Still frothing for on-line action??

pretty sure were all aware of this:wtf:
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #3
Thanks for the insight

Don't doubt that many are aware of this- I thought it was interesting to see/discuss where online gaming v/s profitibality for the companies go. To me the most interesting thing is seeing how far things are still running in the red. . . the cost will have to be made up some where. It looks to be going along the lines of the same model as the mmorpg's on pc's
 
the 4 new maps for gears were 10 dollars because m$ wanted to make up for the free 2 maps and game mode that were released
and the crackdown 10 dollar add on is basically a small expansion set
and its ALL choice on if you want to buy it anyways....
and when they say for rainbow that you cant play matches without the new maps...thats bullcrap..maybe you cant play ranked, but that doesnt affect anything besides leaderboard position.
 
Last edited:
I'd pay extra just to have online ability in the first place. add-ons are rarely that attractive to me, but heck, you don't have to download them if you don't want to pay.

One of the benefits of Nintendo profiting from their hardware sales is that they are less (well, slightly less) desperate to rip us off with exorbitant prices (though VC prices aren't pitch perfect, a look at what MS is charging for just maps should make N-fans a little happier).

But, in fact, a great shooter with a great online system is worth far more to me on the Wii (because of the control system) than it would be to me on Xbox. $100 for a multi-player MP3C? If the multi-player is rock-solid, I wouldn't even flinch. I don't mind paying for quality.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #6
Wiinter said:
I'd pay extra just to have online ability in the first place. add-ons are rarely that attractive to me, but heck, you don't have to download them if you don't want to pay.

One of the benefits of Nintendo profiting from their hardware sales is that they are less (well, slightly less) desperate to rip us off with exorbitant prices (though VC prices aren't pitch perfect, a look at what MS is charging for just maps should make N-fans a little happier).

But, in fact, a great shooter with a great online system is worth far more to me on the Wii (because of the control system) than it would be to me on Xbox. $100 for a multi-player MP3C? If the multi-player is rock-solid, I wouldn't even flinch. I don't mind paying for quality.

That is what I was angling at - one danger of the on-line environment is what pc gamers have run into for years - 1/2 completed releases only to be suplimented by fixes and "expansion" packs later. I have no gripe about paying for a service for on-line, but the adding maps, etc at a $10 charge is a bit iffy to me. The fact is it isn't a must have but in an on-line community - most people do the newest, so you have to follow the community.

Bottom line, the profitibility has to be there for things to work. The wii turning a profit off the floor is a rare and good advantage. The pressure is less to turn huge $$ on games which means they can be more complete and more varied than otherwise.

That being said, I would not invest $100 in what is ultimately version xxx of Unreal tournament/Counterstrike
 
jcblough said:
That being said, I would not invest $100 in what is ultimately version xxx of Unreal tournament/Counterstrike

We agree on that.
 
In Crackdown if you want invincibility without Gameshark, you have to pay M$ $10! WTF! That should be free! Imagine putting the 30 extra lives into Contra, only you can't get it to work without paying $1. What crap. Microsoft's greatest weakness for XBL is Micropayments.
 
sagema said:
In Crackdown if you want invincibility without Gameshark, you have to pay M$ $10! WTF! That should be free! Imagine putting the 30 extra lives into Contra, only you can't get it to work without paying $1. What crap. Microsoft's greatest weakness for XBL is Micropayments.
theres gamesharks for the new consoles?
and its not like your paying $10 just for invincibility (which i didnt even know was included) i would call you a :mad5: name but i dont feel like getting banned or starting an intergalactic forum fight
 
Back
Top