Downloadable content backlash against companies like EA?

RandyM · Post by **RandyM** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:22 pm

First, I did a search and saw no topic directly addressing this, so I'm taking a deep breath and starting one. Hope i don't get flamed for it.

http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/12491/Unl ... e-Content/

In the last 2 months I've seen several editorials in print and online about the nickel and diming being done on XBL. What's really amping up the rage is that some of this stuff is apparently already on the disc, and we're just getting charged for it post purchase.

I talked to a friend of mine who works at EA (who will remain anonymous obviously) and his comment was that it was no big deal, just a perception problem.

His point was that no one is FORCED to buy anything. And also that if people are just mad that the stuff is one the disc, EA could have put it on their servers and made you download it and you would not have known WHEN it was finished. It might have been finished before release, and it might not have. But since the 'micro' downloads that unlock stuff on the disc are exposed, the perception is that EA is holding back content so that they can squeeze more cash out of us after point of sale. This article points out that the total 'unlockable' cost on XBL for NFS:C is 7320 points (about $90!!).

My point is that as long as the games don't start subtracting features people will tolerate it: e.g. if NFS 2006 comes out with 50 cars with 25 addtiional online, and next year we get 30 cars with 45 cars online, we're going to say that for the same cash, we got 20 fewer cars...it matters not that the TOTAL # of cars available is the same....if EA starts trying to charge for what we once got in the box, people are gonna be angry and it will be a big backlash.

Just curious to what people think about this, especially when thinking about franchises like the ones EA makes where # of cars, golf courses, stadiums, uniforms, etc are all considered 'content' and thus are potential candidates for microtransactions.

Randy

Badgun · Post by **Badgun** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:37 pm

My point is that as long as the games don't start subtracting features people will tolerate it: e.g. if NFS 2006 comes out with 50 cars with 25 addtiional online, and next year we get 30 cars with 45 cars online, we're going to say that for the same cash, we got 20 fewer cars...it matters not that the TOTAL # of cars available is the same....if EA starts trying to charge for what we once got in the box, people are gonna be angry and it will be a big backlash.

What do you mean "starts"? EA is already charging us for stuff that used to be free. 300 points for the friggin Kingdome? LOL! And you know they tried to charge us for alternate jerseys that have ALWAYS been free, but you see how well that worked out for them.

They also are charging for cheat codes now as well. Pay XXX points and have a maxxed out Tiger Woods character or pay some more and unlock every item in the pro shop without even playing the game.

I think a lot of game companies are going to nickel and dime us to death, but EA is by far the biggest offender. Even Test Drive is getting in on the act as they promised a free car pack and radio station for download every so often, yet 90% of their content is not free.

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:39 pm

Companies like EA are always going to try to squeeze maximum profits out of people, so they will experiment as much as they can with the limits of people's patience (like they do with pretty much every franchise---seeing how little they can do and still get people to buy it). I am not sure how those experiments will turn out with the mass market, but I personally think it's a big turn-off and haven't bought any of the EA 360 games partially for that reason.

I think microtransactions in general are a great idea, but only when they extend the life of a quality game, rather than making up for shortcomings or (intentional) omissions in the original game.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:48 pm

FatPitcher wrote:Companies like EA are always going to try to squeeze maximum profits out of people, so they will experiment as much as they can with the limits of people's patience (like they do with pretty much every franchise---seeing how little they can do and still get people to buy it). I am not sure how those experiments will turn out with the mass market, but I personally think it's a big turn-off and haven't bought any of the EA 360 games partially for that reason.

I think microtransactions in general are a great idea, but only when they extend the life of a quality game, rather than making up for shortcomings or (intentional) omissions in the original game.

Good post, FP. I think what we're seeing now is that testing the market. I am with Badgun and think things like stadiums and jerseys should be free. But it's also nice that you can get things like gamerpics and wallpapers -- I don't mind paying the small fee for those. And it's great we can get maps, extra levels, and so on for games that have been out for a while.

The most annoying part is these microtransactions have come at the same time there's been a significant price increase in software. So that $60 game turns into $65-70 if you want to buy a few extra items. If we were still paying $40-50 for games, it wouldn't seem so much like gouging.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:51 pm

"the perception is that EA is holding back content so that they can squeeze more cash out of us after point of sale."

This is not perception, it's fact. If the content is already on the disc, it's an obvious attempt to get more money out of the consumer.

I figure the majority of consumers will cave, and in the coming years we'll be seeing more of this. The companies will come up with better ways to mask it so as not to easily anger the consumer, but it will continue.

Personally, I will remember what I had the year (or years) before, and until I feel I'm getting the same value for my $$$, I won't buy it. Madden is a perfect example. Had the 360 version included everything I use in the Xbox version (fantasy drafts, player editing, player creation), I may have caved and gotten it and a 360 by now. At the moment the sports games on the 360 seem like lesser versions with prettier graphics. That is not enough to get me to pay $60 and buy a new console.

I did read that EA finally caved to pressure (likely from MS, not gamers) and released the alternate uniforms for Madden and NCAA for free.

RandyM · Post by **RandyM** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 12:52 pm

I agree about the 'starting' comment. Obviously EA started doing this long before this post was written.

It's just that there seems to be the beginnings of a major backlash against them.

If the gaming press starts negatively reviewing their games because of content 'subtraction', it might actually affect sales enough that EA rethinks how they are doing business.

I don't think anyone in general has a problem with paying for value added...but I think they are pushing their luck here.

I also don't like the idea of 'buying cheat codes'. I think that means you are being paired up with people online who may totally suck at a game but bought all the cheat codes. When you don't earn something, you don't appreciate it so much. And other people don't appreciate you so much for having done the hard work.

Randy

Badgun · Post by **Badgun** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:03 pm

Brando70 wrote:
FatPitcher wrote:Companies like EA are always going to try to squeeze maximum profits out of people, so they will experiment as much as they can with the limits of people's patience (like they do with pretty much every franchise---seeing how little they can do and still get people to buy it). I am not sure how those experiments will turn out with the mass market, but I personally think it's a big turn-off and haven't bought any of the EA 360 games partially for that reason.

I think microtransactions in general are a great idea, but only when they extend the life of a quality game, rather than making up for shortcomings or (intentional) omissions in the original game.
Good post, FP. I think what we're seeing now is that testing the market. I am with Badgun and think things like stadiums and jerseys should be free. But it's also nice that you can get things like gamerpics and wallpapers -- I don't mind paying the small fee for those. And it's great we can get maps, extra levels, and so on for games that have been out for a while.

The most annoying part is these microtransactions have come at the same time there's been a significant price increase in software. So that $60 game turns into $65-70 if you want to buy a few extra items. If we were still paying $40-50 for games, it wouldn't seem so much like gouging.

Agree Brando, I don't mind paying for gamerpics and themes...hell I change mine around all the time so I'm kind of a gamer pic whore, but to charge us for stuff like jerseys and stadiums is a complete joke. Now they are charging us for unlockable cars in Need For Speed.

I don't mind paying for extra levels and such as I just paid 800 points for Nights of the Nine for Oblivion which adds 15-20 hours of extra content to the game. EA needs to take a look at what other companies are doing and take notes...what they are doing pretty much amounts to rape.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:17 pm

I haven't run into this problem, but is it true that in some games you are unable to join multiplayer games if the host has downloadable content that you haven't downloaded?

I do wish there was a way for the purchaseable cheats to affect only the offline game (being able to buy Sunday Tiger, for instance) to prevent the online landscape from being filled with uber-characters.

It will be very interesting to see how downloadable content evolves over the next year, that's for sure.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:21 pm

I would not pay 10 cents for a gamer pic or a theme. I think its silly and a total waste of money. Especially when you already own the game. If anything they should want to give you the pic so you could advertise for them.

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.

I think the 60 bucks a game will backlash too. I know I don't make any random game purchases anymore. I now rent most of the games I want to try instead of buying them.

I believe Viva Pinata's "extra" content is on the DVD too.

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 1:50 pm

Is there no other way to unlock extra content than to pay for it?

I thought it was like those 976 tip lines for people who wanted it right away rather than play through the game and unlock it.

I hear Epic will offer additional DLC for Gears of War for free. But the DLC for GTA4 will probably not be free.

Epic guys seem to be really into games whereas EA and Take Two are run by businessmen, who are under presure from Wall Street to push revenues and profits up. That's not to say Epic isn't interested in making money but you get the sense that they got into business to make games and pay the bills whereas the EA execs are interested in boosting the value of their stock options.

RandyM · Post by **RandyM** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 2:33 pm

Actually I just thought of something.

Is this a way to make money on a game that might otherwise get rented or re-sold? If you play a game for awhile as a rental, or if you play it and then sell it to someone second hand, the company doesn't get a slice of that second sale.

BUT, if you bought content for it, and then sell the game, that person you sold it to doesn't get the extra content you bought. They have to buy their OWN set of content.

The more I think of it, the more I think we're all missing the point. I think the point is to make money on the second, third, fourth person to buy a copy of the game.

Randy

Kazuya · Post by **Kazuya** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 2:54 pm

I don't think anything should necessarily be free and I agree with the concept that no one is FORCED to do anything. The only thing I find irritating is paying to unlock content that's already on the disc. If the content is developed after the game has shipped then I think it's fair to be charged for it. Truthfully, as long as we understand completely what we are paying for when we plunk down our $59, I don't think we can even complain about unlockable content.

Also, it depends on the game. Oblivion has as much nickel and diming as any game out there, but you don't hear people complain because the base product might be the largest game ever created. No one could say with a straight face that Bethesda held back material for later nickel and diming. But when you have games that are kinda thin to begin with, that's when it can become pretty annoying.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:36 pm

Kazuya wrote:I don't think anything should necessarily be free and I agree with the concept that no one is FORCED to do anything. The only thing I find irritating is paying to unlock content that's already on the disc. If the content is developed after the game has shipped then I think it's fair to be charged for it. Truthfully, as long as we understand completely what we are paying for when we plunk down our $59, I don't think we can even complain about unlockable content.

I agree with Kaz here. As long as you know what you're getting when you purchase the game, it's hard to justify feeling ripped off by the availability of extra content. That said, the one thing that has irked me the most is attempts to charge for alternate jerseys as this had become something of a staple of last generation and I strongly consider that a sports game should make every reasonable attempt to allow a gamer to play the games as they might appear on TV on "any given Sunday". It also highlights, once again, how healthy competition affects the market. Madden, with no direct football competitor, releases with a bare-bones selection of team uniforms. NHL, on the other hand, provides a more comprehensive selection of team unis. Now, to say that competition is the sole reason for this is overstating a point. However, the bottom line in terms of what will constitute a microtransaction will, in part, be borne out by what else is available in the market.

kicko · Post by **kicko** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:52 pm

it does not surprise me that EA is the biggest offender. EA has had a history for never dropping prices. Hell the 1st year MVP 03 was online for the pc it was a $5.99 per month charge, after that year they "included" a free year of online gaming, probably helping you decide to buy next years update. Now i just got a 360 seeing that IMO Sony has not made the best choices for ps3 and coming from ps2 where online was free I now have to pay for xbox live i feel kind of cheated but xbox live is a nice service and almost makes up for it, but i do wish it was backwards, being able to play friends online for free but the gold membership would allow the demos and extra content. I do feel the extra should be cheap or a part of the $60 you already spent. I think people are starting to realize that they dont have to have everything little thing, the more that happens the more companies will stop nickel and diming.

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:29 pm

This is not perception, it's fact. If the content is already on the disc, it's an obvious attempt to get more money out of the consumer.

I agree paying for uniforms, stadiums and the like is total bunk. However, I have not one single problem with them charging a fee for you somebody to unlock things that you can also unlock by playing the game yourself.

Now, if the only way to unlock stuff on the disk was to purchase it through the Marketplace then I'd be pissed. If it's there as an alternative to unlocking through gameplay then I don't know why people get pissed. You have other means of getting the stuff other than paying for it. Playing the game you paid 60 bones for is one way.

Let's use Tiger Woods as an example. You can purchase a cheat that will automatically max out your stat points. I for one would rather them charge for that than to give it away for free by pressing some buttons in a certain order. I guess that's just me. Personally, I prefer to actually earn the stat points as I play the game.

Just one example, but there are others.

I do think it's carried away, but at the same time I think some of the responses from the consumer are carried away too (in certain aspects). These are businesses looking for ways to make money.

RandyM · Post by **RandyM** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:34 pm

I hate to belabor the point, but does anyone agree with me that perhaps the REAL motivation here is to make money off secondhand game sales?

How many games are played and then turned over on ebay or taken back to EB and traded in?

The company makes no more money on that game --- UNLESS the next purchaser buys it and then buys more content for it. If you could re-sell your purchased content that would be one thing ... but I honestly think the bean counters have figured out that the more of the game they can associate with a single user, the more money they can make off second-hand game sales. Maybe the first purchaser is really NOT the main target of these 'add-ons'.

Randy

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:54 pm

I doubt anyone smart enough to buy used games and save some $$ is going to get nickel and dimed to death. There is no way to tell, but I wonder how much money they are making off of these "add offs" after the bottom line is offset from the customers they tick off and lose.

I feel the same way about buying ring tones(which I will never do either). However, I know people that buy a CD then pay extra for a ring tone when they already own a license for that song.

Or "Greatest Hits CD" with one extra song. You own all the other CDs but you have to pay 12 bucks to basicly get a license for that new song.

This would be like buying a novel from B&N and having to pay 5 bucks for the last chapter.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 4:56 pm

PRBoom wrote:I have not one single problem with them charging a fee for you somebody to unlock things that you can also unlock by playing the game yourself.

I tend to agree and was going to post something to this effect with one serious caveat. That is whether or not something is attainable in somewhat reasonable sense of the word. Playing the game is one thing, I recall the first Resident Evil had a fun payoff if you beat the game under a certain time limit (2 hours?) you got to restart the game with the rocket launcher and unlimited ammo. I'm hoping that this kind of reward doesn't go by the wayside in favor of "beat the game on Insane using only the knife and without using one healing item"...or pay us three bucks to unlock it with a download.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:29 pm

bdunn13 wrote:Or "Greatest Hits CD" with one extra song. You own all the other CDs but you have to pay 12 bucks to basicly get a license for that new song.

Don't get me started on this. I got an ipod recently. I've been very good about purchasing songs over the past year (usually CDs). I didn't want to buy the stupid 18 album to get the few new songs so I thought I'd go to itunes to legally buy the new songs. The f*ckers (and I mean both U2 and Apple) won't let you buy only the new songs. WTF?? I was trying to do it legally and they won't even let you do that without buying songs I already own (plus, I already own both the Greatest Hits CDs as well because I wanted the B-sides).

I consider myself pretty frugal, but I have caved and purchased $5 worth of ringtones, some Tiger Woods microtransactions, the Links courses, and some XBL gamerpics/themes. I didn't mind the Tiger Woods transaction because I wanted to unlock the courses and I really don't have the desire or time to play some stupid career mode. The Links courses were a rip off, but I think I only paid $40 for the game so it's not like I paid $60 and then they wanted more.

RandyM · Post by **RandyM** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:41 pm

>>I doubt anyone smart enough to buy used games and save some $$ is going to get nickel and dimed to death. >>

really? You don't think some people who buy Oblivion second hand aren't going to download the new content if they get hooked?

Again, we're talking anything vs. 0 here. Right now they get ZERO, ZIP NADA off of second hand sales. It doesn't take too much imagination to see second hand users as a way to get some money without doing any more work.

Randy

Sudz · Post by **Sudz** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:42 pm

if it is on the CD...it should be mine.

if they want to make it so i can download it...fine....but i shouldn't have to pay to get stuff off the cd that is already there.

and i'll pay for extra uniforms...if the game is good and i will use them and the price is not absurd.

and i get a free blowjob from Tiffany Mynx

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:47 pm

Leebo, don't let bdunn get to you -- it's okay to pay for things that are fun.

I am just kidding, but this does show the double-edged sword of microtransactions: what some may see as gouging, others would see as reasonable charges for additional content.

I think most of us agree paying for extra jerseys or old stadiums is crap. But paying for extra cars in racing game probably seems reasonable if the game already has a good selection of cars. This is where developers will have to tread lightly and do some market research, because the opinions on what's acceptable will vary widely.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:53 pm

I think the second hand/rental market is a piece, but not the driving force behind the move to microtransactions. People who buy a game used for $10-$20 less than new may not be as resistant to buy add-ons, since they saved a bunch on the basic game.

Still, I think that would be more than offset by the negative reaction, such as people avoiding such games altogether.

I'm not too worried about it yet, as I've yet to join the 360/Wii/PS3 generation. In a way the new consoles have been a blessing for me, as I can now get loads of quality Xbox games for under $20, and in some cases $10.

By the time I get into the new generation, I *hope* that companies like EA will have at least added back in the features and content I currently have. I don't mind paying for things like new maps, levels and characters in games, but I will resist having alternate uniforms, cars/bikes and features missing if it appears to me that they are holding back just to get more $$$ from me.

bdunn13 · Post by **bdunn13** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 5:56 pm

RandyM wrote: Right now they get ZERO, ZIP NADA off of second hand sales.
Randy

Not directly, but I think its safe to say the first hand buyer of the game used the money he received from selling the game to buy another game... maybe even a game he would not have purchased in the first place. And its also likely if he did not sell the game or as many games, he would not buy as many either. So they are making some cash, just not directly.

Wilk5280 · Post by **Wilk5280** » Thu Dec 28, 2006 6:22 pm

GameSeven wrote:
PRBoom wrote:I have not one single problem with them charging a fee for you somebody to unlock things that you can also unlock by playing the game yourself.
I tend to agree and was going to post something to this effect with one serious caveat. That is whether or not something is attainable in somewhat reasonable sense of the word. Playing the game is one thing, I recall the first Resident Evil had a fun payoff if you beat the game under a certain time limit (2 hours?) you got to restart the game with the rocket launcher and unlimited ammo. I'm hoping that this kind of reward doesn't go by the wayside in favor of "beat the game on Insane using only the knife and without using one healing item"...or pay us three bucks to unlock it with a download.

I really need to start doing 1 of 2 things, or both for that matter. (1) Slow down when I type or (2) proof read when I'm done.

Holy mother!