Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Explains the Lumines Live! Mess

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the wild-wild-west dept.

1up has up a discussion with Microsoft's Greg Canessa, Group Manager for Xbox Live Arcade. There, he attempts to explain what's the deal with Lumines Live!. Specifically, why are they charging us an arm and a leg for a rerelease of an already well-sold portable title? "That's actually done by the developer. As a platform, we provide a list of available price tiers. And we work very closely, of course, with the developer. We provide suggestions and it is a consultation between the two companies, but ultimately it is up to the developer to set the price." I'm looking at you, Q!.

10 of 57 comments (clear)

  1. I agree.. up to a point... by the_skywise · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "It's unfortunate that some people just sort of take the approach of, "oh, blame Microsoft first for everything;" that's not really constructive."
    Okay sure... but this is a Microsoft published product (via XBox Live... I can't go to the store and purchase it) purchased using Microsoft Points (r)(tm) where 1600 points = $19.99 (or sometimes $24.99) and downloaded from Micrsofot XBox Live, a proprietary network built and run by Microsoft and accessible only via the XBox360, another Microsoft product.

    So sure, Q! got greedy... but the gatekeepers let it happen. And the ultimate reflection is on the publisher and service provider. Microsoft.

    1. Re:I agree.. up to a point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "We won't give you this game to publish unless we can charge $20 for it."

      What are your options?
      * Ask nicely for them to reduce the price.
      * Tell them to go shove it.
      * Accept their terms, hope someone buys it.

      Saying Microsoft let it happen for setting the price on points is like saying that the US Government let gas prices get high because they print money.

    2. Re:I agree.. up to a point... by Aladrin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wait, you suddenly expect MS to be completely reasonable and not take dictatorial control over something they have 100% control over?

      MS does not -have- to put anything on XBLA that they don't want to. They could have said 'Sorry, no, that's bullshit' when the deal started and none of this would have happened.

      The truth is, MS knew this was a sleazy way to sell the game. They wanted to see what would happen if they tried to sell something like this, and they found a scapegoat company to try it on.

      So yeah, as well as those options you gave above, add:

      * Make them sign a contract and THEN tell them how much they'll charge.
      * Convince them to sell it for too much, and in a sleazy pay-for demo version, and watch what happens, in case it's a good way to do business in the future.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    3. Re:I agree.. up to a point... by C0rinthian · · Score: 4, Insightful
      MS does not -have- to put anything on XBLA that they don't want to. They could have said 'Sorry, no, that's bullshit' when the deal started and none of this would have happened.
      And if they did this then Sony would still have an exclusive on a successful puzzle game. Yes, MS doesn't HAVE to put Lumines on XBLA. But I bet they REALLY wanted to.
    4. Re:I agree.. up to a point... by Keeper · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Actually, the cost of gasoline is a core component in measuring inflation.

      One of the things that constantly amuses me are the print articles comparing the cost of gasole in the late 70's to now, using inflation adjusted figures. Of course it isn't going to look like the cost of gas has risen much -- you essentially just performed a calculation designed to factor out the changes in gas price over time...

  2. plays with words. . . by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 3, Insightful

    look at how he plays with the words, his answer to every one of those questions is "It's a complete game, you can buy more levels" I've played it already, and it is not the complete game. I could see it as making sense if they decided you get v and w game modes if you buy the base package, and if you buy the addon pack you get game modes x y and z. They actually give you multiplayer and one single player mode, then one level of the other modes, which on completion tell you to buy more if you want to continue playing.

    Personally, I think that's absolutely wrong. They should say something more along the lines of "Congratulations! You've won! If you want additional challenges buy the next package!" For some reason, it seems better if you're told there is more to play if you want, not that you must buy more to finish the game. This is a problem in semantics, that is all. Q! comes off as greedy in this deal, and Microsoft comes off as ignorant, it truly is a pity. I was going to buy Lumines Live until I found out about this, hopefully our wallets will let Microsoft and Q! know that this is unacceptable.

    --
    disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
  3. Stuff like this will get worse .... by WankersRevenge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... before it gets better

    http://www.gamespot.com/news/6160388.html

  4. Let me get this straight... by Turken · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ultimately, it is the developer that sets the price... but only after lots of consultation and suggestion from Microsoft? How much of a cut does MS get from each sale? Does that cut change depending on what the price of the software is?

    If Microsoft is actively influence the developers and making more money when developers raise the prices and/or split software into multiple pieces, then yes, we are justified in blaming MS for being too greedy.

    It looks to me like MS got caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and is now trying to find a scapegoat to pin the blame on.

  5. Bullshit. It's still their marketplace. by kinglink · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's look at it this way. I assume I run a mall, and we got 3 game stores (we are kewl like that). And a fourth opens up. They charge 200 percent more than the other malls. That's fine because it's competition. But remember I run the mall, not the store.

    Let's look at it another way, Assume I now have those 4 stores. Store four is not doing well, they decide to drop their prices to half the price of the other stores. This is troubling because then everything becomes sales and in fighting. But again I run the mall, if the contract/lease says so (and you better believe Microsoft can do this), I can remove that store from my mall.

    I'm sorry Microsoft, you own the marketplace. If you disagree you pull support. There's a lot of competition to even get ON the marketplace, and guess what. You run it so you decide who gets on. Pull support from Lumines, and give it to someone better. Stop allowing people to over charge for games on your service because it has ruined what was a giant boon for you.

    Microsoft also charges companies for ever thing on the marketplace (whether it's a share of the profits or a flat rate for patches). I'm sure they are getting rich off the over price because how ever many units sold I'm sure they get a couple bucks. It benefits them to make us pay multiple times.

    " You know about Arcade, but, you know, for Marketplace, we have over 1,500 pieces of content in Marketplace; we have over 70 million downloads. " Again we use weasel numbers. 70 Million DOWNLOADs. notice he doesn't meantion purchases. How many people download a demo? I'd be willing to put it in the 200K on the first week (Saint's row got 300K at record highs).

    Microsoft realizes they don't have to be competetive any more. They can back anyone they want, just like they do with their OS business, because they are the only ones out. Sony has lost a huge amount of faith from consumers so what does Microsoft have to realize.

    And realize not a single game has dropped in price on the Marketplace since it's been released. Why should they? There's not used games out there to compete with, there's no other way to get this game. They actually have a monopoly on it to the point you no longer can get it elsewhere. Why do you think people have been so anti download service consoles. Because of this exact situation, you'll no longer have an alternative then to pay the price Microsoft demands.

    In a related news, I wrote microsoft talking about the fact that this is a horrible move. Guess what I got back. Instruction on how to connect my Xbox 360. I'm not even joking. Don't think this is the end, because Microsoft will continue to screw customers on the Xbox Live Marketplace until we say "enough", we've seen it with Windows, Office, and now they have pulled back their lips and shown what they have started on the console market.

    1. Re:Bullshit. It's still their marketplace. by Thanatos69 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess you can reword anything to make another look bad.

      Microsoft owns the "store" not the "mall". Publisher says they will sell a game in their store for $x, this game will bring people into the store so they charge a premium for it. MS says no, we don't want to sell the game for that price, publisher says okay, we'll just take it elsewhere, any traffic associated with our game will now go elsewhere. MS says okay, you win, sell it at that price.... people whine that the store owner is being a jerk because they are selling it at what the publisher says.

      Here is another example, Office Depot makes a whole profit of $5 per laptop that they sell, most profit comes from accessories. Are they the jerks because their laptops are still pricier than say, Future Shop? Well I guess they could sell it at a loss, the maker still makes all the profit and they lose shelving space, sales person time trying to sell it and all other costs associated with selling something in their store.