EA Are Going To Sell You Game Demos And Betas $$$

  • 61 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Posted by bunnyboiler (399 posts) -

People say Activision are greedy but..... 

EA are going to charge $10 - $15 for extended game demos:


http://uk.ps3.ign.com/articles/107/1079019p1.html

IGN Article:

EA Outlines New Premium Download Content Strategy
US, March 22, 2010

New initiative offers paid "demos" prior to full game launches, say analyst.
by Jim Reilly

US, March 22, 2010 - Electronic Arts plans to offer extended downloadable demos for a price to players prior to the release of the full, packaged game, according to analyst Michael Pachter's latest investor report.

EA's Chief Operating Officer Nick Earl revealed the company's latest premium downloadable content (PDLC) strategy during a recent investor visit at its Redwood City studio, which includes charging a small price for an early look at upcoming titles.

"The PDLC would be sold for $10 or $15 through Xbox Live and PlayStation Network, and would essentially be a very long game demo, along the lines of 2009's Battlefield 1943," Pachter said. "A full-blown packaged game would follow shortly after the release of the PDLC, bearing a full retail price. Mr. Earl believes that the release of the PDLC first limits the risk of completing and marketing the full packaged version, and serves as a low-cost marketing tool."

In a follow-up conversation with IGN, Pachter says these paid "demos" will act as a sort of beta test for the company, saying feedback received will shape the final retail product.

"Think about Battlefield 1943 as the prototype, so a full (but short) game experience for a reasonable price," he said. "At the same time, an expanded version of the game will be under development for release as a packaged product."

"However, the idea is that if the PDLC gets favorable reviews, it will build word of mouth for the boxed product. If the PDLC has issues, they can tweak the packaged product to address those issues, improving the final product before release," he added.

Pachter said he wasn't sure if EA plans to include the PDLC content with the packaged game, adding that the content could be a "prequel" to the full game so it can continue to be sold separately. The strategy is expected to launch during the company's fiscal 2011 year, which begins on April 1, 2010.

#2 Posted by Th3_James (2579 posts) -

Well...this is leading down a bad path

#3 Posted by Drebin_893 (2933 posts) -

Sounds good to me, I don't get why this is a bad thing. 
"Think about Battlefield 1943". That wasn't exactly lacking and I played the shit out of that game.

#4 Posted by bhhawks78 (1207 posts) -

If this was activision this thread would be 500 pages deep with crybabies and pictures of Bobby Kotick as a devil.
 
 
Vote with your wallets, not your LOL internet "boycotts" and petitions and emo forum posts.
 
I know personally besides Mass effect 2 (because I can't resist Shepherd) I stopped buying EA games a long time ago due to their attitudes towards DLC, and crap like project 10$.

#5 Edited by NoXious (1353 posts) -

Oh wow, this sounds like a perfect initiative. I've always wanted a sort of service like this.
Say you pay $5/10 to get a good look at a game (not some half-assed broken demo without all the features). After that trial you can decide to purchase the full game or not, with knowledge of the actual product.
Feels like the market is finally making an adaption to the consumer's need. Didn't even take em as long as the record companies! Nice!

EDIT: The full purchase would get a slight price cut if you purchased the trial time.

#6 Posted by Falconer (1707 posts) -
@Drebin_893:  Yeah, I think that's a bad example as I too played that game for dozens of hours. 
 
Wouldn't a better example be what Capcom is doing with Dead Rising 2? I know that they're releasing a prologue/demo type thing before the game comes out. They're calling a prologue over just a demo, so that makes me think there's more game to it (1-2 hours?). I still don't know if it's going to be free or paid for though.
#7 Posted by Pie (7110 posts) -

I'll wait and see just how big these things will be

#8 Posted by Conker (792 posts) -

ACTIVIVSION IS THE DEVI-Oh wait, EA.. 
 
Umm....Yea...
#9 Posted by ajamafalous (12147 posts) -

This sounds terrible.

#10 Posted by FrankCanada97 (4039 posts) -

Well, Battlefield: 1943 was pretty awesome, so that's a plus. Let's wait and see where this goes.

#11 Edited by ThatFrood (3391 posts) -

this sounds pretty fine if they gave you a price cut for the full game. There are plenty of games that come out with no demo, I'd have to say this is better than that, at least.
 
edit: although this is also a bit confusing... I imagine if someone is purchasing a demo for the game, they are already interested in it. Free demos are great because people who don't even care about the game try it out.

#12 Edited by MattyFTM (14432 posts) -

That is quite possibly the dumbest idea I've ever heard. The whole point of a demo is to promote a game by giving people a brief taste of the game. The point of Beta's is to test glitches and flaws in a game in a limited userbase. Charging for either of these is stupid. 
 
Fundamentally it's not a bad idea offering people a section of a game for a small price. And then people could buy the rest of the game for a top-up price. It would give people the oportunity to buy a small part of the game (but longer than a demo) for a small price before deciding if they're willing to spend the full price the full product. But it doesn't sound like the latter part is happening with this, so you'll be paying $10 for the demo, and then the full $60 again for the final product, which is stupid. And either way, billing them as extended demo's is dumb.

Moderator
#13 Posted by Burns098356GX (1366 posts) -

Good luck to them on that. Fucking nonsense.

#14 Posted by AndrewB (7689 posts) -

All I'm going to say is that they can do whatever they want. It won't affect me because I'm not dumb or rich enough to buy into it. I'm even starting to get turned off by regular game DLC.

#15 Posted by Th3_James (2579 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" That is quite possibly the dumbest idea I've ever heard. The whole point of a demo is to promote a game by giving people a brief taste of the game. The point of Beta's is to test glitches and flaws in a game in a limited userbase. Charging for either of these is stupid.   Fundamentally it's not a bad idea offering people a section of a game for a small price. And then people could buy the rest of the game for a top-up price. It would give people the oportunity to buy a small part of the game (but longer than a demo) for a small price before deciding if they're willing to spend the full price the full product. But it doesn't sound like the latter part is happening with this, so you'll be paying $10 for the demo, and then the full $60 again for the final product, which is stupid. And either way, billing them as extended demo's is dumb. "
/\ Logic.
#16 Posted by bunnyboiler (399 posts) -
@NoXious said:
" Oh wow, this sounds like a perfect initiative. I've always wanted a sort of service like this.Say you pay $5/10 to get a good look at a game (not some half-assed broken demo without all the features). After that trial you can decide to purchase the full game or not, with knowledge of the actual product.Feels like the market is finally making an adaption to the consumer's need. Didn't even take em as long as the record companies! Nice!EDIT: The full purchase would get a slight price cut if you purchased the trial time. "

But they will be broken. If you read the article, EA say the paid demos will act as a beta test for them.

So you're paying them to test their game. 

#17 Posted by Evilsbane (4736 posts) -
@MattyFTM said:
" That is quite possibly the dumbest idea I've ever heard. The whole point of a demo is to promote a game by giving people a brief taste of the game. The point of Beta's is to test glitches and flaws in a game in a limited userbase. Charging for either of these is stupid.   Fundamentally it's not a bad idea offering people a section of a game for a small price. And then people could buy the rest of the game for a top-up price. It would give people the oportunity to buy a small part of the game (but longer than a demo) for a small price before deciding if they're willing to spend the full price the full product. But it doesn't sound like the latter part is happening with this, so you'll be paying $10 for the demo, and then the full $60 again for the final product, which is stupid. And either way, billing them as extended demo's is dumb. "
This
#18 Posted by Skald (4370 posts) -

In the video game world, demo has come to mean a portion of the game for gratis. If they want this strategy to work, their going to have to find a better name than "paid extended demos." 
 
How about beta? It used to mean the game was quite unfinished, but now it means exclusive demo. Beta testing has become a very nebulous term indeed.

#19 Posted by Daryl (1781 posts) -

I wonder which young business marketing guy came up with this bs just to justify his job position. 

#20 Posted by LiquidPrince (16166 posts) -

Why the fuck would anyone PAY for a demo...? Demo's are made to try and convince you to buy the full product. Oh my god these people are stupid.

#21 Posted by Jimbo (9984 posts) -

So what was the 'full version' of 1943?  That's a pretty half-assed analogy.

#22 Posted by damswedon (3201 posts) -

*Points at Gran Turismo Prologue games

#23 Posted by masterpaperlink (1873 posts) -

And i will not buy them

#24 Posted by Hughes (399 posts) -

Next stop: pay to watch trailers?

#25 Edited by carlthenimrod (1599 posts) -

I can't be bothered to play free demos/betas, forget actually paying for them.

#26 Posted by Jeffsekai (7052 posts) -

Dammit EA people were just star ting to like everything you did now this. GRRR

#27 Posted by natetodamax (19219 posts) -

That is one of the dumbest things ever.

#28 Posted by FrankCanada97 (4039 posts) -
@Jimbo said:
" So what was the 'full version' of 1943?  That's a pretty half-assed analogy. "
The PC version?
#29 Posted by wwfundertaker (1404 posts) -

Video game crash of 1983 again, thats right i said it.

#30 Posted by iam3green (14390 posts) -

 
man that has to be the stupidest thing i have ever heard.  demos should be free and download-able. there shouldn't even be any purchasing to get a demo. i even hate games like crackdown, when it came out there was halo 3 beta. most of the people that got that game just so they can play halo 3 beta. it was a good game none the less though. even betas are turning into demos. companies label betas as demos. betas are suppose to be works in progress.  instead they make them into demos. 
 
people have to purchase demos now? i wounder who came up with this idea. i know i am not going to purchase a $10 demo. EA doesn't really have any great games anymore for me to do that.

 

#31 Posted by AjayRaz (12476 posts) -

BRILLIANT 

Online
#32 Posted by bunnyboiler (399 posts) -

At least we know how they're paying for Project Ten Dollar now.

We'll be the ones funding it.


#33 Edited by Arzen (81 posts) -

" Why the fuck would anyone PAY for a demo...? "

Has everyone forgotten about paying extra for those demo discs that used to come with game magazines (you know, before internet-enabled consoles)?  A handful of short demos that may or may not have given you a clue to a games potential?  We don't know how much they're planning to give away with these "extended demos" here, whether or not you'll be able to get a discount on the full product, we don't know *anything* about it (other than the fact that there will still be free demos).  
 
@iam3green said:
" people have to purchase demos now? "
If you had read the article, you'd have noticed that they said they would not be charging for traditionally free game demos.  
#34 Posted by Blueman (753 posts) -

How are people complaining about this? Its not as if they are forcing you to buy it.
#35 Posted by natetodamax (19219 posts) -
@Blueman said:
" How are people complaining about this? Its not as if they are forcing you to buy it. "
They are screwing people that are ignorant enough to pay for demos.
#36 Posted by Arzen (81 posts) -
@natetodamax said:
" @Blueman said:
" How are people complaining about this? Its not as if they are forcing you to buy it. "
They are screwing people that are ignorant enough to pay for demos. "
Thank god you're safe.  EA won't be swindling you out of any money, good sir.
#37 Posted by LiquidPrince (16166 posts) -
@Arzen said:
"

" Why the fuck would anyone PAY for a demo...? "

Has everyone forgotten about paying extra for those demo discs that used to come with game magazines (you know, before internet-enabled consoles)?  A handful of short demos that may or may not have given you a clue to a games potential?  We don't know how much they're planning to give away with these "extended demos" here, whether or not you'll be able to get a discount on the full product, we don't know *anything* about it (other than the fact that there will still be free demos).  
 
I'm pretty sure most people never got those things for the demos but rather for the magazine itself, and the demos were just bonuses.
#38 Posted by Blueman (753 posts) -
@natetodamax said:
" @Blueman said:
" How are people complaining about this? Its not as if they are forcing you to buy it. "
They are screwing people that are ignorant enough to pay for demos. "

They are not ordinary demo's, it sounds like a good idea to me. I would rather pay a small price to get a better idea of what a game is like than get a 15 minute demo that is nothing like the real game.
#39 Posted by sopranosfan (1935 posts) -

I am kind of indifferent to this news because I almost never download free demos because A.) I usually know if I want to buy the game or not before it comes out and B.) they are usually not as good as the actual game and C.) my local Family Video usually has a good assortment of games for reasonable prices for games that I am not sure if I want to buy.  So I am sure not going to pay $10 to try a small part of the game out.  If I am not for sure if I will like a game I will rent it and I bet I will get a better feel for the game for $3-$6 and be able to play the entire game.   However good luck to EA and all the people that pay for a demo.

#40 Posted by natetodamax (19219 posts) -
@Blueman said:
" @natetodamax said:
" @Blueman said:
" How are people complaining about this? Its not as if they are forcing you to buy it. "
They are screwing people that are ignorant enough to pay for demos. "
They are not ordinary demo's, it sounds like a good idea to me. I would rather pay a small price to get a better idea of what a game is like than get a 15 minute demo that is nothing like the real game. "
I suppose it depends on the size of the demo. But comparing the size of these demos to Battlefield 1943 makes no sense at all.
#41 Posted by atomic_dumpling (2482 posts) -

People are buying and selling Beta keys on eBay, so there seems to be a completely irrational demand for this.

#42 Posted by Arzen (81 posts) -
@LiquidPrince: I'm pretty sure people bought them for demos of games they were interested in.  My friends, family, and I all did.  If people were interested in just the magazine, they'd buy just the magazine.  Why would someone pay extra for a disc full of demos if they didn't care to try them? 
#43 Posted by LiquidPrince (16166 posts) -
@Arzen: I don't know what magazines you were buying, but whatever I bought the demo disc was always free and was always just a bonus in the magazine. You could never buy just the magazine alone, because the demo disc was just a free bonus.
#44 Posted by Godwind (2596 posts) -

I think they should be doing the reverse logic of GIVING  a part of the game for free, even allowing us to save our gameplay.  Then after some point, make the demo unplayable but keep the save file, and allow the retail version to complete it up.

#45 Posted by Arzen (81 posts) -
@LiquidPrince: Both the Official Playstation and Xbox magazines both packed demo discs with every issue and were sold at a premium compared to magazines like Gamepro and EGM.  PC Gamer and Computer Gaming Monthly both sold copies of their respective magazine with and without a demo disc.  Plenty of people paid for demos.  Not because they were forced to. Not because they were the occasional freebie. They paid because once upon a time, that was the only way to get a demo.
#46 Posted by ch13696 (4582 posts) -

They barely have demos on PSN anyways. So now they want to bring "extended" demos out and charge? My other argument is why? I thought just a regualr demo would be just enough to sell us on a game. Now beta's on the other hand I can understand. A lot of people want to get into them. While you have the beta running you need to upkeep the servers.

#47 Posted by sixghost (1679 posts) -
@LiquidPrince said:
" @Arzen: I don't know what magazines you were buying, but whatever I bought the demo disc was always free and was always just a bonus in the magazine. You could never buy just the magazine alone, because the demo disc was just a free bonus. "
That's not how it worked for most magazines.
#48 Posted by mosdl (3259 posts) -

I'm sure some people would pay five bucks to beta test starcraft 2 - but I doubt this will work for most games. 
 
Now if they sell me a short prequel game that is completely separate that would be another story.

Online
#49 Posted by JakJ (1010 posts) -
#50 Posted by bunnyboiler (399 posts) -
@JakJ said:
" They won't be charging for demos as we know them today. We can take the threat level down a couple colors guys. "

So the 'traditionally free' demos will be a demo of the extended demo.


.....

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.