[aldo_14]

it seems rather wrong to charge for an offical modification, i already paid money for the game, there's no way in hell i'm gonna buy anything that they've missed due to the rush to get it out on the shelves.

I feel obliged to point out that this sort of stuff used to be free, too.  Hell both Trackmania and GalCiv2 both have had patches added with new content (the latter less so, as it's newer, but TM had a huge addition that amounted to a free expansion pack).

[Turnsky]

it seems rather wrong to charge for an offical modification, i already paid money for the game, there's no way in hell i'm gonna buy anything that they've missed due to the rush to get it out on the shelves.

It could be a lot worse. I mean, what if they charged the user for patches. Hell, imagine if EA did that...

don't even JOKE about that!

[Ransom]

Indeed. But in some cases I think its already happening.
Look at Fable, and Fable: Lost Chapters.

How can they re-release a game with only a handfull of extra content?

The thing about Lost Chapters was that it was the PC port. And it had more than just a handful of extra content, didn't it have a third extra content or something like that? The point wasn't to get people who already owned it to buy it again, the idea was to get people who hadn't bought it to take a second look.

While I do partly agree with your point, I don't think that's a fair example.

[Grug]

it seems rather wrong to charge for an offical modification, i already paid money for the game, there's no way in hell i'm gonna buy anything that they've missed due to the rush to get it out on the shelves.

I feel obliged to point out that this sort of stuff used to be free, too.  Hell both Trackmania and GalCiv2 both have had patches added with new content (the latter less so, as it's newer, but TM had a huge addition that amounted to a free expansion pack).

Well even Oblivion's predecessor Morrowind had free official plugins released on their website. Something with their publisher must of went awry somewhere. =/

[aldo_14]

Well even Oblivion's predecessor Morrowind had free official plugins released on their website. Something with their publisher must of went awry somewhere. =/

It's because Live gives them the perfect system to fleece sell their plugins (or perhaps stuff dropped to save disk space or expedite beta testing), so why not carry that onto the PC.  I suppose it would be quite interesting if Live facilitated the users being able to make and freely/commerically distribute their wares, but this is basically a nice big scam.

[Ace]

The official excuse is since MS forces people to pay for Live 'content' downloads, they had to charge PC users to be 'fair' 

[Grug]

It's because Live gives them the perfect system to fleece sell their plugins (or perhaps stuff dropped to save disk space or expedite beta testing), so why not carry that onto the PC.  I suppose it would be quite interesting if Live facilitated the users being able to make and freely/commerically distribute their wares, but this is basically a nice big scam.

Damn straight.
It's just dissapointing that it's affecting the PC industry as well, mods are the main reason I go PC. If it all goes like this I'm screwed.

I guess I can only hope Nintendo stays true to the players, and not just the customers.

[aldo_14]

I guess I can only hope Nintendo stays true to the players, and not just the customers.

I would hope so, although it does seem inevitable you'll have to pay to DL the old emulated classics on the Rev; hopefully we'll see a lot of them given away as bonuses to go with other games, special offers, etc.  Certainly I wouldn't be too willing to pay £5 (or indeed less) for games I already owned or could rebuy for cheaper, regardless of how classic they are.

[Mefustae]

I would hope so, although it does seem inevitable you'll have to pay to DL the old emulated classics on the Rev; hopefully we'll see a lot of them given away as bonuses to go with other games, special offers, etc. Certainly I wouldn't be too willing to pay £5 (or indeed less) for games I already owned or could rebuy for cheaper, regardless of how classic they are.

From what i've read, there will be a small price for downloading emulated games, although the price should be negligable, by which I mean about the same price as this Oblivion plugin. I've also seen a bit regarding credit for purchasing games, so it might be cool if - when you buy a Rev game - you get a little bit of credit to spend on emulated games...

[aldo_14]

I would hope so, although it does seem inevitable you'll have to pay to DL the old emulated classics on the Rev; hopefully we'll see a lot of them given away as bonuses to go with other games, special offers, etc. Certainly I wouldn't be too willing to pay £5 (or indeed less) for games I already owned or could rebuy for cheaper, regardless of how classic they are.

From what i've read, there will be a small price for downloading emulated games, although the price should be negligable, by which I mean about the same price as this Oblivion plugin. I've also seen a bit regarding credit for purchasing games, so it might be cool if - when you buy a Rev game - you get a little bit of credit to spend on emulated games...

I think so.  I'm pretty sure one of the first things mentioned (by Nintendo) was that whilst 3rd parties would have control on exactly how you'd get their games, Nintendo wanted to use a sort of bonus scheme where emulated games would be bundled (by way of the aformentioned credit system) with Rev games; like buy Mario 128 and you'd get credit usable to DL Mario 64 or somesuch.

[Grug]

It's a softer way of approaching it I guess. Reward schemes and other means.

Better than MS's this is what we have! To be cool you should have it! Buy! Buy! Buy!

[Shade]

Well, I would expect Bittorrent or the like to quickly defeat any attempt to get people to pay through the nose for minor plugins. They might as well make then available for free and at least get the goodwill out of it.

[aldo_14]

Well, I would expect Bittorrent or the like to quickly defeat any attempt to get people to pay through the nose for minor plugins. They might as well make then available for free and at least get the goodwill out of it.

I dunno; I suspect they'd use some way - perhaps via serial nos or the Cd protection - to link these types of downloadables to the buyer.  Albeit that'd be something that is overridden for pirated copies (rather obviously, as they could remove that protection), which is really adding to an increasing arguement that the consumer is better off stealing than buying when it comes to software.

[Shade]

Only when developers pull stupid tricks. If they play fair, so will most potential customers. If they pull stuff like Starforce, people will rebel and get a cracked version instead. I thoughroughly believe game developers eventually make more money from games that just let you do with them what you want.

[Deepblue]

The official excuse is since MS forces people to pay for Live 'content' downloads, they had to charge PC users to be 'fair'

You are grossly misinformed.

I find it stupifying that people think this is because of Live. That's completely wrong. The publisher can distribute content both for a premium and free. Either way, it's their choice. For example, PGR3 will soon have a new car booster pack up on Live for free.

[aldo_14]

Albeit don't they already charge the user by dint of the subscription fee (for certain sectors), and also through ancillary stuff like charging to change your usertag & the corresponding 'points' purchase system, so MS can absorb a lot of charges through indirect means.  Like, Bethseda could get £1 for that dl, and MS 70p (as a fee for providing the service access, etc), which could effectively finance free packs anyways.  Unfortunately it's nigh on impossible to quickly find out if said license fees for the service exist or not through any sort of trivial google search.

[Deepblue]

The point is that it was the devs choice to charge for the content.

[aldo_14]

The point is that it was the devs choice to charge for the content.

But do the devs have to pay to sell that content.  Because in that context, it becomes more understandable if still a very **** thing.  MS published games are obviously going to have no charges to access their 'own' content delivery network, but do the 3rd party publishers have a charge to contend with?

[Deepblue]

Not that I'm aware of.

Besides, if that were true, why charge for the PC content?

[Crazy_Ivan80]

the problem is of course the balance between price and amount of content.
2$ for some measily horse armour doesn't look like much but it adds up after a number of official mods. 10 to 13 of those mods at such a price and you have the cost of an expansion pack (which would really contain much more content). So either these mods provide plenty of new content (and not stuff that should ahve been included from day 1) or either the people buying them are played for suckers.