THQ: Console Gaming May Switch to Free-To-Play

Status
Not open for further replies.

AMW1011

Distinguished
Dec 5, 2009
90
0
18,580
0
No the problem is that many games cost too much for the content you get. Lowering the price and the content, then charging MORE for a little extra content only makes it worse.

There was a time when you could buy a game and it would last you a week to complete, and then if it had multiplayer it could be even more. I just beat Bioshock 2 in a day yesterday, and the multiplayer isn't worth anything at all. Some people paid $60 for that game, and THAT is the problem.
 

BulkZerker

Distinguished
Apr 19, 2010
196
0
18,630
0
Ok well you can have that thq. But I still want my map and modding tools for the pc. Then youb can bundle a map that I made for free. And sell it to the box-tards for $15
 

duckmanx88

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2008
139
0
18,630
0
what they really mean is paying $29-$39 for half of a game and then they will charge us up the ass for the ending, for costumes, for multiplayer, for cut scenes, for guns, for characters. hell i bet they'll find a way to charge you for trophies/achievements.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Welcome to 20 ago with PC shareware software. Two very notable examples being Wolfenstein and Doom. The first chapter was free and widely distributed via friends, floppies, and BBS with the full version available for a price... almost any PC game around that era had something similar. I understand that this is newer for consoles, but it's a hardly an experiment in gaming.
 

drwho1

Distinguished
Jan 10, 2010
367
0
18,930
0
60 is way too much, I personally buy only 1 NEW game per year and that is the SVR series. but if THQ goes this route (charging more for the same game) Then I will simply STOP buying console games.

 

Graham_71

Distinguished
Jul 30, 2010
20
0
18,560
0
Don't care much for console gaming or THQ but making games free to download & free to try limited content before paying for the full version is, in my view the best method for selling a game.

Years ago I brought 3 games mail order after reading good magazine reviews (DOS era), all cost about £ 35 each, all were crap, over £100 wasted.

It would stop people illegally downloading if there main reason is to try before buying, cause once they've downloaded and got it working why buy it...

Better for both consumer & developer.

Oh yeah & iv seen Assassin's creed 2 for PS3 in shops in Europe for 60 euros, can't see them selling many copies at that price.
 

bv90andy

Distinguished
Apr 2, 2009
391
0
18,930
0
The problem is that DLC is selling, and because of that they will keep making DLC as long as millions buy it. And it turns out they want to make only DLC over a free "Demo". They use the same system as crack dealers.
 

processthis

Distinguished
Aug 30, 2010
20
0
18,560
0
Dropping the price to get more sales? Good. Taking out parts of the game and then making them more expensive as downloads? Good...bye sales.
 
G

Guest

Guest
I think it is an interesting idea. Lower the entrance cost, but with less features, then allow people to add on more features for added cost. For instance maybe making a game like Halo Reach or MW2, and only having a few MP maps to start, but the full Single Player for say $40. Then add on new map packs every month. Then the people constantly playing the game online, would also be paying for new content each month. While the person only playing through the game for the story, does not end up paying for a multiplayer they dont use.

People also need to stop being so dam cheap when it comes to gaming. It seems like a lot of gamers would spend $18 for a dvd they'd watch maybe once a year, and it takes a whole 120min. Then they'd spend $60 for a game they'd play 20 hours+ a week for months, yet they bitch and moan about having to pay $60.

Even at $60 a game, + extra for DLC the dollar to entertainment hours ratio is still much much better then almost anything else.
 

Darkv1

Distinguished
May 30, 2009
86
0
18,580
0
Joy...as if the $60 price point for console games wasn't bad enough they now want to microtransaction us into oblivion...f**k...
 

loomis86

Distinguished
Dec 5, 2009
233
0
18,830
0
[citation][nom]graham_71[/nom]Don't care much for console gaming or THQ but making games free to download & free to try limited content before paying for the full version is, in my view the best method for selling a game.Years ago I brought 3 games mail order after reading good magazine reviews (DOS era), all cost about £ 35 each, all were crap, over £100 wasted.It would stop people illegally downloading if there main reason is to try before buying, cause once they've downloaded and got it working why buy it...Better for both consumer & developer.Oh yeah & iv seen Assassin's creed 2 for PS3 in shops in Europe for 60 euros, can't see them selling many copies at that price.[/citation]

Years ago I subscribed to "compute" magazine. They printed basic programs in the back of every issue for video games. You typed them into your computer and saved them, debugged, then run. free video games. It was a blast. That's how I got into computers back in early 80s. Meanwhile the dumb kids in my neighborhood were paying big money for game cartridges.
 

AnUnusedUsername

Distinguished
Sep 14, 2010
43
0
18,580
1
People buy games once their prices go down because the vast majority of them aren't worth $60 in the first place. I'll buy 2, maybe 3 $60 games a year (always at launch, if I'm not going to buy it at launch I'd rather wait that pay full price), and I'll buy about 5-10 20-$30 games. Unless I'm absolutely positive I'll play a game to death, there's no reason to buy it at launch since I could instead buy two cheaper games of equivalent quality. By next year, when it still isn't any worse or better than a new game, I can pick it up at half price. Just because price goes down after a year or two doesn't mean quality of new games goes up in that time. In fact, thats almost never the case. There are generally maybe 3-10 "revolutionary" or "must have" games released a year across all genres, and that usually leaves something like 1-5 that any individual actually wants. Anything outside of one's "comfort zone" of sequels and preferred/clearly defined genres can easily be put off until next year.
If you want to sell new games at $40, fine by me, they'll sell better and a lot less people will wait for the price to drop. But if you try to sell "part" of a game new at $40, then charge something like $60 for the rest, not only will you lose launch sales (because those that buy at launch are more interested than those who wait and likely want to play the full game), you'll kill off the lower-price sales too, as a lower launch price will undoubtably mean the game will remain at that price for a longer time, so by the time it's affordable there is either something better or the game will "only" cost what a new game does today, once you factor in the cost of the DLC.
DLC as a whole is effectively just a price-hike for customers, as you may be getting more content out of one game, but the developers time could just as well have been invested in the development of another game, and if release schedules all remained the same, everything would have more content, and it wouldn't cost the developers anything more. (With the exception of developers not planning any games in the future, but if that's the case they are probably more worried about bankruptcy than making DLC.) It's true DLC takes less time to make than a new game does, but if you start a new game now instead of making DLC for an old one, you'll finish earlier and have time to finish the "DLC" before the launch date.
 

AnUnusedUsername

Distinguished
Sep 14, 2010
43
0
18,580
1
Wow, that turned out a lot more wall-of-text y than I wanted it to...
Basically, most games aren't worth $60 and DLC is a flat price increase that does nothing for consumers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
G Streaming Video & TVs 1
A Streaming Video & TVs 2
Z Streaming Video & TVs 1
V Streaming Video & TVs 2
I Streaming Video & TVs 0
M Streaming Video & TVs 0
B Streaming Video & TVs 2
V Streaming Video & TVs 1
K Streaming Video & TVs 1
Loganrmcclellan Streaming Video & TVs 1
O Streaming Video & TVs 4
valentinalucia Streaming Video & TVs 3
B Streaming Video & TVs 1
L Streaming Video & TVs 2
P Streaming Video & TVs 2
P Streaming Video & TVs 1
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
X Streaming Video & TVs 9
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY