Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

THQ to Charge For Xbox Game Packs

Posted by Zonk on from the and-you'll-like-it! dept.

Thanks to Eurogamer for the news that THQ is going to be charging for Full Spectrum Warrior mission packs. This additional content was originally supposed to be available for free (and indeed was shipped with the PC version of the game) via Xbox Live. Players are instead being charged $4.99 for the additional content.

51 comments

  1. Knew it. by EvilAardvark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well we knew this was going to happen eventually.

  2. About time... by bigdady92 · · Score: 0

    It was only a matter of time before companies started doing this. Pushing content down the LIVE system is a great way to support and increase revenue for a game. Yes yes yes yes It's SUPPOSED to be free, but who cares, they are supporting their game with mission and addon packs similar to what Valve and Maxis do with all their add ons for their games (do we hate them today or not?) and allows me to play the games longer. $5 is nothing.

    --
    Wheel of Time: Book by Book and Sumview (summary review) Bigdady92 style: http://bigdady92.blogspot.com/
    1. Re:About time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      $5 is nothing? Okay, we'll take that into consideration for all future releases. Please guarantee that we will try our hardest to gauge the maximum threshhold of "nothing" for your maximum enjoyment.

      This is an exciting new beginning for us! We hope you will enjoy the ride.

      Love,

      THQ

    2. Re:About time... by fondue · · Score: 1

      What would be even cooler would be if they doubled the price of games at retail, that way you could play them for twice as long, right?

      You're an idiot.

      --

      Preferences > Homepage > Customize stories on homepage > Authors > Zonk > Uncheck

  3. Duh. by ooPo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Behold that which was told in the ancient texts of gaming past! Tremble at a future where you rent, not own, your games! Fear and repent!

    Seriously, this isn't so bad as it is single-player content. You don't have to buy it. The problem is when they start charging for multiplayer content and if you don't buy it, you're left with very few servers to play on because everyone else upgraded. Its like peer pressure except that if you don't bend to its will, your game is instantly unusable online.

    1. Re:Duh. by *weasel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that most people won't pay more. Not on a console anyway. Why pay $5 for a mutliplayer map pack that no-one else has?

      If this concept is going to work, the 'buyable' content has to be usable with/against those who have not yet bought it.

      Sure, the network effect will make an online game obsolete if a particular pack takes off - but the same effect makes for a substantial barrier to initial adoption. Why should I pay more for content I can almost never use?

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    2. Re:Duh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see you haven't noticed the throngs of people who say 'but its only five dollars!' to the people who don't want to pay for the extra content.

      Still, chances are anyone running a server is 'hardcore' enough to want the pack at any price, so really you're still screwed.

    3. Re:Duh. by fr0dicus · · Score: 1

      Currently, premium Xbox Live content is downloaded so that you can play against people with that car, etc. but you will not be able to directly use it yourself unless you pay for it. With a bit of thought it works perfectly well.

    4. Re:Duh. by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Except in that case you're talking about just the visual appearance of the car, you don't need to be able to play with the car in order to see it.

      In this case we're talking about levels which means that anybody who needs to see a level will be playing with it at that time.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:Duh. by fr0dicus · · Score: 1
      Generally, you're talking about a 10-20% expansion, from the paid updates that I've seen. For people that have paid for it, it's great, but there's nothing stopping you starting a game yourself and simply not playing those maps. Online sessions are really not that big. The updates do not 'lock people off servers' at all.

      For the case in point, the online portion is just co-op, and the cost looks like 10% or less. It's quite simple to join a game and agree not to play them, or start your own. Personally, I expect that uptake is quite low, in the same way that online music sales are low, but for big fans of a particular game, it's a fantastic treat to get a lot more at a low price.

  4. Continual Content by Taulin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would rather spend $5 than $20-30 like PC expansion cost. As long as companies don't shorten the real version with the purpose of making expansions. If the fan support is there, I think it will actually motivate game companies to push more out, too.

    1. Re:Continual Content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $5 is indeed better than $20. But $0 is even better than $5. Considering that the original promised price was $0 and that the PC version of this particular content is $0 (to oversimplify), I don't see how anyone can actually defend this decision. Sure, making extra stuff available for purchase over Xbox Live is a good thing, and they can charge whatever they want for it normally, but this particular case is unfair to Xbox owners who were expecting this particular content to be free.

      (Overuse of the word "particular" in this post was completely intentional.)

  5. Harsh... by meta-monkey · · Score: 1

    This is especially harsh considering the game itself. I was really surprised at how short FSW was when I played it. Great game, lots of fun, realistic action, really cool stuff. But, it didn't start getting even moderately difficult until about level 8, and then there were all of 11 levels in the entire game. The game had maybe five hours of gameplay. When I beat the game, I thought, "Wow, chapter 1 was great." And then there was no chapter 2.

    Maybe if the game had been a long and expansive tale to begin with, and then they added on, that would be fine. But additional content for FSW is really more like finishing the game than expanding it.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  6. Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by cjmnews · · Score: 1

    If I am remembering correctly, Microsoft has expressly forbidden the downloading of any content such as patches, game updates, and expasion modules on the XBox Live network.

    I'm pretty sure this came out when XBox Live started, and when that spy/commando game came out with a flaw.

    With this known, why would anyone expect the free downloads to occur?

    That said, you really can't complain about $5.00 for an expansion pack. Most expansion packs I buy for the PC are $30-$50. The game company has to cover the cost of making the disks and distributing them.

    --
    You can lose something that is loose, so tighten the loose item so you don't lose it.
    1. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well there are already several games that have free content downloads over X-Box live. Off-hand I can think of MechAssualt, which provideds downloads of new maps and mech, and Ninja Gaiden's Hurricane Packs.

      It's nothing revolutionary, people are just wondering why they should have to pay for this most recent update that was originally promised to be free.

    2. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft doesn't allow X-Box Live to be used for bug-fixes. As far as I know, pretty much everything else is fair game. MechAssault was, I think, the first game to release paid-for content over X-Xbox Live, and I think that must have been 12 months ago now. That said, a lot of games have significant free content downloads. KOTOR, Crimson Skies, Secret Weapons Over Normandy and Ninja Gaiden to name but a few, all have large amounts of freely downloadable content.

      I don't see the problem with this, to be honest. As you say, pretty much any PC game that's even vaguely successful gets paid-for expansions these days. The only difference here is the price.

    3. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Xentax · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think they don't (normally?) allow patches/game updates/expansion modules *unless they pertain to online play*. As in, Live is not to become a patching mechanism for any and all XBox games; Live is how people play XBox games together, and can also improve/fix that multiplayer experience as necessary.

      Didn't some game recently go through this, where they needed/wanted to patch SP badly but had to wait until they had some MP fixes to bundle the SP fixes along with? I can't remember the specifics.

      As far as the concept of $5 expansion packs go, this is only news insomuch as a 3rd party company is doing it. MS charges for some expansion packs - PGR2 and Links2004 I know of first hand. Links has at least one free course for download, and at least one NON-free course for download. PGR2 has extra maps and cars - all players get access to one car, and the assets for all the cars (so they can race in races limited to that booster pack's set of cars, I suppose), but only players who buy the packs can race in races on that track and use the other cars.

      Now, the *inevitable* consequence of this is that less people race on the new tracks, because you don't want to shut out players who are online and willing to race but don't have the packs. I'm dismayed by this, but it's sort of inevitable; the same goes on with expansion packs for Mass Multi's, I'm sure, though I imagine the number of people with a given pack approaches 100% over time.

      I wouldn't be surprised if Halo2 has downloadable maps/new game modes/etc. - the question'll be whether it's all free, partly free, or all pay-only. I hope it's all free - you just won't see many people playing on maps that only some of the playerbase is willing to pay for.

      Xentax

      --
      You shouldn't verb words.
    4. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by hollismb · · Score: 1

      As far as the concept of $5 expansion packs go, this is only news insomuch as a 3rd party company is doing it.

      Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow charged 4.99 for two maps a few months ago, so this isn't even the first time a third party developer has charged. The only news is that is costs five bucks here, really.

    5. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Xentax · · Score: 1

      I ...well, sit...corrected.

      I believe this is the part where I say "Geez, why did /. post this, this isn't news at all!" and an AC replies with "You're new here, aren't you?"

      Xentax

      --
      You shouldn't verb words.
    6. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're obviously not new here, but perhaps you missed the part in the summary where it says that people are mad because this update was initially supposed to be free.

    7. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by atlasheavy · · Score: 1

      Bungie was discussing this a few weeks back on their rumor roundup, I believe. They said that they were going to stick to free maps and the like, if I am not mistaken.

      --

      iRooster, the Mac OS X a
    8. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by LordNimon · · Score: 3, Informative
      Microsoft has expressly forbidden the downloading of any content such as patches, game updates, and expasion modules on the XBox Live network.

      That's just plain false. A big factor of Xbox Live is downloading new content and getting updates (including bug fixes) to games. Most content is free, but everything else is (so far) reasonably priced.

      --
      And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
      To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
    9. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by Xentax · · Score: 1

      Well, I didn't ponder that tidbit for long, I guess.

      My feeling is this - if that bothers you, don't buy it. They already paid to develop it, so if no-one (or not enough) people buy it, they'll probably eventually give it away *anyway*. Maybe not. Either way, they'd learn that the return on doing those for pay isn't right for them.

      I agree we should ding companies for turning around and charging for something they said was free - especially if it really WAS free on the PC, that's just silly; whatever cost realities may exist, it's saying you treat your PC customers better than your XBox customers, so it's a good way to consolidate on the PC in the future if that's your goal, I guess ;)

      Xentax

      --
      You shouldn't verb words.
    10. Re:Isn't this a known, Microsoft caused event? by unclethursday · · Score: 1
      Microsoft doesn't allow X-Box Live to be used for bug-fixes.

      Yes, they do, and quite often. Just go to FASA's page about Crimson Skies to see the info on the first patch that was released for Crimson Skies.

      Street Fighter Vs. SNK 2 EO has also been patched, as has Unreal Championship, as has Links 2004, and many others (in fact, nearly every XBL game that supports downloadable content and online play has been patched).

      Any time you log into Xbox Live from a game and you get a message that there is a "required download from Xbox Live in order to connect to Xbox Live", then you know it is a patch. Put in another XBL game and connect, and it should work fine to connect; it will only be the game(s) giving you the message that is (are) being patched.

  7. Fine by me... by hollismb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't have a problem with paying for additional content, as long as it's worth the price. So far, most of the pay content has actually been pretty good, examples being car/track downloads for Project Gotham Racing 2, two new maps for Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow, and new licensed courses for Links 2004. All of them worth five bucks, IMO. That being said, I don't think I'd want to pay for say, a single map for Rainbow Six, which wouldn't be worth five bucks, although a whole pack of maps would be.

    And there's been plenty of patches released for Xbox games. Off the top of my head.... MotoGP2, Splinter Cell: PT, Star Wars Battlefront, ESPN 2K5, Rallisport Challenge 2, and an upcoming one for Rainbow Six: Black Arrow.

    So, none of this paying or patching is anything new at all. If a developer has a bug or exploit that needs to be fixed, they need to patch it, and if they work extra to give us content, I have no problem paying for it it it's worth the extra cost.

    1. Re:Fine by me... by bigman2003 · · Score: 1

      DDR had 4 songpacks at $5 each.

      You're right about the Links courses- at least Kapalua was worth the $5. The Gallery (I think that was it) came too late for me to really enjoy it- although I did buy it.

      The only premium downloadable content that I have NOT purchased (where I actually had the game) was for Mechassault. And once again, that was because it came so late, that I no longer played the game.

      But I've downloaded all the free, and premium content that I could- I don't mind paying the $5, because it usually extends the enjoyment I get from the game.

      Nobody has mentioned the RTCW content yet- that was also free, and good.

      --
      No reason to lie.
    2. Re:Fine by me... by hollismb · · Score: 1

      The RTCW content was a lie. That crap was already on the disc, and all you downloaded was a key to unlock it. Sure, it seemed like new content, but it was really just giving you something you'd already paid for.

  8. Total bullshit by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

    They promised there would be additional content offered for free.

    Now there isn't what a bunch of wanks.

    It would be nice for game companiese to see how sucessful a game is before doing a full development cycle on it but guess what if the customers start to figure out you are just going to SCREW them I don't think it will catch on.

  9. It's THQ folks... by dreamquick · · Score: 1

    ...quite frankly I was just amazed they managed to make a game that wasn't complete rubbish - normally a THQ game is a mediocre game...

    Making people pay for content that would normally be free (an extra level/map etc would happen sooner or later with the PC's moding community) seems about inline with the THQ school of thought.

    Xbox live had the promise of "free exclusive online content" but who honestly believed that?

    Business is business and if there's a buck to be made sales and marketing folks will happily screw the customer to get that buck...

    At the end of the day I can't think of any real "success stories" for xbox live where the online content has just flowed and flowed once the game has been paid for without a second subscription cost.

    Most of the time the only extra content people see is the stuff that was over-hyped at launch and even then they have to wait and wait for them to actually "finish" the content that they hyped as being "almost ready to ship" when the game launched.

    1. Re:It's THQ folks... by sw33tjimmy · · Score: 1

      ninja gaiden, rainbowsix 3, crimson skies, mech assault, and splinter cell all had a good deal of post-mortem development.

      I'm not sure what you expect when you say 'flowed and flowed'. A developement team can't work on the same project for ever.

      --
      Get Virtual.
    2. Re:It's THQ folks... by Kyouryuu · · Score: 1

      $5 is a rather far cry from "screwing the customer" when PC game producers can usually extract $20-$30 from each expansion pack.

    3. Re:It's THQ folks... by dreamquick · · Score: 1

      Yes but why exactly are they charging?

      If it's just a small expansion pack then why not give it away for *shock horror* _free_ as thankyou to people who bought their game and have XBox Live?

      What's wrong with treating people who paid $50 for what was a good (but short) game with a little aftersales service?

  10. Offer both? by cmstar · · Score: 1

    I agree that's it's dirty for them to offer free downloadable content and then turn around and charge for the content on disc. The problem there is not keeping their word. However, I see no problem with selling a patch/update for a small $5.00 fee. I think that's great. Lots of people (myself included) don't have Live and have no intention of purchasing. Plus, if you download content that is only available via Live, and Live is a subscription service, then the content isn't really free is it? There's still a fee involved in aquiring it. This is great for people who just want a particular game patch but don't want Live.

    1. Re:Offer both? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I agree that's it's dirty for them to offer free
      > downloadable content and then turn around and
      > charge for the content on disc.

      That wouldn't be dirty, it would be fine. Physical costs, shelving, shipping, etc., etc.

      The problem, though, if you had read the FA or even the summary, is that they aren't charging for a physical copy of something you can download for free! They are charging $5 for a _download_ of content that was supposed to be free (and was included for 'free' with the full PC game).

  11. Could Be Good For Xbox 2 Hard Drive by blueZhift · · Score: 1

    I'll bet Microsoft will be watching the success or failure of THQ's approach very closely. Why? Because downloadable content is something that is done best with the availability of local mass storage, like a hard drive. Even with a broadband connection, you usually don't want to be pushing a lot of data back and forth if it can be stored locally.

    If a lot of people are willing to pay $5 for additional content, then including a hard drive in the next Xbox makes better business sense because it enhances the revenue stream. I'd like to see something like the 20 - 40GB minidrives that are showing up in iPods and laptops in Xbox 2. Though I suppose a 512MB memory card would do the trick in many cases too.

    --
    To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
    1. Re:Could Be Good For Xbox 2 Hard Drive by StocDred · · Score: 1
      If a lot of people are willing to pay $5 for additional content,

      Well, a lot of people won't. A minority of Xbox owners use Xbox Live. A minority of Xbox Live users bought this game. A minority of people who bought the game will buy the extra content.

      No, I don't have any actual figures to back this up. But I suspect this is exactly how it will play out.

  12. Seems like this would upset MS by Pluvius · · Score: 1

    Putting something free on the PC version of FSW but charging for it on the XBox version makes the latter look bad, which in turn makes the XBox look bad. Perhaps a portion of the $5 fee is going to Microsoft as restitution?

    Rob

  13. at least... by sw33tjimmy · · Score: 1

    at least they didn't make use of the Couterstrike method: include 2 'downloadable' levels on the game disk that can only be unlocked via live 'download'.

    dr. evil voice:
    riiiight

    --
    Get Virtual.
    1. Re:at least... by EvilAardvark · · Score: 1

      Wow I hadn't heard about that one. That's pretty damn cheap.

  14. lol x-box weenie can't read by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    The PC people got the extra's free. The X-box people get to pay for it and, at least over here, also have to pay more for the game. So your screwed twice.

    Also this hardly qualifies as an expansion pack, closer to the "extra" missions the better game companies sometimes put online to download. Missions that weren't good enough for the full game or to big for the minimum requirements but are downloadable if you want them.

    Then again this has been happening less often recently.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  15. Re:That is what you get by Zoshnell · · Score: 1

    Possible troll pandering, but how is Microsoft responsible entirely for this? Becasue the game might be X Box exclusive(I don't know, I haven't really payed attention to the game.) From what I understand THQ is responsible for the charge because it's, y'know, their game and all.

    --
    "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
  16. If it was the same on both that would be okay by DaveCBio · · Score: 1

    Otherwise I won't be biting. This makes THQ look lame beside Ubi that has given tons of free post ship content on the Tom Clancy games. However, even Ubi loses points for charging for PT content.

    1. Re:If it was the same on both that would be okay by jxa00++ · · Score: 1

      I don't really have problem of selling optional content but PC gamers had to wait several months for the release of the game, only to find out that the game isn't graphically optimised to include a reasonably pervasive function as anti-aliasing support!

  17. the five bucks stops here by slumpy · · Score: 1

    Only offering one level for five dollars is an outrage. I've spent hundreds of hours playing Rainbow Six 3 on Xbox live, and Ubisoft has offered a multitude of premium multiplayer maps for free download. Most of these maps are equal in quality to ones included in the box, with some being being better i.e. garage and carnival.

    Once Splinter Cell 2 allowed users to download 2 online maps for $5, i knew there was going to be a change in the way content was distributed via xbox live. No longer are are we going to get companies who acknowledge the initial $50 investment and continue to support their product for free. We are entering the more capitalistic phase of online gaming...which was inevitable. It's just sad to see THQ charging 5 bucks for one single level. This is no expansion pack and will offer maybe a half hour of fun. Instead of spending the five bucks on an extra mission, go out a buy a book...Rainbow Six by Tom Clancy perhaps, and you'll probably get a better military experience...you might learn something too.

    --
    http://www.commaecho.com
  18. Re:That is what you get by tod_miller · · Score: 1

    no you are right, you were just troll pandering, I have a reflex that types anti-microsoft stuff at lightening speed.

    Seems silly really.

    --
    #hostfile 0.0.0.0 primidi.com 0.0.0.0 www.primidi.com 0.0.0.0 radio.weblogs.com
  19. Re:That is what you get by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    Live is controlled by Microsoft. I just assume it is at Microsofts' discretion whether or not to allow content on their network. So yes, they do have some responsibility.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  20. Re:That is what you get by Zoshnell · · Score: 1

    Just becasue they host it on live , to me anyway, doesn't seem to mean that they are responsible for THQ charging a fee for this, unless I missed somewhere that said, "Microsoft hold's THQ's President hostage! Are you BAD enough to save the president, or fork over 5 bucks for maps?". If I did, mea culpa :)

    --
    "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
  21. Re:That is what you get by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    No, but Microsoft certainly has the power to say "you can only put it on Live if you lower/raise the price".

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  22. Re:That is what you get by Zoshnell · · Score: 1

    True enough as they are providing the way to distribute the media, but from what i understand, this isn't the case. They aren't holding THQ at gunpoint to charge for this. I could be wrong, and if I am please show me.

    --
    "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi