Advertisement
Download games too cheap - XNA dev News
Xbox 360 News by Tom Bramwell
The developer of XNA Community title Weapon of Choice has said that downloadable games like Bionic Commando: Rearmed and Castle Crashers are too cheap.
"I want to go on the record and say I feel like most downloadable games are under-priced," Nathan Fouts told MTV, describing 800 or 1200 Microsoft Points for the Capcom and Behemoth titles as "ridiculous to me".
Fouts, who used to work at Insomniac on Resistance: Fall of Man, released Weapon of Choice at the launch of the XNA Community Games channel with New Xbox Experience, and he admitted that he found Microsoft's restrictive pricing frustrating.
"Microsoft does not allow for user-defined price points like 799 Points or even 100-Point increments like 500, 600, 700, etc. For a bigger game like Weapon of Choice, only having two options, one of which is double the first option, makes the decision difficult," he explained to MTV.
He's hardly the first developer to complain about Microsoft's Xbox Live pricing structure, but it usually goes the other way. Earlier this year, for example, Jonathan Blow admitted that the main reason he accepted a 1200 Microsoft Points price for Braid was to avoid pissing off his new friends at Microsoft. He would have preferred a lower one.
Look out for some coverage of our favourite XNA Community Games later this week.
Advertisement
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Comments: 1-44 of 44 in total
Poster
|
0
The reason being, if you want to setup a company and release proper games, your supposed to do it via the proper method of going via microsoft, getting a development contract, getting a dev kit, paying them for certification, and maybe then you can pick your own price.
XNA is for indie and homebrew, small businesses hijacking it to release bigger budget games to avoid the initial cost offset don't get the right to moan about it. |
|
the_dudefather
25/11/08 @ 08:41
0
oh god no 799 games please, don't introduce retail bullshitting in virtual stores too
BC:R is probably one of the best value games on the service, with an ace soundtrack, loads of content and some great one liners and compared to some more expensive games on the service, I would almost say it was underpriced, but as a consumer who actually buys it, nothing is underpriced |
|
0
It's customary in business to understand your market and the conditions prevalent in that market. Essentially if you want to develop for the service then you should know the price points.
I also agree with Pirotic, if you want to develop full games then do so through the retail channels. Don't hijack the service and bring your 'wii' ethics into what has proven to be one of the few channels that supports the Jonathan Blow's of the world. I do not want shovelware that isn't good enough for a retail release infecting the channel.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 25/11/08 @ 09:15
|
|
kangarootoo
25/11/08 @ 09:27
0
"I want to go on the record and say I feel like most downloadable games are under-priced"
... is nonsense. A lot of the stuff on XBLA is tat, frankly. "Microsoft does not allow for user-defined price points like 799 Points or even 100-Point increments like 500, 600, 700, etc. For a bigger game like Weapon of Choice, only having two options, one of which is double the first option, makes the decision difficult," ... is quite true. The fixed pricing structure is stupid. A game on PSN can cost whatever is deemed to be appropriate, and so prices can be set that suit the content. Some games on XBLA are underpriced, many are overpriced. A flexible pricing structure might sort both of these issues. |
|
rhubarbandcustard
25/11/08 @ 09:29
0
If developers are unable to make 40K salary a year from making games then lower your prices and you'll sell more.
If developers are complaining because they would like to make more than a 40K salary then kindly fuck off from the videogames industry as you are a greedy money obsessed cunt. |
|
kangarootoo
25/11/08 @ 09:30
0
What is all this "hijacking" nonsense? None of this is for charity you know. All these channels are just sales channels, with associated costs and profits. Are we actually going to stop certain businesses using them, purely because we deem them to not be poor enough, or to not bleed enough for their art?
Highbrow facism is what I would call that. If you don't like the games by larger companies, don't buy them. Job done. Prevention of any sort is a step too far. |
|
kangarootoo
25/11/08 @ 09:32
0
"If developers are complaining because they would like to make more than a 40K salary then kindly fuck off from the videogames industry as you are a greedy money obsessed cunt."
So immature. Show me a single person earning less than £40k who would not like to earn more than £40k. Since when did that particular figure become the transition line between glowing angel and money obsessed c*nt? Everybody in every industry is just trying to get by, and some people earn more than others. If you one day earn more than £40k, will you be giving the difference to charity, to ensure you stay under that limit? Course bloody not. Grow up. |
|
rhubarbandcustard
25/11/08 @ 09:41
0
If people stopped being so flippant about greed maybe, just maybe, Western society wouldn't be in financial free fall right now.
Bankers screamed for higher and higher profits too. Look where that got us. |
|
phoenixology
25/11/08 @ 09:46
0
I just wish that when you purchase anything on the Xbox Marketplace that it would display the £sterling equivalent.
|
|
0
@rottm: Weapon of Choice is pretty good actually. It may look like an explosion in a GCSE art class, but if you can look beyond that it's a nice little run and gun shooter, with a bunch of neat ideas of its own. It really feels like the product of one person locking themselves in a room for a year, frantically coding and scribbling away (probably with crayons), refusing to throw away any idea or piece of artwork regardless of how daft it was, and then releasing what they had at the end. I like. Definitely worth playing the demo.
|
|
daz_john_smith
25/11/08 @ 10:29
0
Dizzy Wrote:
"Castle Crashers has 800K purchases. I am sure they made some nice money. " And yet they still haven't got around to releasing a goddamned patch to fix the gimped online modes. I can't believe they're actually charging for some of the community games, full stop. They're the sort of thing you can download or play online on the PC for free, and unfortunately I'm afraid to say that most are tat. Weapon of Choice is certainly one of the better ones along with the excellent Biology Battle and a couple of others, but unfortunately for them there's much better examples on XBLA, like for instance BC: Rearmed, Gemoetry Wars and Geometry Wars 2. |
|
Shakey_Jake33
25/11/08 @ 10:45
0
@MrED209 - Well the implication was that (in that foolish developer's mind), 800 is too cheap, but 1200 is too expensive, and they cannot choose to, for example, sell for 1000. So we can discount the 1600+ price points in this case.
The entire 'points' system discourages me from purchase, quite frankly. I might want a game at 800, but will be unwilling to purchase 1000 worth of Microsoft points to do so. The fact that the remaining 200 points can go towards future purchases just underlines what fools some people are - the very point is that you psychologically feel inclined to use those remaining points to get your moneys worth, and ultimately have to puchase more points in order to do so, and it's an endless cycle. On the other hand, being able to pay exact money on PSN is extremely appealing - that £4.95 game really is £4.95. |
|
The_Inquisitor
25/11/08 @ 10:48
0
Once you set the price you can't just raise it, so it's a bit late now to be complaining about it. The amount of people that complained about the brilliant Braid goes to show how paranoid consumers can be when it comes to being ripped off.
|
|
0
@Shakey_Jake33: As someone else mentioned - XNA games can only be 200, 400 or 800 points, and since Weapon of Choice costs 400, I'm guessing he'd rather have been a bit higher, but didn't want to go as high as 800. So rather than gouge people for more, he seems to have charged less than he'd have liked.
If you make a product you usually get the chance to set your own price, and it's up to your customers to say whether it's worth it or not. Being forced to choose between 2 price points, neither of which you feel is right isn't really ideal.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 25/11/08 @ 10:57
|
|
Shakey_Jake33
25/11/08 @ 11:26
0
^Oh I agree. Take what I said and adjust it for XNA prices (admittedly I focused on Live Arcade pricing). Maybe I foolishly fell for the increasingly tabloid-style Eurogamer headlines ("Download games too cheap!"?!). Indeed we'd all be better off with exact pricing... the points system serves to gourge developers, and take customers for fools.
|
|
Shakey_Jake33
25/11/08 @ 11:54
0
If you still have to puchase 500/1000/etc amount points in order to purchase a game that is 400/800/etc points of value, then it doesn't work out cheaper.
Good point about the points being discountable though. |
|
daz_john_smith
25/11/08 @ 12:10
0
Dizzy Wrote:
"The patch has been submitted to MS." Considering how long it's been out, how bad the online is and how many copies they've sold, it's taken them long enough. |
|
0
@Stoatboy
@rottm: Weapon of Choice is pretty good actually. If it doesn't have Christopher Walken dancing through it, I ain't interested. ;) I do agree with Fatboy Fouts that the pricing should be up to the individual, however, I believe he will be disappointed if he expects to make more money from raising the price. I think that, moving away from the "standard" pricing model will cause his potential customers to examine the game a lot more closely and to ask the dreaded but all-important question: is it worth an extra X MS points? @rhubarbandcustard If people stopped being so flippant about greed maybe, just maybe, Western society wouldn't be in financial free fall right now. Bankers screamed for higher and higher profits too. Look where that got us. Oh please, are you seriously trying to draw comparisons between Nathan Fouts trying to charge a few more MS points for a release and the shoddy practices that have lead to the credit crisis? That's pretty weak. I love the instant assumption that it's because he's greedy too, rather than just, I don't know, his desire to cover the development costs and ensure that he can continue to live in a house and eat whilst developing more games. |
|
rhubarbandcustard
25/11/08 @ 12:57
0
I've had a complete change of heart of this matter.
Minimum 2000 points for all XNA and XBLA titles. Games ARE too cheap. Can't afford higher prices? Tough. Get a better job. |
|
0
I thought the idea of these downloadable games was that they were cheap so people would impulse buy. I know since the 1200 pointers started appearing more regular I've been more selective in what I buy off Live. PSN on the other is a joy to impulse buy, spot on pricing! A fiver? Yes please! - although I notice a slight increase lately (£6.20 for a PS1 game, you joking Sony????)
|
|
SilentScream
25/11/08 @ 13:35
0
"the price of burgers these days is just far too cheap"
Says man selling burgers. That's 100% true, well put cyacomini. |
|
muscleblade
25/11/08 @ 14:14
0
"I want to go on the record and say I feel like most downloadable games are under-priced,"
+1 Retail games are too cheap too btw. Nes games was priced higher back in the eighties. |
|
spudsbuckley
25/11/08 @ 16:16
0
The majority of XBLA and PSN original games are usually just slightly jazzed up versions/clones of freely available browser-based Flash games so they're already far too expensive as far as i'm concerned.
|
|
0
"The reason being, if you want to setup a company and release proper games, your supposed to do it via the proper method of going via microsoft, getting a development contract, getting a dev kit, paying them for certification, and maybe then you can pick your own price.
XNA is for indie and homebrew, small businesses hijacking it to release bigger budget games to avoid the initial cost offset don't get the right to moan about it." Totally agree 100%, instead of complaining he should appreciate the fact hes been given a way to develop and release a game (and charge for it) and release it on xbox360 without having to buy a dev kit which will have cost him many thousands of dollars.. Someones solution was sell it on PSN... how exactly can these indy devs release their game on PSN? ala community games (it dies not exist on psn)
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 25/11/08 @ 16:49
|
|
InternetRed
25/11/08 @ 22:33
0
@Shakey_Jake33
PSN = XBLA in terms of purchasing. I bought the original Rayman, and had to put £5 into my 'wallet', to buy the £3.49 game. Now i have £1.41 or such in my wallet. Isn't that the same as having 200 points left over from a 1000 points purchase? |
|
0
All I read in the article was
Blah Blah Blah, I'm greedy and just want more money. I only do this for the money and that's the one thing I want more of. As long as I get my money and it's stops people from buying XBLA games I don't care I have my money already. $ $ < \_/
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 26/11/08 @ 09:52
|
Comments: 1-44 of 44 in total
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
