Cliff Bleszinski suggests a new sales strategy for the budget-strapped gamers.
I'm a Cliffy fan but I think lite versions of game would be do more harm than good for the industry. You have games that honestly are 60 dollars and the single player cam[aign is all gamers really care about. If you tell me I can pay 30 dollars for Bioshock or Uncharted 3 and then tell me I have to pay another 30 for the multi-player, the developer is NEVER going to see those multi-player dollars from me. Games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 sell incredibly because they have an aspect of the game that keeps people coming back. It's so good that people even bought Elite. Online passes in that case is pretty effective. But, I'm not going to lie, those passes have kept me from buying certain games used. It'll be interesting to see a publisher like EA release some stats as to how many people buy their passes after getting a game second hand. Evil
"the single player campaign is all gamers really care about." I don't know about that. In the case of Call of Duty most people would just buy the online portion then, no one ever plays the single player anyway.
I haven't read the article, but if it's as simple as selling sp and mp separately, count me in! So many games with tacked-on mp I don't give a shit about, I could have saved a few $$$ there.
@ Megaman, You misread my comment.. You have games that people really only care about the single player campaign..Bioshock, Uncharted etc. If you charge seperately for the multi-player for THOSE games, the developer will never get much of the revenue for the other portion as most would care less. As for Call of Duty..they have not only made it worth the 60 dollars, but they then got money for Elite which bridged stats from the earlier titles. Activision wouldnt be stupid enough to seperate their revenue because just like you pointed out, the multi would win heavily in that case over the single player campaign. If they went to these models then what would be the use for retail? Everything could be sold on Live and PSN. Evil
i also agree with you on everything. i do not like the online pass but that has prevented me from buying used copies of games, however i only buy a game with an online pass when it is discounted. the most i spent was $40.00 for a game with an online pass new, and i'm sure i am not the only one
What I find ironic is that many of the publishers moaning about loss of sales in used games are rolling in cash like they need another million jillion dollars. Save for a few cases, I think it just comes down to greed.
"but if it's as simple as selling sp and mp separately, count me in! So many games with tacked-on mp I don't give a shit about, I could have saved a few $$$ there" In theory, perhaps.....but I can just see publishers selling the SP for $40/$50 and the multiplayer for another $40/$50 if they went for a model like that.
I think companies are getting too greedy. They blame production costs, but I think there are other ways they could raise revenue if they are truly struggling. Lite versions, and DLC codes simply detract from the gaming experience - and puts me off of a lot of games as you can generally tell what games MP is going to be populated right from the off... A lot of games would benefit from 2nd hand sales keeping their online portion alive. If they want to go down this route then they should offer me money back when they fail to live up to their games hype... Because if not I will want to trade my old poo games in, like I do all my other unwanted products. Like I say, it's just greed and people are spending less money as they have less money due to greedy corperations.
Only a select few franchises would really see those multiplayer dollars if you had to pay to unlock it. Halo, Gears, COD, possibly Uncharted and Killzone, along with fighting games (including WWE and UFC)and racing games, but that's about it. @Kurt Russell - it's not greed. A lot of money goes into making those games, and so many people contribute in making them. A game has to make X amount of dollars to support them all, and not every game that comes out will be a blockbuster. As a customer I don't like the idea, but I understand why it would be considered.
Lite versions of games work with iOS because everything is digital and it's easy to download, delete, and redownload. It's a cool idea, but with consoles still very much involved in the Retail industry, it would probably cost developers/retail stores more money to carry two versions of the same game, three including CE's. Perhaps in 5-6 years though? Wouldn't be a bad idea.
Danny D suggests that seeing as; Cars, books, music, dvd's, clothes, furniture, ect ect ect can all be bought second hand, that the games industry should just accept that it is a part of life and move on rather than trying to squeeze every last drop of money from gamers!
I second that motion!
Rise! Take to the streets! We want freedom to buy used!!!
More importantly, I want the freedom to SELL my copy of the game, and not in fragments. And hey, I don't normally buy used or even sell my games. Not unless the game is really short or crap. But I want that freedom, and I want publishers to stop cheapening the things they sell me.
Considering 1 game can sell more than an entire car manufactures full range of cars I dont know what publishers R bitching about
Sounds similar to some F2P models already available on PC , this idea of a lighter games sounds like a modified version of that and could potentially be a success if done right.
In my day we called them Demos.
Freaking good one!
A demo is just a stage or 2 for you to try for free. Cliff is talking about a budget version like saying, you get the single player but not the online multiplayer but you'll be paying less for it.
I just don't think it will work. A lite version is essentially a demo which we can already download from the psn, live market or already. But even if they was to release these to combat used games, I'm still thinking why would be choose them over a used full version that maybe be a pound or two more. Just my opinion, but lite should stay as digital and not retail.
Computer Software and games are different, you do not own the game/software, all you purchase is the disk and a license to use the software/game. I do agree you should be able to sell or transfer your license to someone else, but that would be up to the software/game developers. If you are using software/game without that license you are nothing more that a thief, IMO.
I could see this working IF they price it right. Say, if they separate the SP/MP and sell them separately, pricing those at a 50/50 split could work, so that when/if the gamer wanted to buy the other half, they aren't screwed of their money. But we'll see, I wish there was a better way to combat used game sales, but there really isn't a good option for it yet.
I kinda agree with him on this one. I'm the type of player that never does online or whatever. I'm single player campaign only. So giving me a stripped down version with just the single player for 20 dollars less would be awesome.
Its absurd to think game developers are going to divide the cost of games $30.00 for single player and $30.00 for multiplayer. That makes the consumers decision to cut one or the other features WAY too easy. If they do go this route You'll more likely see (at the time the game launches) a $40-$45.00 for single and $40-$45.00 for multiplayer. They'll most likely offer a "Super Saver" bundle of single + multiplayer for $60.00 too ;). Also, its worth noting that the above prices only go for this generation of consoles. Just wait till they try and convince you that the next generation of games should run you $70-$75.00 each. There is a great way to combat used games. That is to release special or exclusive perks, maps, skins, characters, dlc, or what have you ON LAUNCH ( not months later) to people who buy the game first hand, FOR FREE ! However devs won't do this because it means giving away something for nothing ( well for $60.00). So they'll just continue to complain and pump out mediocre title after mediocre title demanding full price for C+ work.
Developers are too greedy to release half a version. I mean if you look at Activision and Call Of Duty, why would they release a lite version when so many buy the full version? I hope we can play used games on next gen consoles, mainly because I sometimes share games with my brother or friends. We let one another borrow a game and having games that are console locked is just taking it too far. If we buy something, we should have the right to do what we want with it. Do car companies try to stick it to people who sell used cars? of course not. What about used house sales? nope. This is ridicules thought by developers. I think online passes is far enough, smaller developers I could see complaining a bit more, I'd support online passes fully for those types of games/developers. $60 is a lot for a new game, which is why we see so many sequels as well. People tend to only put out full price for games they know will be quality. Something needs to change, that is for certain.
And what will keep people from just buying the lite version and then trading it in and stores selling used copies of the lite version. I like the idea of only buying the part of the game I want but it's not really going to combat used game sales
No way willl I be going for this business tactic. That's even worse than the online passes because It will be segregating the fanbase of those who like the Single Player, and those who like the multiplayer. It also will be like buying the same game Twice, which I won't do. Stop trying to hurt the used game market and just let it be. Its only going to hurt the market in the long run, especially in these economic times. We're all hurting here, not just developers.
I've got a better model: Give up all this "war on used games" bullshit altogether.
this actually makes lots of sense i know alot of games that have multiplayer i will never play like red dead redemption that multiplayer was sh*t IMO, this is a far better idea than to make online pass and i think this will happen soo we mite be saying bye bye to used game sales soon
burning my book collection in the back yard as I type this. think of the return policy?
"Publishers are always eager to make limited and collector's editions, why not a budget, stripped down version to get the lower end customer?"" OVER MY DEAD BODY. They make millions of dollars and want MORE ? Greedy bastards. Then again, I wouldn't mind having to buy separate singleplayer and multiplayer games. Eg. I couldn't give a Rat's ass about the singleplayer in battlefield 3, or multi in assasins creed.
with FIGHT NIGHT CHAMPION..... i downloaded the story mode for 5 dollars, to unlock the play now mode was $10, and the full multiplayer was an additional $10 dollars
DEA Fresh is 100% correct I don't buy it. Because then what would happen is retailers would sell the used Lite versions for an even lower price. So Cliffy is completely wrong. There is only one way publishers can tackle used sales and that's a Digital Download game.
I can just see them charging 35 for each mode separately, so when you do actually decide to own the full game you end up paying $10 more.
I like the idea, he should start with the homoerotic nature of the single player in Gears of War.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.