Microsoft's tricky ways continue: Buy Crackdown, get Halo 3 beta invite?

kyleb said:
I can't help but wonder how worried they were that Crackdown might flop.
Click to expand...

A lot of people are saying that but I dont see it.

I was probably going to buy crackdown anyway, for example. It seems fun to me.

Now, I dont know, I guess it's "flop insurance". Although, it's clear from the ad it's a "limited time" and "specially marked boxes" offer, so I wonder how many numbers we are talking about?

I have already resolved to get on the Halo 3 beta by hook or by crook, even if i have to buy in, so I guess this looks like my way :D
 
This has been done for years. Remember the FF7 demo (or was it MGS1?) packed with another no-name game back in the mid-90s?
 
PARANOiA said:
This has been done for years. Remember the FF7 demo (or was it MGS1?) packed with another no-name game back in the mid-90s?
Click to expand...

I think ZOE had a demo of MGS2 on it. Though it wasnt like people were not going to buy MGS2 at the time. I think it was just to sell ZOE copies.
 
expletive said:
Can you also get in the beta without buying crackdown (albeit without a guarantee)?
Click to expand...

There are probably going to be various ways, some involving payment.

You can register for free at Halo3.com, but I think those are going to be like a random drawing. AKA, only a certain amount will be chosen.

I think most people also expect some type of "pay 19.95 and you're in" type system later on as well.
 
kyleb said:
I can't help but wonder how worried they were that Crackdown might flop.
Click to expand...

They could be, with the stylized graphics. Seeing Bioshock slip to summer, most likely Mass Effect not hitting spring either, Too Human not even on the radar, and with all they other big titles a ways off (Fable 2, Alan Wake, PGR4, Banjo, Shadowrun, Wolfenstien, etc) so they want to make sure their only major title sans FM2 gets the needed exposure and isn't lost in the wake of titles like Brother in Arms and Lost Planet.

OR it could be that they know new franchises with unique premises can be a hard sell, and believe that once people play it they will be hooked, so they are using their "Halo 3, Get Out of Jail Card" to promote a new franchise they believe will be good.

Or it could be a little of both ;) Interestingly, I know someone who was asked by MS about putting higher rated content from a game demo on another game and how policy makers would rate the game. We both missed the game MS was thinking of putting Halo on, but it seems MS was quite serious. I need to hit this source up more often!
 
Bad_Boy said:
I think ZOE had a demo of MGS2 on it. Though it wasnt like people were not going to buy MGS2 at the time. I think it was just to sell ZOE copies.
Click to expand...

I bought ZOE because of the demo. It was on sale so it was quite cheap too, like 20€. Turned out I really liked ZOE so it wasn't that bad deal.

You could have already registered online...
Click to expand...

Most likely not everyone will get the invite if they registered from the web. I don't think they want millions of beta testers. If all gets in, great, more people will be happier but I just don't see that happening. I guess these tickets are sure way to get in?
 
With microsoft charging 800 points just to change the gamertag, why is it a sueprise to anyone they're charging the price of a full game for a popular demo? :cool:

They're out to nickle and dime everything they can out of the gamer market, and then condition us into paying successively more and more and more as time goes by..

The horse armor and live subscription in order to play online on games hosted on our own consoles are simply other indications of that greed-laden strategy.


Peace.
 
I was going to get Crackdown anyway. The game has come a long way as far as looks go, and the recent videos suggest it could be a lot of fun.

Rainbow Man said:
With microsoft charging 800 points just to change the gamertag, why is it a sueprise to anyone they're charging the price of a full game for a popular demo? :cool:

They're out to nickle and dime everything they can out of the gamer market, and then condition us into paying successively more and more and more as time goes by..

The horse armor and live subscription in order to play online on games hosted on our own consoles are simply other indications of that greed-laden strategy.


Peace.
Click to expand...

No, the demo comes with a game. It's a bonus. There will likely be other ways to get the demo anyway.

Thank Jebus for Sony and Nintendo who don't want our money?

Live is unparalled at this point. Until someone else can come up with an exact replica of Live for free then I'll gladly pay the premium. As it is right now, everyone falls short...very short.
 
Rainbow Man said:
With microsoft charging 800 points just to change the gamertag, why is it a sueprise to anyone they're charging the price of a full game for a popular demo? :cool:
Click to expand...

They are not charging anything for the demo. People who buy a game are getting a access to a limited beta -- it is a perk for buying the game (not vice versa). And saying they are charging the full price of a game for a demo is... inaccurate at best. Likewise people who have won certain contests get access to the limited beta. There are quite a few ways to get on the open beta. This just happens to be one, and a quite intelligent one--reward your customers who buy your stuff to begin with.

They're out to nickle and dime everything they can out of the gamer market, and then condition us into paying successively more and more and more as time goes by..
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Why only now speak up for this? And only on MS? Sony and Nintendo are doing it as well (Sony had a lengthy article out in Spring 2005 about the microtransaction goals which are identical to MS); even more this is the trend of the digital media industry in general. Just look at audio and video in general.

The horse armor
Click to expand...

That was a Bethesda decision, just like EA's DLC strategy is an EA issue. MS just offers the platform, the publishers decide how to use it within the structure provided.

and live subscription in order to play online on games hosted on our own consoles are simply other indications of that greed-laden strategy.
Click to expand...

Then don't use Live (use the free ethernet service online). That said, Live offers a lot of features and functions that other online services don't, and have a streamlined universal platform for such. It is a service, which costs them money, which they extend to developers as a unified approach to engage clients via the service. The idea of paid online gaming is NOT new or unique to MS. Do I dislike it? In general YES. I prefer free online games (hence no MMOs), but that said $5/mo for messaging, VoIP support in all games, global friend and block lists, and a ton of other features isn't too bad. We know developers don't all have the resources to develop/deploy/offer these services themselves, so MS doing it for them is a benefit.

I am glad Sony and Nintendo have gone with the free online platform approach, but MS didn't invent the pay-for model and isn't necessarily offering less and demanding more. They have the best online service and product available and if they choose to charge a premium then that is their choice. It is your choice not to buy it or not. But the "M$ bloodsuckers" angle is worn ragged and doesn't really resonate well these days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Post Conference Interview With J Allard
Replies
1
Views
2K
Geeforcer
G
Back
Top