New Pricing for Demos Could Change XBLA Games in a Big Way

"Bringing demos to the consumer always seems like a solid way of marketing a game, right? Of course. But publishers like EA have considered putting a separate price tag onto their trials, and in turn changing them."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Natsu X FairyTail3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

I hate that idea Alot. A whole lot.

shoinan3101d ago

That's one rip-off too many.

cain1413101d ago

Depends on the demographic. I know plenty of people who would have paid say 15$ to play even a gimped version of modern warefare 2' multiplayer early

ProjectVulcan3101d ago

People download demos to get a taste of a game free, in order to decide if its worth their well earned cash. It also reduces the likelyhood of piracy on some titles, because of lot of people just want to try before coughing up any cash.

Having to pay for any even 'extended' demo is thus a seriously flawed business model...

N4Flamers3101d ago

Actually I bet somewhere an activision exec is pissed that he didnt think of this first. Next they will charge us for looking at the box art in the store.

Genesis53101d ago

If they do that. I would just rent the game for $5 to try it out, if I was really interested in it. I don't think I would ever pay for a demo.

Bnet3433101d ago

I'm not surprised that EA wants part of this. I can see Activision and Ubisoft joining the fray.

Bigpappy3101d ago

This is on developer's wish list and EA mentioned it before. One developer is talking about this. I think it is in everybody's best interest to keep demo's free. A demo is and advertisement. I am not going to pay a developer to advertise to me. That is plain stupid. If a demo is costing your studio too much to make, don't make the demo. If it cost too much to advertise don't advertise. The problem with that is that I am not going to buy games and then get home and find out that they suck. Mean while these guys got my $60 and I am eating crow. I am also NOT going to pay you to let me test your game to see if I want to pay for the full thing. This is already a dead issue as far as I am concern and I will no speak on it any further.

FantasyStar3101d ago

And people thought EA is a better company than Activision. That, EA actually "changed". The only change here is the difference in the sub-total at the end of my receipt before tax.

bruddahmanmatt3101d ago

The fact that any consumer would be in favor of this is frankly shocking to me. I mean wake the **** up. You're not paying for an extended demo, you're paying for the intro to a full game. It's no longer a demo once you're opening your wallet. The whole point of playing a demo is to get a taste of what a game is like BEFORE you go to the bank so that you don't end up with $60 worth of **** on your shelf. There's nothing wrong with half-scale or quarter-scale games like BF1943 or Fat Princess. They're just fine the way they are. This entire model they're suggesting seems ass backwards. You'd be paying to extend BF1943, not sample Bad Company 2 which again, defeats the whole purpose of a DEMOnstration. Stupid.

cmrbe3101d ago

A money hungry company will always be a money hungry company. However lets not forget that EA has improved game development wise lately.

Its naive to think of companies as people however credit must be given were credit is due. I have been very surprise with Dead space, Mirrors Edge, Fifa 10 and BC2 this gen. Lets not forget ME 1 $ 2 as well as Crysis 2 which is shaping up to be a stellar game.


Wow, just wow.....

You know there was a time I would have said there is just no way in hell this would work... people/ gamers can't be that stupid, can they ?

The scary thing is they will launch it and we will be seeing VGcharts numbers on x millions of demo or at least in the 100's of thousands paid for.

what is happening to gaming, i don't know if it's the hobby I once loved. The games I onced loved are all being dumbed down for the noobs while the publishers just reach deeper and deeper into our pockets.

they can F=the F%$K OFF !

HolyOrangeCows3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

I don't pay to view advertisement/trailers for a movie, this is not much different.

Blaze9293101d ago

guys I don't think they mean regular demos but I could see a rise in 90 minute to 2 hour demos like THQ did with Darksiders. Basically paying for a really long good taste of the game.

That I see happening...will suck but that's probably what they mean.

bnaked3101d ago

Seriously, all gamers of the world should boycott this sh!t..

FantasyStar3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

there's a huge difference between "publishing" a game and "developing" it. Of all the games you've listed, only Dead Space is one developed by EA themselves (EA Redwood to be specific). Any other talent that came through EA is either.

A. Publishing contract (Crytek)
B. Bought out and owned (Bioware, DICE)

The only thing game-development wise that EA improved is how to milk its customers for more money. Whether it's reducing the value of used-games, charging for DLC that should've been in the game, charging for cheat codes, placing very annoying in-game ads and didn't bother to warn the customer ahead of time, not allowing their fanbase to host their own servers but forcibly rent through the "EA approved list".

I can really go on about how much EA sucks, and I wouldn't be short on my list of points because they've been pulling this stunt for over 3 generations of gaming. I wish more people would wise-up to EA's schemes, but they're so blind-sighted by "good games" they don't see the ramifications of what happens when you accept paying the same for less content.

FFS, look what they did to CnC4!

fatstarr3101d ago

And the industry wonders why people pirate... -_-
In this bad economy... maybe they should just suck one up for the team
smh at this rate games are set to hit 70 maybe 80$ next gen...
First Kotick
then my manuals

Automat3101d ago

remember when games cost $60 back in the early eighties ..? Yeah, they did. a lot has changed. and will.
not that I would consider paying for a demo. and no GT5P is not a demo.

JL3101d ago

I think that's exactly what they're talking about though. Something like GT5P. And call it what you will but essentially it was a "demo". Just not in the traditional sense. More of an "extended demo". And I think that's what they're talking about here. Not the lil 15minute demos that you see on PSN all the time. GT5P was nothing but an extended demo, don't care how you want to spin it. I was satisfied with it for the money, and it was a good lil taste before we get the full GT5, something to tide me over. But it definitely was not a full game. It was a preview to the full game. And last I checked, that's pretty much exactly what a demo is: a preview/demonstration.

Doesn't bother me all that much. Though I would argue that this isn't a business model that would work well if you did ALL games like this. Maybe just the big games. Still need to have some of those free really short demos. Those free ones would work best for unknown/under the radar type games. Nobody is going to pay to play a game they've barely heard of just to see if they want to buy the whole game.

But yea, doing something like GT5P would be ok with certain games here and there. Definitely doesn't need to become too widespread though, and not something that becomes the norm.

Like somebody mentioned down below, I think the "problem" here is the phrasing. Don't think so much of it as a "demo" (cause they're not talking normal demos), but think more like prologue. Examples would be, like I mentioned before, GT5P..or R&C: Quest for Booty, or the whole Taxidermist part of Heavy Rain, instead of releasing it as DLC, why not make it so it can run on it's on and make that into one of these "demos". Matter of fact, I think that's a good way to look at it. Take something that would normally be DLC, but instead make it standalone and allow it to be played without having the full game. No real harm in any of that.

Another good idea would be to find a way to allow what you spent on the "demo" to be credited towards the purchase of the full game a bit if you do end up buying the full game.

Anybody that had no problem paying $30 for GT5P or paying a full $60 for ODST shouldn't really have a problem with an idea like this (unless it does in turn completely eliminate all free demos). Getting rid of free demos completely though would be stupid and could hurt the industry in that lesser known titles would sell less and nobody would be able to try out games that they would otherwise never even pay attention to.

Dee_913101d ago

I used to go in magazine section of a grocery store and steal the demo disk out the PS magazines lol
I wouldnt pay for it then and i wont pay for them now

BloodyNapkin3101d ago

I would be gameflying alot more, might even have to up my plan....

pixelsword3101d ago

I like it but it starts off with one charge, then another, and then another...

I can't wait for Pay-Per-Play; oh, wait; that's the Arcade.

Alvadr3101d ago

Paying for demos??? Disgusting!

Good luck with that EA, hardly anyone will do it resulting in less people likley to buy the full game

Inside_out3101d ago

This is going way to far...charging for demo's...I don't even want to read that...I never will pay for a demo...PERIOD...

vhero3101d ago

More money for MS pockets? Can't see how MS wouldn't go for this.. However it's all about it devs think its feasible as even making DLC content costs money.

BYE3100d ago (Edited 3100d ago )

That's like paying for a 15 second sound preview on iTunes...

Syronicus3100d ago

Just like there are still people who pay to play online... This is just one more stupid way to rip off the consumer on something that should be free to begin with.

Speak2theHand3100d ago

My god people have no clue. Ok for the less informed this has nothing to do with xbox live or with MS. It has been going around for a while now they are thinking about charging for demo's and just not EA and not just on the Xbox. It's kinda funny cause GTP was the ones that started this, but i didnt hear the sonyfanboys boohooing then.


Give me some names of racers with less than 6 tracks? You can talk the talk, now walk the walk. Lets see i bought Forza 3 for 50 bucks and it had close to hundred tracks and about the same on cars. GT5P had 6 tracks and what like 30-50 cars (not for sure) and it cost 40 bucks.

duplissi3100d ago (Edited 3100d ago )

nope.. i hope this fails, and that it doesnt also cross over to the playstation store (we would be screwed twice!). i like my demos free.

IdleLeeSiuLung3100d ago

I hope whatever they release as a premium demo that it will be included in the final game, then I don't care if some sucker is willing to pay. Now if they are basically breaking up the game and selling it in pieces, then that is messed up!

Dee_913100d ago

So your saying GTP is a demo .. A demo that just happen to take about a year to finish ? by finish i mean finish all the races . i havent even drove all the cars yet and I had it since it came out

Thats one hell of a demo .. Its sorta like a real game :p

Just imagine paying for that Skate 3 demo .. youd have to be the dumbest person to pay for that LOL

edgeofblade3100d ago (Edited 3100d ago )

I had no doubt this news wouldn't fly at N4G, bastion of PS3 fanboyism. A people so used to getting PSN for free that they will riot anytime someone asks them for money.

Well, never fear... those demos will have to be good enough to warrant your money. And if the market doesn't go for it... these kinds of Prologue content will disappear.

Just remember... GT5 did it first.

I'd love to know what you disagree with: if N4G is inundated with PS3 fanboys, if we live in a free market society, or if GT5 had a Prologue?

Raf1k13100d ago (Edited 3100d ago )

The only way I see this working is if you pay something like 20% of the games full price to play 20% of the game. If you decide to purchase the game you can then pay the rest of the money.

Paying for a trial and then paying full for the full game takes the piss.

Nevers3100d ago

.. if I must pay for a demo, I won't.... and therefor ... not buy the game. This is a greedy and stupid idea. Whoever came up with this can stick it where the sun don't shine.

+ Show (31) more repliesLast reply 3100d ago
cain1413101d ago

I don't hate it if the games become like Battlefield 1943. That game was great.

The demo's would just need to become sizeable levels.

Yi-Long3101d ago

... when the full game gets released and needs all the server-space.

Demos are fine the way they are now. Why change it? And I will never pay for a demo.

corneliuscrust3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

that many many people feel the same way.

paid demos? GTFO, EA.

Let's all pay to beta test all of their games for them too! It'll be great!

mrv3213101d ago

1943 is basically a demo for BC2.... I was VERY happy with the amount I paid for it.

Speak2theHand3100d ago

Do what? 1943 is basically a demo to BC2. Surely your are not that dumb. You was joking right?....right?

edgeofblade3100d ago

You will never pay for a demo?

What if it's a demo with 3 hours of solid Triple-A gameplay? What if they make it worth your cash? Are you going to avoid that kind of content on principle alone?

Well, that's your choice. As for me... I'm not decided yet. Each any every time they will have to earn my money, same way a free demo has to earn my valuable time.

corneliuscrust3099d ago

until you've paid for it, played it and found out that it was a bust. Unless you want to start trusting this broken as hell review system that is the norm these days

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3099d ago
BetaChris3101d ago

To me, this sounds like little more than extending the concept of shareware into the console arena. Remember Fable 2's fragmented digital distribution, where only the first chapter was free? I wouldn't be surprised in the least to see downloadable games going further down that path.

As for having to pay for these so-called "premium demos"? I'm alright with it, on the sole condition that the amount I pay for whatever initial chapter/segment/quest that is being offered is deducted from the full version. That is, if the developers (be it EA or others) feel it necessary to market demos the same way episodic content is marketed, then I would expect to get the same value of said demo than I would similarly priced episodic content. Failure to offer some kind of discount/deal on the full product (whether digital or packaged) would seem like double dipping in this case.

siyrobbo3101d ago

XBOX live arcade games are just like shareware games, download the full release, with a limited demo and if you like it you can unlock the full game for a fee

ukilnme3101d ago

The only way I would think about supporting this is if my money went towards the purchase of the final game but then I would be stuck if I did not like it.

Ziriux3101d ago

That wouldn't be a bad idea.

NinjaSp33d3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

Thanks alot:( i will never ever pay for a demo EVER

cain1413101d ago

I wouldn't pay for a demo either, but with games that I'm on the fence about I would be willing to pay little to get like an extended amount of time through game.

Ziriux3101d ago

I don't blame you since demos are a bad presentation of a game.

Brock Danger3100d ago

I don't understand this entitlement people have, where they just believe gaming companies owe them things. They're companies, they have investors, employees, and responsibilities to turning a profit. If they can validate this idea with worthy "demos" (not the right verbage, obviously carries a lot of negative connotations that is getting everyone's panties in a bunch), then maybe it's not a terrible idea.

Especially if it gets more people to buy the game and therefore helps ensure sequels, DLC, or new IP's from the developer.

And as someone mentioned earlier, games have cost the SAME AMOUNT for nearly 30 years, with certain systems going well above (N64 and the notorious $200 neo geo cartridges). Getting the 10 dollar increase this generation was an absolute necessity as budgets have skyrocketed in summer blockbuster levels. Gas goes up, milk goes up, movie tickets go up, but gaming has really held a constant level. Games should cost closer to a $100 dollars or more according to inflation, so you should actually be celebrating the decades of reasonable prices you've been enjoying instead of crying about dropping 10 measly dollars on something YOU'RE NOT FORCED TO BUY.