More to xbox live pricing than meets the eye?

http://kotaku.com/5594032/dead-rising-2-case-zero-hits-xbox-360-next-month/gallery/

............The downloadable game will cost 400 Microsoft Points and introduces players to Dead Rising 2's hero Chuck Greene. And that's a price that's not making Capcom any money, according to Keiji Inafune, Capcom's Head of R&D Management Group and Executive Producer for Dead Rising 2.

"We're not making any money on this," Inafune said during today's Comic-Con panel for the game. "I went against the company's wishes and went for the 400 MSP price point"...........

Other companys say that they are forced to charge to DL, other companys have been able to get DL on live free of charge.

makes you wonder whos really controller the price of DL, Mircosoft clearly has a price range for DL, but how some are free while most costs money is weird

Capcom giving stuff for "free"... something does not compute, seeing how they have incurred in some DLC BS moves.

400 is still better than what most DLC comes out at, like 1200....rly it was ment to be free?

it's sad that companies have to actually fight with M$ to be able to give gamers something for free.

even more sad is that I still see lemmings trying tosay that all game companies are the same and only want your money simply because they don't want to admit that M$ is the greediest gaming company to ever exist.

it's sad that companies have to actually fight with M$ to be able to give gamers something for free.

even more sad is that I still see lemmings trying tosay that all game companies are the same and only want your money simply because they don't want to admit that M$ is the greediest gaming company to ever exist.

hard_body79

Sony dont give away alot of free stuff either buddy.

Oh, I get it, they *could* have released it for free, but M$ would have charged them for it anyway...

here is the simple fact of it.

XBLA, DLC and other pricing has allways been a set standard and up to the developer. Microsoft doesn't want to pay for the Research of a thing, its testing, its hosting and bandwidth and see no return on it...Developers have a choice pass the cost onto consumers, or pay for it them selves. this is the case for XBLA,DLC and dedicated servers.

Its not like Microsoft says you have to charge money for this no matter what..no its If you do not want to pay then we are going to make the users pay for it, We are not going to sit here and take on your cost because you want the consumers to have it for free, if you want em to have it for free then you pay for it.

That is the simple and plain fact of xbox live pricing developers aren't forced to make the consumer pay for it no matter what, If they are unwilling to incure the cost of it then Microsoft is going to pass that cost onto consumers so as to pay for hosting, and testing and to make some profit. You get companies like epic, and others making wild claims...but but but but but Microsoft made us charge for it, we wanted to offer it for free...what you don't hear is...we wanted to offer it for free, but all so incur no cost our selves We felt Microsoft should pay for it all.

If companies are willing to put the money out there to make stuff free for users, or have dedicated servers then we will not get dedicated servers and or free items. Microsoft isn't going to host something, test it, and such on a service with so many users without seeing some sort of return no company would do that unless your seeing a return because of the actions no company is going to offer them for free.

http://kotaku.com/5594032/dead-rising-2-case-zero-hits-xbox-360-next-month/gallery/

............The downloadable game will cost 400 Microsoft Points and introduces players to Dead Rising 2's hero Chuck Greene. And that's a price that's not making Capcom any money, according to Keiji Inafune, Capcom's Head of R&D Management Group and Executive Producer for Dead Rising 2.

"We're not making any money on this," Inafune said during today's Comic-Con panel for the game. "I went against the company's wishes and went for the 400 MSP price point"...........

Other companys say that they are forced to charge to DL, other companys have been able to get DL on live free of charge.

makes you wonder whos really controller the price of DL, Mircosoft clearly has a price range for DL, but how some are free while most costs money is weird

gamer-adam1

If companies are willing to put the money out there to make stuff free for users, or have dedicated servers then we will not get dedicated servers and or free items. Microsoft isn't going to host something, test it, and such on a service with so many users without seeing some sort of return no company would do that unless your seeing a return because of the actions no company is going to offer them for free.WilliamRLBaker

it's sad that companies have to actually fight with M$ to be able to give gamers something for free.

even more sad is that I still see lemmings trying tosay that all game companies are the same and only want your money simply because they don't want to admit that M$ is the greediest gaming company to ever exist.

hard_body79

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]If companies are willing to put the money out there to make stuff free for users, or have dedicated servers then we will not get dedicated servers and or free items. Microsoft isn't going to host something, test it, and such on a service with so many users without seeing some sort of return no company would do that unless your seeing a return because of the actions no company is going to offer them for free.RavenLoud

Sony charge for themes aswell and gamerpics so dont start down that road as both are as bad as each other.

Wow so Capcom is just giving Microsoft Money.

Sony charge for themes aswell and gamerpics so dont start down that road as both are as bad as each other.Snugenz

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]Sony charge for themes aswell and gamerpics so dont start down that road as both are as bad as each other.RavenLoud

Well there's barely any free dynamic themes on PSN (Wipeout one is the only one that springs to mind). The other themes are barely more than some wallpapers and an icon set.

The NXE themes change alot more than the old guide themes did and there's still some free ones about.

I do love the community themes for the PS3 though. :D

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]If companies are willing to put the money out there to make stuff free for users, or have dedicated servers then we will not get dedicated servers and or free items. Microsoft isn't going to host something, test it, and such on a service with so many users without seeing some sort of return no company would do that unless your seeing a return because of the actions no company is going to offer them for free.RavenLoud

obviously I meant aren't so whats the problem? dont be the spelling police no one likes them.

Point Id like to make is that Sony charges for themes, avatars and gamerpics as well, Its not like the whole realm of themes on psn, avatars and such are free no the free stuff is in the minority just like on xbox live, I have over 200 free themes from Xbox live over the years as well as 500 or so gamerpics for free. Some of the themes are premium even. I have a few free themes and premo themes on psn.

Microsoft does not charge for each gig used, What they do is host most of the stuff Microsoft is the provider and controller of all the information on the service, If a developer wants to offer something for free that means Microsoft isn't able to charge for it then someone has to pay for that bandwidth usage, the hosting, the testing...ect If the developer doesn't want the consumer to incur the cost then they must pay for it, If not them Microsoft charges the consumer.

Psn the developer is charged regardless if its free, if its at cost...ect for each gig used. Not on Xbox Live the only time the developer or publisher is charged is if they want to offer the item for free and dont want the consumer to pay for it in anyway.

Its just a simple equation or 2.

Developer wants dlc for free and is willing to pay=its free for the consumer.
Developer wants the dlc for free but is unwilling to pay=charged to the consumer.

If these devs really wanted it to be free they wouldn't get as tight in the butt as soon as someone asked for money. Epic is a big tightwad in the end they complain they wanted it to be free, But in the end weren't willing to pay for it...much like they have horrible net code, they know they have horrible netcode and allways have so instead of paying for dedicated servers they kept it Client server model.

In that situation epic is the one at fault they can act all buddy buddy with the consumer and wanting them to have free but its pretty much proof that they knew their netcode was complete trash so dedicated servers could have fixed that problem but they didn't want to pay, And didn't want to pay for the content being free.

there is no such thing as a free lunch someone has to incur cost.

I remember the good ol days of live, where $49.99 would get me Online Multiplayer and Free Addition Game Content. I just recently got back on xbox live. Didn't mind coughing up the 50 bucks, really. However, realizing that I had to spend an addition $20 just to properly play the games I wanted to play--well that didn't sit too well. Why is it that Sony can charge nothing and essentially give the same service? Now that money is being spent within xbox live, shouldn't the base service be free?

I remember the good ol days of live, where $49.99 would get me Online Multiplayer and Free Addition Game Content. I just recently got back on xbox live. Didn't mind coughing up the 50 bucks, really. However, realizing that I had to spend an addition $20 just to properly play the games I wanted to play--well that didn't sit too well. Why is it that Sony can charge nothing and essentially give the same service? Now that money is being spent within xbox live, shouldn't the base service be free?

Heirren

I's safe to say that the Dreamcast and PC did something right: Free DLC.

[QUOTE="hard_body79"]

it's sad that companies have to actually fight with M$ to be able to give gamers something for free.

even more sad is that I still see lemmings trying tosay that all game companies are the same and only want your money simply because they don't want to admit that M$ is the greediest gaming company to ever exist.

Snugenz

Sony dont give away alot of free stuff either buddy.

[QUOTE="Heirren"]

I remember the good ol days of live, where $49.99 would get me Online Multiplayer and Free Addition Game Content. I just recently got back on xbox live. Didn't mind coughing up the 50 bucks, really. However, realizing that I had to spend an addition $20 just to properly play the games I wanted to play--well that didn't sit too well. Why is it that Sony can charge nothing and essentially give the same service? Now that money is being spent within xbox live, shouldn't the base service be free?

genaroll

Really? Because the game I spent 1600ms points on was Halo 3. Two map packs cost $20. I am enjoying them, though.:)

400 points? I wonder how long the DLC is.Stevo_the_gamer

Sorry if your paying 50 dollars a year, you should not have to pay for anything else.......but lemmings like playing follow the leader so let them.

Edit:dont bring psn + into this, they dont charge for playing online

Sorry if your paying 50 dollars a year, you should not have to pay for anything else.......but lemmings like playing follow the leader so let them.

Edit:dont bring psn + into this, they dont charge for playing online

Syn_Valence

Microsoft wants money for virtually any form of DLC. I remember Gabe Newell petitioning Microsoft to let the Team Fortress 2 be free on the Xbox 360.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="hard_body79"]

it's sad that companies have to actually fight with M$ to be able to give gamers something for free.

even more sad is that I still see lemmings trying tosay that all game companies are the same and only want your money simply because they don't want to admit that M$ is the greediest gaming company to ever exist.

reyad-u

Sony dont give away alot of free stuff either buddy.

There's been free DLC and free stuff given out on XBL aswell.

here is the simple fact of it.

XBLA, DLC and other pricing has allways been a set standard and up to the developer. Microsoft doesn't want to pay for the Research of a thing, its testing, its hosting and bandwidth and see no return on it...Developers have a choice pass the cost onto consumers, or pay for it them selves. this is the case for XBLA,DLC and dedicated servers.

Its not like Microsoft says you have to charge money for this no matter what..no its If you do not want to pay then we are going to make the users pay for it, We are not going to sit here and take on your cost because you want the consumers to have it for free, if you want em to have it for free then you pay for it.

That is the simple and plain fact of xbox live pricing developers aren't forced to make the consumer pay for it no matter what, If they are unwilling to incure the cost of it then Microsoft is going to pass that cost onto consumers so as to pay for hosting, and testing and to make some profit. You get companies like epic, and others making wild claims...but but but but but Microsoft made us charge for it, we wanted to offer it for free...what you don't hear is...we wanted to offer it for free, but all so incur no cost our selves We felt Microsoft should pay for it all.

If companies are willing to put the money out there to make stuff free for users, or have dedicated servers then we will not get dedicated servers and or free items. Microsoft isn't going to host something, test it, and such on a service with so many users without seeing some sort of return no company would do that unless your seeing a return because of the actions no company is going to offer them for free.

WilliamRLBaker

gonna have to disagree on that one... in terms of investing money to strengthen your platform and gain market share... giving developers an outlet to offer free DLC seems like a really easy way to add value to the 360 for little cost. Why deter devs from giving your console content only to go out and spend millions acquiring devs and paying them to create you content?

if you are in the business of paying people to create content, charging people who are willing to provide free content seems ridiculous.

EDIT: it would be if someone had an ad for a free 360 and asked the person to only pay shipping, and then you were like "whoa whoa, you gotta pay that shipping charge buddy! im not gonna incur that cost, ill just go buy a brand new 360 then"

Microsoft wants money for virtually any form of DLC. I remember Gabe Newell petitioning Microsoft to let the Team Fortress 2 be free on the Xbox 360.

Vesica_Prime

theres gotta be more to that than what the devs are telling us, because other devs have been able to get free stuff

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

Microsoft wants money for virtually any form of DLC. I remember Gabe Newell petitioning Microsoft to let the Team Fortress 2 be free on the Xbox 360.

gamer-adam1

theres gotta be more to that than what the devs are telling us, because other devs have been able to get free stuff

I also think there has to be something to this. It really seems ridiculous that MS would turn away free content for their platform. The more free content they have the more it will drive console sales and ultimately increase their market share... which is the whole point of being in the console business.

why spend money on devs to create something like 1 vs 100 and offer it for free... but not allow devs willing to work for free give you content.

[QUOTE="gamer-adam1"]

[QUOTE="Vesica_Prime"]

Microsoft wants money for virtually any form of DLC. I remember Gabe Newell petitioning Microsoft to let the Team Fortress 2 be free on the Xbox 360.

markinthedark

theres gotta be more to that than what the devs are telling us, because other devs have been able to get free stuff

I also think there has to be something to this. It really seems ridiculous that MS would turn away free content for their platform. The more free content they have the more it will drive console sales and ultimately increase their market share... which is the whole point of being in the console business.

why spend money on devs to create something like 1 vs 100 and offer it for free... but not allow devs willing to work for free give you content.

ya just doesnt make sense. microsoft isnt all about charging people over and over. I wonder if we will ever see what microsoft does behind the closed doors, that they charge for everything. I think devs have more controller over pricing and live than we are told

I stopped renewing my Xbox Live subscription awhile ago...I didn't really enjoy the online community.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]Microsoft don't want content being given away for free. They don't want users to have online access to games they already paid for for free. They don't want updates to games that add content (ala The Orange Box and Left 4 Dead 1/2, Halo maps) being given away for free. - This shouldn't surprise you, this is a norm in console gaming in general. Sony is only a step above actually giving you access to game content you paid for on the disk.dotWithShoes

The artists, designers and programmers do make money from free content released for their game? How. Well simple, it sells more copies of the actual damn game. This is a concept that has been around since the dawn of online gaming, and still works to this day. It also curbs pre-owned sales (mas effect 2's cerberus network for instance).

Want the best example of it? Team Fortress 2. The game was released in 2007 and still sees more sales with every update (it has almost been 3 years since it's release and it plays like a new release), on the niche spectrum you have ArmA 2 and it's patches adding additional content.

As for Burnout Paradise's free updates, while I'm not sure how Criterion dealt with Sony and Microsoft there was only a few free updates; adding those bikes. After that it pretty much dived into paid DLC territory.

I'm sure developers like Bungie would release their map packs for free if they had the chance, Microsoft stood in their way, compared to publishers like Activision who readily take advantage of dlc pricing.