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
Am I reading this wrong, or is EA essentially trying to establish a paid beta program?
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?
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.
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
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
Not just that - it's getting fanboys to pay to be beta testers.
EA has been off my list of companies to purchase from for years and years now. Shit like this does nothing to get them back on my list.
Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
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
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.
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."
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.
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
It hadn't hurt Microsoft and they charge full price for their betas.
Why bother
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.
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.
So you're saying I should have gotten MW2 for $15!
(Mod it funny; anyone who owns the game knows it took 5 hours)
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)
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 don't think it's a fantastic idea at all. The whole point of a demo is to give people a taste of the game so they buy it. But you always risk giving them so much they have time to get tired of it. When it's free you can just give them enough to get hooked, but people paying fifteen bucks for a demo are going to expect something a bit more substantial. I think this is going to cost them sales if it does anything.
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.
Nope. This cannot and will not cost them sales in any way. Only piracy does that, and if this appears to, it just means that piracy is on the rise...
I don't think it's a fantastic idea at all. The whole point of a demo is to give people a taste of the game so they buy it. But you always risk giving them so much they have time to get tired of it. When it's free you can just give them enough to get hooked, but people paying fifteen bucks for a demo are going to expect something a bit more substantial. I think this is going to cost them sales if it does anything.
I think it is fine, if, at the end of the day you can put that $10-15 toward the purchase of the full game and also use the save data from the demo in the full game. I would never replay the first few hours of a game, and I would also never pay for the same content twice.
However, I might pay for a "try before you buy" type of deal where you really do get to try the game, and not just play 5-10 minutes.