Slashdot Mirror
EA To Charge For Game Demos
Kohato brings word of a new Electronic Arts marketing strategy that aims to start monetizing game demos. According to industry analyst Michael Patcher after an EA investor visit, the publisher will start selling "premium downloadable content" prior to a game's release for $10-$15 that is essentially a longer-than-usual demo. Patcher said, "I think that the plan is to release PDLC at $15 that has 3-4 hours of gameplay, so [it has] a very high perceived value, then [EA will] take the feedback from the community (press and players) to tweak the follow-on full game that will be released at a normal packaged price point." He also made reference to a comment from EA's CEO John Riccitiello that "the line between packaged product sales and digital revenues would soon begin to blur."
Sounds better than $50 for 4 hours of gameplay. I'm looking at you, most games.
Far, far ahead of their time.
Gran Turismo 4 and Gran Turismo 5 spawned "GT4: Prologue" and "GT5: Prologue" products which were cut-down versions of the eventual games to come out.
According to some definitions, "Torchlight" by Runic Games is the same thing.
The days of buying a game and feeling like you have the complete thing are coming to an end. It's nickle and dime time!
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
A high priced appetizer to milk fanboys of their money. It's a fantastic and evil idea but I don't like it.
Good Luck, you'll need it.
Am I reading this wrong, or is EA essentially trying to establish a paid beta program?
They're gonna charge beta testers. There's a reason I don't buy from EA, vote with your wallet.
Bitter and twisted, DON'T ever FORGET the TWISTED
the publisher will start selling "premium downloadable content" prior to a game's release for $10-$15 that is essentially a longer-than-usual demo
So were going back to shareware?
Reminds me of Apple having people actually pay them for taking part in a beta test or for a SDK.
Who still is buying EA games? The last one I picked up was Battlefield 2. I've had enough of their shit and don't see any real reason to ever to go back to any of their products.
Are they TRYING to put themselves out of business? This seems like a perfect way to ensure no one plays the demo and instead purchases the full game. Sure, it'll get them more sales, at first. Then people will realize that the games are crap anyway and stop purchasing from them.
The point of a demo is to convince people to purchase your game. If you force people to also purchase the demo, then they'll likely not bother purchasing anything.
The only effect this can have is a decrease in revenue for EA followed by some long-winded rants about "piracy is decreasing our revenue" when in actuality it's EA releasing poor-quality games and making boneheaded decisions like this one that are causing them to lose revenue.
"[EA will] take the feedback from the community (press and players) to tweak the follow-on full game that will be released at a normal packaged price point."
It sounds to me like EA will start charging for beta releases.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
I'm no hardcore gamer but to me the value of a demo has always been to decide whether or not I want to spend money. Am I showing my age or something? Because what is called monetising in the summary I call money grubbing. If EA are counting on this I think they'll likely implode. If they're not, well done on one of the best jokes I've heard in a long time. Bonus points if you can convince your developers that coding is a game, and get them to pay you for working 18 hour days 7 days a week.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Why let demos out to spice things up? Let's just have people pay to try!
Loadcrap of idiots. Anyhow, demos are getting more and more useless, which is probably why EA is doing this -- they'll win more than they'll lose. Game critics and arcade boxes already let people try out games -- and those will (most certainly) always be free.
Yet, they won't see a penny of me -- those bastards!
Have you heard about SoylentNews?
Good luck with that!
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
You guys were doing so good...really making a turn around. You were starting to release big games without DRM (Dragon Age), You were showing that aquiring a company no longer meant dictating every facet of development (again, Dragon Age is a good example), you were gaining some great IP (Dead Space)...and then you go and do this shit.
I was trying, EA. I really was. But this is making it very hard for me. If you take the money paid for these extended demos off the price of the full game, then ok...I'm behind you 100%. BUT. If it's just "pay for demo, pay full price for the full game"? I'm sorry EA...but I would be forced to abandon you.
WHY CAN'T I QUIT YOU???
Living With a Nerd
good luck with that EA. Unless you are going to provide the kind of continuous content and value of an MMO (and charging for demo's does not), I am a good many others will not buy. Oh and if it has draconian DRM and you treat Customers like Criminals people are going to make decisions based on that too and not buy.
Looks like EA saw how successful Sony's GT-5 Prologue was and decided that this is a viable business model for eagerly anticipated AAA titles.
If the demo purchase price could be applied as a credit on the final release I would have no problem with this, but somehow I think the chances of this being the case are pretty close to 0%.
I browse Slashdot at +3, Funny
first it was some small cosmetic DLC (anybody remembers the huge hoopla about the 'horse armor' in Oblivion?) and lately it's starting to become a 'pay if you want the full experience' with 0-day DLC, with assets sometimes already present on the game media.
It's pretty obvious that the games industry is envying the MMO business model where customers pay as long as they play (and wish they had done so a lot earlier) and this 'paid beta access' program seems just like another step in that direction.
Nowadays not being internet connected on your gaming PC is pretty much unheard of (and with more and more games with net-based DRM impossible), the only people who would regularly play disconnected would probably be laptop users, but I guess they are not big enough of a market to stop this kind of monetization.
-- the cake is a lie
Big game publishers are dying to generate a constant revenue stream as opposed to the famine for two years of development then feast for 1/2 - 1 year.
I don't enjoy gaming anymore. My 20+ year hobby is dying right in front of my eyes. This story doesn't help.
*IF* the purchase price went toward the full game. If I purchased a $10-15 "demo" I would probably feel cheated by purchasing the retail version at full cost otherwise.
Consider Battlefield: Bad Company 2. A beta was available on Steam more than a month before game release, but you could only access it by pre-purchasing the game. There is a small step from that to splitting the cost between beta content, and full game content.
Do I get a discount when I buy the full version since it'll have hours of gameplay that I already paid for?
This is gettings silly, they're gonna milk the market dry at this rate.
The wii sold like popcorn for a reason guys. Take a lesson.
Maybe they should try micropayments to look at screen captures...
You may put lipstick on a pig, teach her how to dance. But the bottom line she's still a pig. EA's bungling things in a bad way by nickle and diming the masses for software that is not stable, not final. They are going to lose out on that badly.
First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
I have been a gamer since I was a teenager in the late 80's, and I'm very much used to downloading demo's for free, for the rare times I actually DID download game demo's but instead read tons of reviews and what have you until I got a game. I would not pay money for demo software, because then if it is a crappy game or something I did not like, I would be complaining I wasted a good $15 bucks on a crappy demo, when I could have went and bought lunch somewhere instead! :D
I see this as another money making ploy by Electronic Art's and for the fanboys to throw away money at demo's.
You must master your joystick like a fisherman masters bait! - Gimpy
Patcher said, "I think that the plan is to release PDLC at $15 that has 3-4 hours of gameplay, so [it has] a very high perceived value, then [EA will] take the feedback from the community (press and players) to tweak the follow-on full game that will be released at a normal packaged price point."
So essentially, I pay $15 for the "privilege" of being a beta tester? I get to play (part of) a prerelease version of the game, so I can tell them what needs to be fixed before it ships?
That last bit is especially rich, coming from a bloke named "Patcher."
"I think that the plan is to release PDLC at $15 that has 3-4 hours of gameplay, so [it has] a very high perceived value"
3 to 4 hours of gameplay at a rate of $15 is percieved as high value?
To whom?
I'm assuming EA, because that's a very poor value to me.
Don't worry, EA has already thought this out.
Now you can download the demo of the demo. Just $4.99!
The ad for the demo of the demo. Just $1.99!
The teaser for the ad for the demo of the demo. Just $0.99!
Post fan posts discussing a potential new teaser for the ad for the demo of the demo. Just $0.10 a post!
You know you want it.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Hey, if it means that I get more interesting games because they're more profitable to make, cool. I'd pay good money for, say, a sneak preview of the next Elder Scrolls V game (or even an official version of Morroblivion complete with quests). Just please don't make it an online game; that would ruin it.
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
Does it make sense to charge for a test-drive?
How about eating samples at a grocery store?
Or collect a fee for reading an advertisement?
Intuitively, this is patently absurd. But, even at a conceptual level the notion of "monetizing an advertisement" is utterly brain-dead. Now I am going to give these goons at EA the benefit of the doubt and say that they have at least a few pairs of properly functioning neurons firing (every so often). That must mean that they don't actually consider their demos to be advertisements. They are products in and of themselves! Much as it makes sense for someone to live off grocery store samples, commute to work via daily test-drives and avoid sensory deprivation by staring at bill-boards every so often. ... hmm, nevermind.
Damn, now we will have to start pirating demos... I don't see how EA thinks this will work out in their favor, dumbass businessmen.
So they are selling the beta versions and then upping the price after you tell them how to fix it. Ok just like Microsoft's operating system strategy but with MS you don't get the cheap version first.
Why bother
Does it count as paying for a game demo if you buy a game you don't really want just to get the packed in Metal Gear Solid 2 demo?
Over my dead body I'll pay for a Demo!!!!!!!!!!! And they wonder why people use torrents............
EA: We Will Not Charge For "Traditionally Free Game Demos" claims something entirely different and less "OMG the people in EA have been eating LEAD!"
Not that I don't think a vast majority of the people at EA don't enjoy a good paint chip now and then, I haven't been under a rock you know. I just don't think this particular article is about the consequences of such.
This is a stupid idea, but not the way you think. It's stupid for us, but not for EA.
This will work for EA for the same reason why they can sell DLC which is probably developed at the same time as the game, or considered "cut" content released in the DLC. It will work because impulse gamers DON'T CARE, and will willingly pay money for this shit. We are going down the nickel and dime road of gaming because of apathy and ignorance from the vast majority of consumers who don't know any better and can't be bothered to educate themselves.
Shit, I still see people who think the DRM in Assassin's Creed 2 or CNC 4 is fine because their internet connection is "rock solid". Yeah, great. Unfortunately it doesn't mean you will still be able to play the game, particularly if EA themselves can't keep their shit working.
Honestly it's getting to the point where I'm going to take one of there options:
(1) Stick with old, quality games until I get burnt out on them
(2) Stick with open-source games which don't do this DRM shit, and only purchase commercial games from independent developers who won't risk this kind of behavior
(3) Find a new hobby. Probably the most healthy option anyway.
A payed demo with DRM, muhahahaha
So we now have to pay the biggest game company in the world to be an extremely valuable resource of thousands of QA testers with the largest variety of hardware. Something seems wrong here...
Sometimes to provide extra emphasis without using foul language? Could that be a good reason?
I wish I could say I'm amazed / outraged by this. As it is I'm barely surprised. As others have commented the pay-per-play revenue model seems to be the chosen policy towards which certain publishers appear to be incrementally heading. When I say 'certain publishers', EA and Ubisoft - I'm looking at you. Now we could argue endlessly about the merits of the "piracy is destroying the industry" argument that most such publishers put forwards as the sole defence of their actions, however I have the following observations: 1) This is the upper boundary of the sophistication of the publisher's argument. It isn't a sophisticated dialectic. 2) Most reasonably intelligent gamers are more than able to clearly see through this argument and identify the PPP model as a barely concealed attempt at revenue maximisation. 3) Does everyone remember a few years ago when the average price of a PC game increased from £30 to £35? It hurt a bit, but most players (and thus customers) ultimately accepted it because they were still being treated with a modicum of respect by the publishers. No attempt was made to masquerade the price increase as anything else. 4) My personal view is that the efforts to which developers go to create the games that we love requires renumeration. Games do and should cost money. OK, I think the price for games is a little too high, but I do not and will not pirate games. However 5) I think that what disgusts most players is being treated like thieves by publishing houses who's cynical view appears to be that their customers are insuficiently intelligent to recognise when they're being fleeced by an unsophisticated but greedy revenue model and are simmultaneously subject to arbitrary and draconian restrictions on the use of software that they legitimately purchased. I'd like to single out Stardock as an exemplary publisher. No DRM, not even disk checks. Which is why I've happily and enthusiastically purchased ALL the DLC for Sins of a Solar Empire. Isn't this exactly how we want developers / publishers to behave? They should be enthusiastically supported...
I am so tired of hearing from gaming companies about how the next generation will be cheaper and more stable. Blah they just keep looking for an excuse to rape my wallet. Remember how CD and DVD technology were supposed to make games cheaper? Anything to make a buck. I now have to pay them for the privilege of what sounds like game testing something you used to get paid for or at least some perks.
Chris Sheppard
I mean Microsoft have sucessfully sold broken consoles to games for the latest 4 years, and they even queued by to pay to buy replacement broken consoles.
Consumers are idiots, gamers in particular, so why no cash in?
The more customers they drive to pirate their software, the better as far as I'm concerned. Then we'll see them in front of congress wining how the evil bit torrent is steeling their monies!
So if there is a short demo that costs zero dollars, and a long demo that costs 15 dollars, and a full game that costs 60 dollars... where do the consumers get screwed exactly? Everyone acts like they're being forced to buy the $15 version. Similarly, Apple has an iPhone, an iPad, and a desktop. Some people want more, some want less. I personally won't buy many $15 mini-games but who knows, some might. It's similar to the ZOMG reactions people have about on-the-disc DLC. It's not like you're FORCED to pay more for the full game; it's up to you to decide what a "full" game means. To me, Bioshock 2 is a full game as-bought. The DLC they can charge extra for, I don't care- it's not like they're taking away something by having ANOTHER option to buy. If a car company develops two cars at about the same time, nobody would be pissed if they bought one car and found out later that oh noez the 4WD version was developed at the same time and then claim they want both cars.
This is only slightly less disgusting than Ubisoft's DRM scheme.
I believe I speak for many gamers when I say that I wouldn't play most of their finished games for free, so good luck trying to sell me a demo.
...not a demo at all. That's paying to be a beta tester.
Definitely paid beta. FUCK EA. Where's Infinity Ward when you need em? Oh wait...
Yeah, that'll stop piracy! Way to use your thinkin' caps, EA!
i always wanted to pay for semi-broken beta versions
From what I've seen recently, EA had been doing much better in terms of games. They made my "do not buy" list a few years back with a multitude of lackluster and overpriced games, but they seemed to be turning over a new leaf. With this news, I guess not. [FYI, Ubisoft is the only other publisher/developer on that list atm]
They killed Command & Conquer, one of my favorite series ever. Outside of that, the only games I see on their released lists that I actually like are Crysis and Mass Effect. Everything else doesn't even interest me. So if I'm essentially a non-customer right now, how exactly is charging me to play demos of their games a good method for acquiring me as a customer ?
All I see here is a greater prevalence to shopping with companies like Valve. Anybody think TF2 would have done well if they charged you for each update ? Would anybody be playing it ? And instead, they have tens of thousands of players every single day. More than I can say for most games that are almost 3 years old. I just hope they maintain the same attitude with their customers in the future.
The reason is, that with EA games, you usually lose interest by the time the demo is over. So they though to themselves: Better get a little money, than none at all.
Of course it won’t work, since it’s still too expensive for the value.
Valve did it right. Lower the prices by 75%, and you get so many buyers that you make MORE profit.
In a couple of years Valve will be offered to buy them, but decline, when they get sold to some strange holding company.
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
I purchased BattleField Bad Company 2 three weeks ago. Of the desired 25 or so times I have tried to connect for online play I have been able to play perhaps 4 times over those three weeks.
If their beta demos are worse than this gaming experience then they will deserve what they get.
In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
I wonder if this $15 "demo" is going to be in addition to, or instead of, a traditional free demo.
Because, you know, I could kinda see it not feeling like a rip-off if it was in addition to a demo. Play a one- or two-level demo that convinces me this game will be Awesome, then have a chance to spend $15 for a handful of bonus levels that'll add on to the entire game? Not so bad. Or play a free single-level demo, then spend $15 for, like, the first three or four levels of the game, with a discount off of buying the whole thing? Not so bad either.
But having to spend $15 for the privilege of playing what would normally be a free download? Fuck that. I'll go take that $15 and buy a few awesome indy games instead.
(admittedly I swore off paying $50-60 for AAA titles that eat 40+ hours of my life to finish anyway, so I'm not exactly EA's target audience here.)
egypt urnash minimal art.
So you're saying I should have gotten MW2 for $15!
(Mod it funny; anyone who owns the game knows it took 5 hours)
I can see paying $5 for 3 - 5 hours of potentially buggier than usual game content. $10-$15 is just ridiculous. I'll wait until the full game, thank you.
What the headline says:
"EA To Charge For Game Demos"
What the article says:
- None of the proposals call for charging consumers for traditionally free game demos.
"I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)
Have you played any EA games this century? While I'm enjoying their current paid beta, they've been at it for a while.
--- Do you believe in the day?
If nobody buys the demos, then they won't figure out how shitty and bug-ridden the full version will likely be.
Subject says it all
Linux modi 2.6.26-2-parisc
What they are proposing is not a demo. The headline on Gamasutra even indicates that this is a form of DLC (DownLoadable Content): "EA To Release Paid DLC Prior To Packaged Game Launches". If I read things right this sounds very much like American monthly comic books and the "zero" issue or in terms of a TV series more of a pilot. There is also an update in the article indicating "None of the proposals call for charging consumers for traditionally free game demos."
I have seen other companies release semi-episodic games, where the first one is a taster to let the developers know whether it is worth continuing the development. What EA is doing is not really new. Its just being badly presented here.
Once again the only real flame bait is the /. summary. I am not new here, I just keep on kidding myself that it might be otherwise ;)
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
I could see myself buying an extended demo if and only if the purchase price went towards full version (somewhere near 100%). There have been plenty of games I've enjoyed 5-10 hours, purchased the damn thing, yet never get around to finishing. Were I able to purchase a reasonable portion (i.e more than 50-60%), with the option to unlock the entire game, I'd be less inclined to download the full game for free.
I paid $5 for a preorder of Battlefield:Bad Company 2 simply so I could play the PS3 demo. I had no intention of actually buying the game later, so I guess that technique works pretty well. And honestly, I did easily get $5 of value from it...
I ended up purchasing the game in the end, but the thing is I was willing to pay $5 for a pretty full-featured demo version.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I have been playing pirated copies on the C64... on the Amiga... on 8- and 16-bit video games consoles... on Windows... and even on Linux using Wine... I will stop doing that now and just play some sweet Q3A now and then... The only original I ever bought and it is banned in Germany (some Nazi-censorship-nostalgy for the sake of the children i guess)...
sounds like some arcade pricing ways where some games make you pay more then one time / pay the price to start more then one time to play full game and that happens even if you don't die. Why not just go the old say of having a full game + some add one packs at a later time.
A demo is for me to evaluate a game prior to purchase. If I have to purchase the demo, then it's not a demo (short for demonstration).
Call it what it is... X lite (replace X with name of game).
When all is said and done, nothing changes...
The deal was you got an early taste of the beta. But wait! there's more! They (EA) also charged my credit card right away. The game was utter garbage. 10 days later when I canceled my pre-order the charge was reversed on my cc. This, among other things, was a way to get the interest on hundrreds of thousands of dollars for weeks before the game was even shipped. Why isn't this a scandal?
And I enjoyed it. No, it didn't have a particularly large amount of content unless you count GT:TV.
I also played Torchlight and really enjoyed it.
I don't see how this has to do anything with my comments. It's still nickle and dime time. Just because a particular "preview" edition of a game is good doesn't mean we won't see massive nickle and diming going forward. Heck, we have it already!
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
You're making two critical assumptions, both incorrect.
1. Making games is unprofitable. You are assuming EA is not making money, this is false. EA is making money, they are just looking for ways to make more money.
2. If EA makes more money it will go towards production, not shareholder dividends. This is a very shaky assumption considering EA is very interested in increasing it's share price, not it's risk.
Your also kind of making the assumption that more money equals better games. Given EA's current level of quality I'm hesitant to say EA making more games is a good thing(TM) (gems like BC2 may sneak through but they still have massive bugs).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
why not go the old way all the way and equip the consoles with a coin slot?
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Good one EA! You really got me with that one.... excuse me while I catch my breath....
BWAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.....
Ok, seriously EA?
Guess I can add "Game Demos" to my list of EA products not to buy (the rest of the list being "DLC" and "Shitty Games").
I already have.. The nice thing is, I have the key to take the quarters out afterwards!
"Be grateful for what you have. You may never know when you may lose it."
A demo was worth playing. They had at least 6 complete levels (duke3d), and sometimes more than 8 (doom). These days though, I guess more attention is devoted to developing anti-customer malware to pack in the game, rather than making the games better themselves. I've even heard of some cases where game demos included the capitalistic malware in them.
We're talking about demos which are longer than Portal here.
Yo Dawg, I heard you like to try before you buy....
Thank you EA for stooping to a new low. Now that want to charge people to be in BETA. At this point I don't think this company can whore itself out more. It's what happens when marketing doosh bags take over a company. Truely sad.
I'm sorry.. my mind read:
"EA To Charge For Game Demos"
as:
"EA puts shotgun barrel in mouth and happily pulls trigger".
I guess this will encourage more people to have "full-version trials".
$15 for the pc version similar for xbox 360 and ps3, not really a full game but several maps and people enjoy it for what it is.
Once you've got a decent engine underneath your game, re-skinning it gives you a chance to sell it over and over and over. And re-selling what you already got is profitable, usually.
Make a few hooks so you can keep adding cool stuff to get past just new uniforms and different buildings, and you've got a franchise-builder. Which is good, cause it usually takes a long time to build a substantially new and improved engine.
Battlefield in the 1942->Vietnam->BF2 progression 'seemed' a lot like that.
I would expect as many game writers can will re-use their engines to make different games. How innovative this is, I dunno. If all you get is new maps, weapon shapes, and flags, woop-de-do.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Why not just release the long pay "demo" as the game and release the rest of the game as paid dlc
It's not bad for the money, but if you play the free version of Torchlight quickly, you can exhaust the real content there. After that point (2 hours in), it becomes really repetitive. Are you getting $15 in content? Probably. But it's not a complete game by the measure of other games.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
It says four dog hours.
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
Right now beta keys for Starcraft 2 are selling for $200 on ebay. Part of me would rather pay Blizzard $15 than a scalper $200 to be in the beta. And what if you got $15 off the released game? I'm not sure it's a terrible deal.
(Yeah, I'm registered on my battlenet account. If you want to send me a key go ahead;))
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
A man walks into a GM dealership and cars are on display..
GM Sales Person "Hello sir I can see you like our latest 4 door"
Man "eeer yes it looks interesting"
Gm Sales Person " Would you like to sit in it and get a feel, if you like I could give you a test drive ?"
30 minutes later..
Man " the car was interesting but not quiet what I am looking for"
GM Salesperson " that's OK, if you just now pay our demo fee of $49.95 you can be on your way"
Man "WTF!!"
so when will they start making demos for the demos?
It sounds like a form of price differentiation. I know the products are not exactly the same, but it's a bit like selling regular coffee alongside fancy coffees with flavours, creme etc. for those that are willing to pay more. I think this is definitely one that the free market will sort out; you can still get the free demos and you can still buy the full game. If there are casual gamers that are willing to buy an in-between version; why not? Maybe those would never have bought a full version at $50-$60 to begin with
I remember that before the first Sims version, EA/Maxis was very unsure whether the title would be a hit. These long demos allow them to test the market a bit more thoroughly, and if EA finds that this strategy increases (through hype) or decreases (through cannibalization) their total revenue from their titles or franchises, they will probably adjust their strategy accordingly.
and the digital horse you road on...
I will NEVER pay for a sample I want to use to see if I want to buy something.
Pardon the probably redundant rant but I had to get that off my chest...
gee, so now they want us to PAY for their beta/demos?? so will PAYing for their demo/beta mean that they'll actually release a game that functions upon opening week... o sry, opening 2 weeks... o wait, what week are we in on Bad Company 2 and it still doesnt have full functionality? sorry, i'm a bitter BC2 PC user. and pls, no flames about "all games have bugs" blah - i've been playing pc games for the last 10+ yrs... and this has been one of, if not the worst, displays of broken functionality I've ever seen.
No the Iphone isn't. It is King of the Fart App.
I reserve the right to have a physical object so I can sell it later, and recover my money.
Apparently they don't get the point. They want us to buy. We don't want to. They need to wet our appetites with demos. No demo, no sale.
So, a Fremio? (Fremium + Demo)
Pretty soon EA will package USB-operated coin machines where you have to put a quarter in to play your game, and an EA representative comes by every month to collect the change.
I could see this working if the price paid for the PDLC could be applied towards the full version, but as many others have noted this is probably a pay-for-beta or nickel-and-dime scheme. Even if it's not, players are going to feel cheated, not try the demo, and not buy the game. Good job, EA
They're like the Microsoft of the video game industry. Good business models, but bad innovations.
f---ing joking! Is there no depth that EA will NOT sink to?
Holly shit, I haven't pay for any EA games for 10 years, and never I will. EA & UBI, worst publisher ever on this planet. The only demo I would like to pay for is GT5P on PS3, and actually I did pay for that.