MLB 2k6 last year.Brando70 wrote:EA is the only company that I feel has really dropped the ball with the 360, and that's mostly because Madden has been such a disappointment.
I see where Zeppo is coming from, but to me EA coasted with Madden and NCAA this year. Things like way too many generic stadiums and a complete lack of 1-AA teams really hurt things like dynasty mode -- they take you out of the immersiveness of the game. Madden had the terrible fatigue bug and frankly looked like ass -- the PC version even on my older ATI 9600Pro card looked much better, and I think NCAA does, too. Plus, playing the PC version, I realized just how much stuff was taken out of the 360 version. I was willing to overlook that with Madden 06 but it's unacceptable now.
That's why the micotransactions from them are so infuriating. It's one thing if the game is amazing but bare bones, but to half-ass it and then ask extra for something like alternative uniforms? That triggers a Cheney-esque "Go f*** yourself, EA" from me.
BTW, that Penny Arcade strip was hilarious.
- Danimal
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 12194
- Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:00 am
- Location: Chicago, Illinois
- Contact:
Are there currently any sports games on the 360 you can do in games saves in?Leebo33 wrote:You make it sound like the only things they took out for next gen are superficial. How about the exclusion of in-game saves? That's HUGE when games routinely take an hour. What other game genre would we accept only being able to save each hour? How about the lack of an accelerated play clock?
Follow Me on:
YouTube - www.youtube.com/maxpixelation/
Twitch - twitch.tv/maximumpixelation
Twitter - twitter.com/maxpixelation
YouTube - www.youtube.com/maxpixelation/
Twitch - twitch.tv/maximumpixelation
Twitter - twitter.com/maxpixelation
MLB 2K6 has in game saves. I think Top Spin 2 does too. I can't remember if Tiger does.
Hockey and soccer games really don't need an in game save. Most racing games allow you to save more frequently so it's not really applicable either.
The 2K basketball games could use them. I haven't tried the EA bball games.
Hockey and soccer games really don't need an in game save. Most racing games allow you to save more frequently so it's not really applicable either.
The 2K basketball games could use them. I haven't tried the EA bball games.
Leebo, I'm not arguing that the only things missing in the current-gen versions are superficial, but many arguments in here have made it sound like there's nothing improved or added at all to the current-gen games in comparison, and to that I take exception. I don't think I'm the only one around here who, having tried it on the 360, just doesn't want to go back to the old-gen versions, despite the level of polish and robust feature set in comparison on the old-gen, nor the horrendously trimmed down playbooks (no end-arounds or reverses at all? Those aren't 'trick plays' in my book. . . ). Then again, I may be wrong.
For $60, I expect more than "1 step forward, 1 step back" feature sets, especially when they charge even more (or eventually cave in and give away in the case of jerseys) for content that was and still is standard in the cheaper PS2/XB versions. I can understand it for the first efforts, but this shouldn't be the case in year two.
Getting back to downloadable content, I picked up PGR3 after Christmas since a relative got it and a 360 for a gift. Holy crap, are there a ton of microtransations to add cars.
Getting back to downloadable content, I picked up PGR3 after Christmas since a relative got it and a 360 for a gift. Holy crap, are there a ton of microtransations to add cars.
xbl/psn tag: dave2eleven
- pk500
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 33890
- Joined: Sun Aug 11, 2002 3:00 am
- Location: Syracuse, N.Y.
- Contact:
I'd rather call you a cheese-filled, blood-engorged, raging DICK!Zeppo wrote:Call me an ass if you want

Reporting from Symmons Plains, I'm Paul Kelly ...
Take care,
PK
"You know why I love boxers? I love them because they face fear. And they face it alone." - Nick Charles
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
"First on the throttle, last on the brakes." - @MotoGP Twitter signature
XBL Gamertag: pk4425
- ScoopBrady
- DSP-Funk All-Star
- Posts: 7781
- Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 3:00 am
- Location: Chicago, Illinois
Co-sign. Well put Zep. I understand people's love of some of the missing features but for me they don't matter. As long as I can play a season and play online I'm happy. The addition to play human opponents in your season/franchise is simply awesome. I'd rather them work on things like that rather than working on adding concession stand inventory to the franchise mode.Zeppo wrote:Call me an ass if you want, but to me things in Madden and NCAA like a much greater number of player attributes/ ratings, many more polygons per player and more and better player interaction animations, a greater degree of momentum to the players, vast improvements in the inside running game and passing game, and being able to play season games online against friends in Madden should be considered 'features.' Is it that they don't have their own listing in the game's main menu that they aren't considered 'features?'
Sure, crappy old stadiums like the Kingdome and extra uniforms can be neat, but if you don't want them enough to pay for them, then don't pay for them. The lack of a fantasy draft, I'm sure, does suck for those interested in such things, but I think improvements and additions to the core gameplay, which would be experienced by every person who plays the game, as opposed to things like a fantasy draft or the ability to change a player's shoes or gloves which are only missed by those who really want those things, ought to be considered when you poo-poo everything about the game. For my money, I'd rather they spend resources and energy improving the core gameplay than worry about historical team rosters or alternate uniforms. I'm not saying the gameplay is perfect by any stretch, but I can't ever go back to playing the old-gen versions of these games no matter how polished, because to me the vast improvements offered by the current-gen versions far outweigh those things that are wrong with them.
I am a patient boy.
I wait, I wait, I wait, I wait.
My time is water down a drain.
I wait, I wait, I wait, I wait.
My time is water down a drain.