Should Be Free

The gaming world at the moment is seemingly full of whiners complaining that X 'Should Be Free' or this is too expensive and should be cheaper.

If you examine the phrase 'Should Be Free' what are they actually trying to say. 'Should be free' from a moral obligation? Well, I can understand education 'should be free' or healthcare 'should be free'. Fine, you can realistically argue those things should be free from a moral perspective but video game services or add-on game content?! I think not.

What they are actually saying if you expand that sentance is, X should be free because I want it. Hardly a compelling argument is it? In fact, it's very childish. Most people get to an age where they realise many things in life are financially out of their reach or simply too expensive to be a sensible purchase given their means and they accept this and stop whining about it.

Porsche 911s should be cheaper because I want one.

The sole purpose of a business is to make profit, if you understand this what is there to whine about? Sure, it's a fair comment to say, I think X should be cheaper because that would actually end up be beneficial for the company in the long run, I think they would make more profit. I think this about the Video Marketplace, I think dropping the price would actually cause a significant increase in customers. Lets be honest though, Microsoft has more than a few highly paid people to set prices for this type of thing and I'm darn sure they know more than I do on the matter so I probably am wrong on that one.

There are several pieces of DLC for example that while I could afford to pay for them, they're just not money well spent to me. I make financial decisions like this every day of my adult life, I don't feel compelled to whinge every time I come across something I would like but either I flat out cannot afford or don't deem good value.

I'm sure pretty much everyone will reach this point in their life but lets hurry it a long a little shall we, for the sake of internet boards all over the world ;)

What you're entitled to when you purchase software

Some people simple do not understand what they are paying for when they buy software so get angry when they don't get what they think they are entitled to.

You ARE entitled to:

• To play the game as indicated on the packaging

You are NOT entitled to:

• Features/content not part of the original game, be they on the disc or not, created after the release or even before. You do not 'own' all the code on the disc, merely a right to use it in it's described form.
• Play online multiplayer for game without the appropriate service. Just because the content for online play is on the disc, you have NOT paid for the right to use it.

pretty soon we'll buy a game for $50 and it will have the single player and multiplayer modes and the single player mode will have the tutorial already unlocked!!! .... THEN once you beat the tutorial, for the low low price of $5 you can download the first level, beat it and for only another $5 the second level of the story mode is all yours! rinse and repeat for 10-50 levels. but man once you get to that last level, you better be prepared to pay $15 because not only is it the last level it's also the ending of the game and they know you want to watch that!

PSN is not free it's simply paid for by a different buisness model.

There's no such thing as Free.

The Wi-Fi adapter in the PS3 maybe a nice inclusion but it costs Sony money and is not always necessary as in my case where my 360 sits next to my router.

Online play should be free end of story(not counting MMOs). Its been free since PC games. MS thought hey lets charge for online on our console people would pay for it and well they were right. If a game say it has online play on the box I shouldint have to dish out extra cash after paying 60 bucks. It would be like buying a sandwhich and after you pay for it in order to eat the other half you have to give the company extra cash.

Online play should be free

finalfantasy94

1. Again, should be free because I don't want to pay for it. Hardly a constructive argument is it?

2. You didn't pay for the right to use the online portion of the game when you purchased it, this is clear on the box I believe. How can you complain if you knew what you were paying for.. you did know this right?

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Online play should be free

speedsix

1. Again, should be free because I don't want to pay for it. Hardly a constructive argument is it?

2. You didn't pay for the right to use the online portion of the game when you purchased it, this is clear on the box I believe. How can you complain if you knew what you were paying for.. you did know this right?

It says you have to pay to play online on 360,but others no. Look I know your trying to make the fee for playing games online on 360 look fair,but its just not. Hell thats like saying what capcom just did was right. The contant was on the disk and I had to pay 5 dollars to unlock it. Was it right nope. So I didint pay for the mode. Its like paying extra money to unlock a diffculty setting.

I agree with this topic. You guys at the least are lucky enough to have stuff "your are entitled" to for free.

Back here where I am, we pay 100,000pesos per school year. thats roughly $2,000 a year. and considering theres 3 of us, 2years of prep, 7years of grade school and 4 years of highschool(yeah we have a different system) well you guys get the point. (I know there are public schools from where I am, but they are NOTHING compared to public schools in places like the US or so.)

Then healthcare, a lot of people I know have relatives dying because they do not afford to have X operation, X medicine etc. so yeah.

I agree with this topic. You guys at the least are lucky enough to have stuff "your are entitled" to for free.

Back here where I am, we pay 100,000pesos per school year. thats roughly $2,000 a year. and considering theres 3 of us, 2years of prep, 7years of grade school and 4 years of highschool(yeah we have a different system) well you guys get the point. (I know there are public schools from where I am, but they are NOTHING compared to public schools in places like the US or so.)

Then healthcare, a lot of people I know have relatives dying because they do not afford to have X operation, X medicine etc. so yeah.

kevinolsson305

Your talking about school and healthcare and were just talking about the gaming world. I think theres a big difference there.

It says you have to pay to play online on 360,but others no. Look I know your trying to make the fee for playing games online on 360 look fair,but its just not. Hell thats like saying what capcom just did was right. The contant was on the disk and I had to pay 5 dollars to unlock it. Was it right nope. So I didint pay for the mode. Its like paying extra money for a hard mode.

finalfantasy94

The only reason you think it's not 'fair' is because you thought you were paying for something you weren't.

People have a really difficult time grasping the concept of software licenses, you are not paying for all the code on the disc to do with as you please. For an example, you can download trial software for your PC for free, all the content is sitting there on your hardrive but you still can't use it until you pay for a license to unlock it, that's the way it is. When you download a trial game of XBLA/PSN, you're downloading the full amount of code but you still aren't entitled to play it until you pay to unlock it. The fact the content is on the disc or not is completely irrelevant, being on the disc just saves downloading it.

[QUOTE="kevinolsson305"]

I agree with this topic. You guys at the least are lucky enough to have stuff "your are entitled" to for free.

Back here where I am, we pay 100,000pesos per school year. thats roughly $2,000 a year. and considering theres 3 of us, 2years of prep, 7years of grade school and 4 years of highschool(yeah we have a different system) well you guys get the point. (I know there are public schools from where I am, but they are NOTHING compared to public schools in places like the US or so.)

Then healthcare, a lot of people I know have relatives dying because they do not afford to have X operation, X medicine etc. so yeah.

finalfantasy94

Your talking about school and healthcare and were just talking about the gaming world. I think theres a big difference there.

Yuh I noticed that haha anyway,

What RE5 did was both wrong and not wrong(I cant say good) at the same time.

The thing you guys downloaded was not a code, 1.8mb is big considering thats just all text. why is it all text? because everything model wise (character, maps, textures, etc) are being reused from other parts of the game. its not ideal having to re download a chris redfield when you can easily use whats in the game.

Nor what capcom did was good, considering this was released only a few weeks after RE5 was released. They shouldve thought of it earlier and assigned another person/team to work on it. Or push back re5 just a bit so they can release it with. But then again, money comes first so yeah ;D

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

It says you have to pay to play online on 360,but others no. Look I know your trying to make the fee for playing games online on 360 look fair,but its just not. Hell thats like saying what capcom just did was right. The contant was on the disk and I had to pay 5 dollars to unlock it. Was it right nope. So I didint pay for the mode. Its like paying extra money for a hard mode.

speedsix

The only reason you think it's not 'fair' is because you thought you were paying for something you weren't.

People have a really difficult time grasping the concept of software licenses, you are not paying for all the code on the disc to do with as you please. For an example, you can download trial software for your PC for free, all the content is sitting there on your hardrive but you still can't use it until you pay for a license to unlock it, that's the way it is. When you download a trial game of XBLA/PSN, you're downloading the full amount of code but you still aren't entitled to play it until you pay to unlock it. The fact the content is on the disc or not is completely irrelevant, being on the disc just saves downloading it.

SO your basicly saying we are paying 60 dollars for a demo. Doesint make it sound any less worse. I mean when we download a trail may it be for a game demo or program demo we are not paying for anything. So yea its understandible we cant use everything,but then making us pay for the full program then saying nope even after paying full price you have to pay just a bit more to unlock such and such is just underhanded. Even if you outright saying "even though you paid in full for this your going to have to pay a bit more in order to get the full use of this program" its like pointing and laughing at the consumer.

if there are ads on the service regardless of whether you pay for online or not, multiplayer should be free

i can play the same multiplat on my pc for free, why should i shell out for some half assed service ontop of the $10 console premium

with your logic, i should be paying for every mod i play too

Hey RE5 had a solid single player (Thats my opinion) and the RE franchise has never (correct me if im wrong, since I recall a ps2 resi having online but I cant confirm) done online before. And the multiplayer is just a bonus feature, you dont need it to fully enjoy the game. Heck people would rather go play the story via online coop than kick each others butt in multiplayer.

why should i shell out for some half assed service ontop of the $10 console premium

voxware00

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

So true. The "should be free" attitude makes me think that some people actually believe that companies owe something to them. They are companies. They offer a product. If you like it, you get it. If not, not. There nothing more. No one, nore the companies nor the gamers have any "moral obligation" here.IronBass

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

why should i shell out for some half assed service ontop of the $10 console premium

speedsix

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

Have you ever watched TV? You might be surprised to find out that people get content for free because they're subjected to ads

You undervalue yourself as an audience

and why am I footing the bill for a developer to work on multiplayer when I don't get that content? I should get a reduced cut since they aren't working as hard on my package.. we get a flat flee when there should be packaged pricing

I guess you paid twice for your copy of America's Army as well to support the business model

I don't understand people's feelings of entitlement when it comes to luxury items.

There is no rightness or wrongness to it. If you like it and think it's worth the money, then pay. If not, then don't. The provider will make adjustments based on that, not on the amount of internet whining.

And it's not like people are being misled or otherwise deceived. Multiplayer requirements are rightere there on the back of the game box and online and in print mags. Prices are listed in the download marketplace or at the counter. There's no mystery or guesswork. People know what they're getting into. There' simply no excuse.

If there's any disappointment post-purchase, the culpability lies squarely on the shoulders of the consumer.

So you think its right that people get charged for MP that never use it? They don't have a right to get value for their money? PoppaGamer

Games with a multiplayer option have existed before the Nes. And they have always costed the same price, even if somebody didn't use that option.

Complaining about it makes little sense.

There aren't such things as "right" when talking about games. There's simply a company offering a product, and the consumer accepting it or not.

Like I said above, if the priced the games with and without MP, that makes more sense. But they don't. People get screwed.PoppaGamer

If somebody buys a game for its multiplayer, he must be sure he can play it. If you buy an offline multiplayer game, you'd need an extra controller. If you bought a GBA game for the multiplayer, you had to buy Link Cable.

If somebody don't have/want to buy those things, it's his fault.

Games are sold as a package, there's nothing you can do about that. If you find the value on it, you get, if not, then no.

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

why should i shell out for some half assed service ontop of the $10 console premium

speedsix

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

Cause we are human and as human we have opinions on certain things that we like to express and give our thoughts on. Thats line right there is basicly like saying "why does SW exisit then." I mean people like me think PS3 is worth the cash and others dont think its worth the cash thefore they deabte/argue about why its not worth it while I say why I think its worth it. Is it really going anywhere no. Its just something to talk about and proboly go in a little deeper. This feels like another is live worth the money topic. Just in a different outfit. Some people are going to agree it is while others like me wont.

Such an entitled topic, I made a point of discussion, now don't bother to discuss it. Agree or remain silent

[QUOTE="speedsix"]

[QUOTE="voxware00"]

why should i shell out for some half assed service ontop of the $10 console premium

finalfantasy94

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

Cause we are human and as human we have opinions on certain things that we like to express and give our thoughts on. Thats line right there is basicly like saying "why does SW exisit then." I mean people like me think PS3 is worth the cash and others dont think its worth the cash thefore they deabte/argue about why its not worth it while I say why I think its worth it. Is it really going anywhere no. Its just something to talk about and proboly go in a little deeper. Just like how I have the feeling this will end up going nowhere.

Fine. Then here's my contribution to the "discussion".

Whining and complaining don't matter one iota unless you actually DO something about it. Otherwise, it's all just hot air.

If you pay for something you don't think is worth it, then you negated any point you may have had.

I think it's a good thing that consumers take a stand and say things like "should be free", by doing so often and long enough, these companies might be pressured to lower the price or actually make it free. Although I wish DLCs should be cheaper, I have no problems in buying them. In the end it's just the way business works.

Such an entitled topic, I made a point of discussion, now don't bother to discuss it. Agree or remain silent

voxware00

Or point out any factual inaccuracies or logical fallicies that weaken the point.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="speedsix"]

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

VoodooHak

Cause we are human and as human we have opinions on certain things that we like to express and give our thoughts on. Thats line right there is basicly like saying "why does SW exisit then." I mean people like me think PS3 is worth the cash and others dont think its worth the cash thefore they deabte/argue about why its not worth it while I say why I think its worth it. Is it really going anywhere no. Its just something to talk about and proboly go in a little deeper. Just like how I have the feeling this will end up going nowhere.

Fine. Then here's my contribution to the "discussion".

Whining and complaining don't matter one iota unless you actually DO something about it. Otherwise, it's all just hot air.

If you pay for something you don't think is worth it, then you negated any point you may have had.

I contribute by refusing to pay for live, if people would understand MS is having their cake and eating it too by forcing ads on the service, the price would be reduced or dropped entirely once everyone else just stopped paying for it, if even for a little while to send a message

just like complaining that the service DOES have the right to charge you doesn't matter either, don't discuss it if there is no need or difference being made right

"Or point out any factual inaccuracies or logical fallicies that weaken the point." but there is no point of discussion according to you, and complaining one way or another does nothing so why create a discussion.. any factual inaccuracy will just go ignored anyway

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"]TC, you whole point gets flushed down the tubes when you consider the pricing of games with MP. Why not have the SP cheaper and sell another version with the SP and MP for $60? You see, if someone goes and buys Halo 3, they are paying for the online MP. And then the people that want to pay online get double-dipped when adding Live fees. Either the people that only play SP's get screwed, or the people paying for Live fees are getting screwed. Either way, someone is getting screwed.[QUOTE="IronBass"]So true. The "should be free" attitude makes me think that some people actually believe that companies owe something to them. They are companies. They offer a product. If you like it, you get it. If not, not. There nothing more. No one, nore the companies nor the gamers have any "moral obligation" here.IronBass

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="speedsix"]

Herein lies the whole concept of 'buying stuff'. Because you knew when you purchased the game that this is how much it costs to play online.

X product costs Y. I think it's worth money, I buy it, if I don't, I don't. What is there to even discuss??

VoodooHak

Cause we are human and as human we have opinions on certain things that we like to express and give our thoughts on. Thats line right there is basicly like saying "why does SW exisit then." I mean people like me think PS3 is worth the cash and others dont think its worth the cash thefore they deabte/argue about why its not worth it while I say why I think its worth it. Is it really going anywhere no. Its just something to talk about and proboly go in a little deeper. Just like how I have the feeling this will end up going nowhere.

Fine. Then here's my contribution to the "discussion".

Whining and complaining don't matter one iota unless you actually DO something about it. Otherwise, it's all just hot air.

If you pay for something you don't think is worth it, then you negated any point you may have had.

lol then i guess SW has enough hot air for a million balloon's:P.

Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|MKLOL

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Online play should be free

speedsix

1. Again, should be free because I don't want to pay for it. Hardly a constructive argument is it?

2. You didn't pay for the right to use the online portion of the game when you purchased it, this is clear on the box I believe. How can you complain if you knew what you were paying for.. you did know this right?

[QUOTE="MKLOL"]Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|navyguy21

Comparing hardware to monthly or yearly fees is weak. PoppaGamer

It's not. In both cases you need an "extra" to play the multiplayer mode. If you want to pay for those extras is your choice.

And just because something's been done for a while doesn't make it right. And complaining and getting more to see the fault in something so that it changes is not pointless, dude. After those two statements, I guess no one should have complained about slavery and it shouldn't have been banned because it existed for so long. Right? PoppaGamer

*Sighs*

You're twisting my arguments far too much.

First, I clearly specified we were talking about gaming.

Secondly, I never said it was "right" or "wrong".

I said it was a common and accepted practice in this industry.

And it is.

I guess its cool if console makers just keep upping the price of their latest console (like Sony did with $600). It would be pointless to complain and hope for a change. :roll: .PoppaGamer

"Complaining" is always pointless. If you don't find the value of something, don't get it.

It had worked so far. Both MS and Sony have drastically reduce the price of their consoles.

The customer's wallet is the one that has the final word.

And it has spoken about most of this issues.

it should be free because: 1.The competition is providing it for free 2.Its a complimentary service 3.You need it for the full experience of some games 3.13((......cause were in recession(not really, but it would be nice to cut people a break)) 4.It should be cheaper or free because it should have been included with the game( DLC 1 month after the games release...wth? Just make a patch or something) 5.It should be free or cheaper because, maybe i dont want to pre-order at gamestop. Which should be good for publishers that i'm not supporting that corporation that has a horrible policy on trading in ga.es.Adrian_Cloud

[QUOTE="navyguy21"][QUOTE="MKLOL"]Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|MKLOL

[QUOTE="MKLOL"]

[QUOTE="navyguy21"] lol, how is that even remotely the same thing lol. Anyway, no one is DEFENDING the live fee, they are saying if you dont think its worth the money (as you seem to believe) then DONT PAY FOR IT, simply go to a free service. Just because YOU think its wrong doesnt mean that everyone else share your views. I own all 3 systems and i WISH sony would charge for PSN, that way they can fund the changes that need to be made to the service without budgeting for it(which is difficult in this economy) But thats just me, I play on live way more than PSN while PSN is free. Some people think its worth it, so they pay, you dont, so dont pay, it doesnt make YOU right and everyone else wrong.navyguy21

TC, you whole point gets flushed down the tubes when you consider the pricing of games with MP. Why not have the SP cheaper and sell another version with the SP and MP for $60? You see, if someone goes and buys Halo 3, they are paying for the online MP. And then the people that want to pay online get double-dipped when adding Live fees. Either the people that only play SP's get screwed, or the people paying for Live fees are getting screwed. Either way, someone is getting screwed.[QUOTE="IronBass"]So true. The "should be free" attitude makes me think that some people actually believe that companies owe something to them. They are companies. They offer a product. If you like it, you get it. If not, not. There nothing more. No one, nore the companies nor the gamers have any "moral obligation" here.PoppaGamer

[QUOTE="navyguy21"][QUOTE="MKLOL"] If live was the jesus of all Online I would agree, it's worth it! but when you have a normal Online system I don't see why I should play(And I have a 1 month trial from halo 2 so i didn't payed). And why is Windows Live free? windows live is way better then Xbox live IMHO! It's free because PC gamers don't pay for something they SHOULDN'T pay! well exept wow :lol:

MKLOL

[QUOTE="MKLOL"][QUOTE="navyguy21"] ok, so YOU dont think its worth it?? Then thats what you should say, but you have no right to tell someone that their idea of value is wrong, even if there IS a cheaper, or free alternative. Value is different from person to person. Suppose i attacked you for buying a PS3 because I didnt see the value in it?? Do think i would be right, or do you think you bought it because it was worth it to you??navyguy21

[QUOTE="VoodooHak"]

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Cause we are human and as human we have opinions on certain things that we like to express and give our thoughts on. Thats line right there is basicly like saying "why does SW exisit then." I mean people like me think PS3 is worth the cash and others dont think its worth the cash thefore they deabte/argue about why its not worth it while I say why I think its worth it. Is it really going anywhere no. Its just something to talk about and proboly go in a little deeper. Just like how I have the feeling this will end up going nowhere.

voxware00

Fine. Then here's my contribution to the "discussion".

Whining and complaining don't matter one iota unless you actually DO something about it. Otherwise, it's all just hot air.

If you pay for something you don't think is worth it, then you negated any point you may have had.

I contribute by refusing to pay for live, if people would understand MS is having their cake and eating it too by forcing ads on the service, the price would be reduced or dropped entirely once everyone else just stopped paying for it, if even for a little while to send a message

just like complaining that the service DOES have the right to charge you doesn't matter either, don't discuss it if there is no need or difference being made right

"Or point out any factual inaccuracies or logical fallicies that weaken the point." but there is no point of discussion according to you, and complaining one way or another does nothing so why create a discussion.. any factual inaccuracy will just go ignored anyway

That MS is having it's cake and eating it too is a judgment call on your part. It's an opinion that I and many others don't share, so no, it's not appropriate to state it as if it were some universal truth. It's not.

If you don't like ads, then maybe you should stop buying magazines or newspapers or riding public transportation or driving on roads or cable TV. There are ads everywhere. It's a flawed analogy, incorrectly applied.

[QUOTE="navyguy21"]

[QUOTE="MKLOL"]Well If the PS3 was free somewhere else and I bought it from 400$ from Amazon(example), they yes you would be right! I would've wasted 400$ on something that somewhere else is free! MKLOL

Nice to see another serviceman speaking the truth, navyguy21. If you don't like paying for a service, don't. That's the best, most personal message you can send. cainetao11