Lumines Heralds New Costs for Xbox Live Games

Game|Life reports on the upcoming release of Lumines for the Xbox 360's Live Arcade. Despite the high interest in the unique game (previously only on the PSP), gamers may be frustrated to learn that playing through the whole game will require additional purchases. From the article: "But then, once you hit a certain point in the 'Mission' or 'Vs. CPU' modes of the game, you'll be asked to pay up again for the ability to keep on progressing. All in all, you'll have to spend another 700 points ($8.75) to get the rest of the levels, bringing the real cost of Lumines Live to nearly $24. What lesson can we take from this? Clearly, Microsoft understands that there's a major disconnect here between what they'd like to make off direct-download game sales and what customers are willing to pay based on their perceived value. That's why, rather than go with straight dollar amounts, everything is priced in 'points.' 1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15."

Odd, I like it.

Since I played the original Lumines for about 2 hours and wasn't past the first few boring levels, paying for part of a game and then only paying for the rest -if I care- appeals to me. I'd like to see more crappy games go this way and make my wallet happy.

Re:Odd, I like it.

My thoughts exactly. I have never purchased one of these games, but my only concern is that customers know they are only purchasing "Part 1" of the game and are not under the impression that they are buying a full game.

Re:Odd, I like it.

not most... ALL

IIRC it's a requirement that all XBLA games have a free trial version (which is really just the full version but locked out of full functionality)

As for the articles clam that the arbitrary point system is to confuse people, I'd have to disagree. I thought the same at first myself but after using it for a while I actually think it's a great idea... The Xbox Live Marketplace is GLOBAL if something costs 400MP in the Us then it also costs 400MP in Canada and 400MP all through Europe and 400MP in Japan. Rather then trying to localize the price of things for every currency in the world they just made their own pay scale, and IMO it works really well.

After having purchased a few things it becomes easy to follow. in US dollars 400MP = $5 exactly considering most game expansion packs, XBLA games (pretty much anything other then themes and pictures) cost 200, 400, 800, or 1200 it's fairly simple to figure out in your head how much they're worth in real money.

As for Lumines being the most expensive XBLA game to date, it's really not all that bad considering the PSP version is a whole lot more expensive, Not to mention you'll be able to play the free demo version to your hearts content before deciding to actually buy it.

Just a Rumour

While this may end up being the truth, right now it is just a rumour [gamespot.com].

not that bad of an idea...

So you pay $15, you get the first half the game. If the game blows, you're only out $15, if the game is good, you cough up $10 to get more content. Seems like a better idea than blowing $25 per game regardless of quality.

-Rick

Except there's a demo

Except that there's a demo for all arcade games, and I doubt lumines will be any different.

This is greed at best, and honestly I'd call it bait and switch at worst.

Point System

Perhaps the point system makes an easy way to decouple the prices from local currencies and allows parents to give their kids a bunch of points to spend each month. I used to go rent games at the video store when I was a child. Now some of that might be replaced by parents giving their children points to buy games.

Not bad

... when you take into account that the PSP version originally retailed for $40.

Proof Microsoft has lost Xbox Live.

If this is true, it's proof Microsoft is going to destroy Live.

Why was the first 6 monthes of Live popular? 5 bucks a game? What happened around June? Tons of new content all for 10 bucks a pop. Personally I'd buy 2 or three games for 10 bucks, but I'm sure as hell not buying legacy games for 10 bucks, I'm also not buying crap like Cloning Clydes or Bejeweled for 10 bucks a pop. I mean if it was 5 dollars I'd probably pick up both of them. If I had to pay 15 bucks for Luminies I'd be happy to pay that much but at the same time for 15 bucks I should get the puzzle pack and Versus for free. Instead I could go get Luminies for 20 bucks on the PS2, and that should contain both these modes and I'd get a CD/DVD for it.

That being said Gamespot is saying it's likely bogus but us raising our voices against it should help it even if they were considering it. http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?t opic_id=24928329&page=1#comments [gamespot.com]

How is this a bad thing?

I paid far more than that for it back when it was released for the PSP. The episodic release means you dont have to shell out so much money and get to play far more than free "demo" would let you. With xbox live there is also the possiblility of more dynamic content like new music tracks and themes as well. This sounds more like a good idea of what xbox live could be rather than a negative.

Good Idea

As long as they make it clear ahead of time that this is the pricing model then I think it's a great idea. It's kinda like a step up (or to the side) from traditional shareware.

On a side note, Lumines is fantastic. The only game of that style that I've enjoyed more than Tetris. The idea of racing "against the clock" two seperate ways (one being the speed the blocks fall and one being the thing that sweeps out your completed blocks) really is a cool mechanic. Once I got into it, I couldn't stop playing.

Nickel and diming...

The thing about Xbox is that if you keep charging for more and more functionality. MS finally has the AOL model, where they have you credit card and are going to chanrge for all sorts of things on top of the recuring subscription fee. As a casual gamer, I can't see paying all those fees. I like to buy the game and be done with it.

Old News

"What lesson can we take from this?"

People are greedy, corporations doubly so, and like to milk money from their consumers. Nothing NEW here... but if true I'm glad I'm going with the Wii, if only because at least I haven't seen Nintendo do anything spectacularly stupid yet (as opposed to the other two guys, esp Sony).

Re:Old News

Is this the same Nintendo that was charging $20 for GBA ports of ExciteBike, Ice Climbers and the NES version of Xevious? The Nintendo download service isn't going to be free, and I wouldn't get too excited before you see some pricing.

Clever

Actually, this may be a pretty clever way to sell a game.

If you buy a game and later find out you don't really enjoy it, you don't have to buy all of it and the money loss won't be as bad.

In the end, this could be a very encouraging move that allows for a reduction of the risk/cost of trying out new games.

Scumbags with kindly potential

1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15

That's the trick casinos use - issue chips and cards and hide the clocks so that you mindlessly keep plugging in cash.

Then again, this incremental pricing model isn't necessarily a terrible thing. I love buying used games, but sometimes I trade in a game for one third the price I bought it for because I didn't enjoy it. It'd be nice to pay for the first half of a game to see if I like it before shelling out the rest.

It's not bad math, it's sunk costs

1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15

While I'm sure that plays a role (it must, or gas wouldn't be priced out to tenths of a cent), I don't think it's the largest reason MS uses points - or even the largest reason it's easier to spend points than money.

The big reason to use points, if you're MS, is that it allows them to sell points outside the Live system. You can buy redeemable cards in Best Buy et al, which makes them convenient stocking stuffers. Yes, there could be other ways to accomplish the same result, but:

Points are, as the article suggests, easier to spend. But not primarily because people are somehow "tricked" into not thinking of 1200 points as $15 - it's primarily because people see 1200 points as money they've already spent. The disconnect is between the perceived value of the points when purchasing them and the perceived value of the points once they've been purchased. People tend to have a reasonably good grasp of the concept of sunk costs.

When purchasing points, it's easy to dump $20 into it, thinking of how many little purchases that will cover. Once you've got the points, though, you know you're not spending any new money.

Shareware, all over again

This just sounds like a new spin on the old shareware concept. Having to pay for the initial trial wasn't necessarily unheard of during the shareware days as well (though usually it involved buying a 3.5" disk or CD).

Points vs. Dollars

I am not trying to debate whether or not paying for a game as you go is good or bad. It definitely has its pros and cons.

What I am trying to point out is the psychological game they are trying to play. If they (Microsoft or anyone really) can get you to not look at an actual dollar amount, it will in your mind change the "worth" of the dollar. You wont be speaking in terms of dollars, but points. Points arent worth anything to you, they are just insignificant numbers on a TV/Computer screen. Dollars on the other hand are tangible objects you can hold and feel when you lose. Same reason it is easier to spend money on a credit card vs cash. You dont feel the loss of it being gone from your wallet.

What they are trying to do is similar to stores pricing things at $19.99, have you ever wondered why they dont just price it at $20.00 even? There is psychological difference in peoples minds.

Thanks for listening. This is my first post ever on /.. I have been a reader since 1998.

I appreciate all of the discussions, and other things that /. provides for me as a IT Consultant.

Personally, I am always the person that creates a conversion tool for Points > Dollars and Dollars > Points. That way people dont lose the reality that they are really spending money and not just "points".

JS

How is that different than HalfLife/SIN episodes?

Really this is just an online verion of episodic content like Half-Life 2: episodes and SIN: episodes.

The only difference is that you get to buy all the episodes at once instead of having to wait a year between each episodes.

I'd also like to point out that the Live model on the xbox is actually CHEAPER than the retail version.
PSP Lumines = 40$
XBLA version = 25$ (with all the content)

So really, why is everybody complaining?

Perception

"That's why, rather than go with straight dollar amounts, everything is priced in 'points.' 1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15"

Yes, it does seem cheaper. That's why when you go to a casino, you don't use "money", you use "chips". Throwing $100 on the blackjack table is a lot harder than throwing a single black chip. People are used to evaluating the value of dollars and they automatically make the connection when they see a price tag. It's menatlly different when it's shown in a different way (points, chips, etc).

You know, at first I was disgusted...

But frankly this is pretty much in line with what you'd pay for incredibly comperable 'indie' games, the likes of which are available for $20 a pop at places like http://reflexive.com/ [reflexive.com] and http://gamehouse.com/ [gamehouse.com]

$24 for lumines is quite in line with the market.

Is there still a free demo?

If there's no free demo available, and you're shelling out 15 dollars to play the first portion of the game, you've just paid 15 dollars for a demo of the game. That would be moot if there's a demo for download, but I personally wouldn't go spending 15 bucks a pop just to see if I like a game and want to buy the whole thing.

Why this idea is stupid...

What does this do to the Game Rental Market?

Imagine that you have rented a game for a few days from Blockbuster or wherever, you have invested 20 hours of time into the game, and all the sudden, you can't go any further? How would that work? Would they make you pay to continue playing? Would there be special versions of the game that game rental companies would have, with the complete game? Sure, there are services like Gamefly that even stretch that further, because you can essentially keep a game as long as you'd like, and therefore, it will be easier to put 20 hours into a game.

As for people who say that paying $15 up front for the game to see if you like it, I say that is pretty stupid. If you want to see if you like a game, go spend $5 and rent the thing. You may like a game, and therfore need to spend $5 more for the game. But, it only takes you not liking one game ($15) to make up for renting three games for $5 each.

Look, this teired pricing for games is stupid. When I buy a game, I want to own the whole game, not pieces of it. Granted,in the past, I have bought expansion packs for some games, but that was not merely for new levels and maps,it was for new functionality and new gameplay, essentially, I was buying a new game...

I say again, this paying for a piece of a game is stupid. As for game companies wanting to protect themselves against losing money on games that may not be popular, I say stop making bad games...

Transfer games?

What happens if after you buy a game on live with regards to "your copy"? If your hard drive fails can you download it again on a new machine or do you have to repurchase it?

What about if you sign into live on another persons xbox? Can you download it again there? Sort of like Steam allows?

This really isn't any different than...

...HL 2 or Sin Episodes as stated previously. In addition, the same model is being applied, at least in principle, to Oblivion when users are paying for new and exiting things, like horse armor.

You might as well prepare yourself for more of the same, because if this business model succeeds, the industry as a whole will jump on board.

Is it a bad thing really?

Ultimately doesn't this lead to better games though.... How many crappy assed games have you bought over the years, shelved it after 2 or 3 hours of forcing yourself to try and enjoy it? If I could have all new games cost me $5 to try them out and pay a few extra bucks depending on how long/deep into it I play, isnt; that in effect promoting the survival of better games thata re more fun to play? Bad games would die quickly. There's a cottage industry of crappy games out there. Minimal cost to develop. They toss them into boxes and sell them at retail stores and bank on people not returning the crap. I know one company has changed it's name a few times because eventually people stop buying titles by the same name when they all suck. This would be the death knell for them.

Not his business model

This business model has been suggested before but I never thought it would start so soon.

When I purchase a game I expect a full game that I may play as often and as far as I want to what would be considered the end. This episodic content or toll-bridge gaming model is exactly what I don't want but of course it means more money for the game companys so they will continue to push it. Yes, vote w/ you $ of course but keep posting to any and all forums so that they get the message. We want a full game but will be willing to pay more for EXTRAS like maps and expansions. Oblivion(I am ignoring the horse armor) had it right with the new areas in the game because the game was so full and large to begin with. You can spend hundreds of hours in that game without ever worrying about extra content. The content was cheap compared to what it gave you. I really hope that is method of toll-booth games fails miserably.

Famous Quote.

"The guy who invented Poker was very smart. The who invented poker chips was a f*cking genius."

Points == Poker Chips

NOT MORE LUMINES!!!

I bought a PSP just so I could play Lumines, and now I'll have to buy an XBox 360 AND purchase it (again) online so I can play it on my big screen, play new skins, have more challenging computer opponents, and presumably other people online?

Cruel world! Why must you tempt me with your colored blocks and hypnotizing music?!!??!

(999,999-filled high score list. Everything unlocked. Got to about level 400 before I was too tired to keep concentration. Haven't yet done 100 blocks in 60 seconds. Playing versus the other guy in the office is really fun.)

I, like quite a few others, don't have a problem

with the total price of the game. I also like online distribution, not only as it costs less, but I can get it NOW (age has not made me any more patient).
My main gripe with paid for updates is that it is at the expense of what we used to get free. For example in Oblivion I can now pay a few pounds to get some new buildings, locations, items etc - a while back these would have just been chucked in for free in a patch.
The same goes for the PC, I play Battlefield2 - some of the early patches included some new levels to play. Then we had the SpecOps pack which was sold (online and offline - bizarrely cheaper to buy from amazon, than download from EA) and had an updated engine - I was happy to pay and was bouncing around on ropes in no time.
Then we had Euroforce and the latest (I've even forgotten the name of now) - all these were were a few extra maps and vehicles - wooo (that was sarcasm).
These have shifted to online only distribution and it's not even as if you can ignore them. You're playing a few rounds online, the server then loads a map from a pack you haven't paid for and *click* you're disconnected.
I just feel this is going to get worse as the publishers pick up on this, we'll fondly look back at the day we paid £30 for a game and that was it forever.

Quoted so many times already but ...

1200 points seems somehow cheaper than $15.

There must be other people that don't see it this way as well as myself. To have this sort of logic you'd have to already have a few thousand points piled up, which have obviously cost you money in the past, a long, forgotten past that is no longer relevant to your current financial situation, which you just throw around without remembering that at some point in time they did actually cost you money. I only buy points when I want to make an immediate purchase, which means that each time I'm buying a game, I pretty much have to part with US$20.

I haven't bought enough games to get myself a 'free' game from leftover points yet ... okay, okay, so I wasted money on some retarded gamer pictures, so technically I should have, but even then, I know that these points didn't just magically arrive for free in my account and were traded for other real life virtual currency (now this is getting confusing) from my credit card. Maybe it's just because I've bought so many games and appreciate the correlation between the number of games I have and the balance of my bank account.

Or maybe I just couldn't think of a good analogy given the poker one has already been played to death.

(crickets)

bringing the real cost of Lumines Live to nearly $24

OMIGOSH!!! ... or rather, still well less than the original version, which you can play on the go, and which was a full price PSP game, that was quite popular and that a lot of people paid that full price for. It's not going to become magically cheaper just because it's only a virtual copy.

The UMD format might have cost Sony a lot, but they aren't actually that expensive to make.

BOOM BOOM TISH!

Thank you, thank you. I'll be here all week.

Re:Good idea

Of course the Slashbots will try to spin this as an Anti-M$ thing, but this is a good idea. Too many times people pay for games that they don't like and don't end up finishing. It would be great to be able to save a few bucks and play only to the point in the game you want to. If you really liked the game you could pay to unlock the entire thing.

I agree with you (and everyone else) that paying less at the start and then paying again for additional content is better than overpaying for a full crappy game that you never complete, but I think the concern here is that this will wind up being misapplied, such that games will cost 'full price', or $50 initially, with further payments along the way. Then again, I suppose price increases are to be expected at some point. This just seems like a stealthy way to introduce that.

It's called a demo.

That's why almost all 360 games, and all Xbox Live arcade games have Demos. If you don't play a demo and just buy a game and don't like it, it's your fault. I've downloaded... well let's put it this way I've played close to 15 demos on Xbox 360. I played 0 on the PS2, I played 1 on the PC in the last 5 years and that was for work (game company).

I tried Test Drive Unlimited last night, the controls were a little stiff, but damm if I didn't like driving with 10 real people in free drive, that's an easy "must buy" for me. I tried Just Cause and it was an interesting game however the controls completely sucked, and the game wasn't that great, I'm waiting on reviews for that one.

Re:Good idea

There are elements of this that I like because it (sort of) reminds me of the old shareware games like Doom; you pick up the first episode at your local computer shop for $5 and if you like the game you pay the rest for it.

What I dislike is simply the cost. Digital Distribution (virtually) eliminates all of the costs associated with delivering a game to consumers; you eliminate the cost of physical production, shipping, warehousing and the mark-up at retail, meaning you probably save $20-$30 per game to deliver it to the customer. If the console producer has better licencing terms for smaller/digitally distributed games you could also save an aditional $3-$5 per game from that alone. A game like Lumines should be able to sold for $10-$15 and still make as much revinue (for the developer) as a game being sold for $40-$50; the "second" charge seems to be mostly a greedy act to gouge their customers (much like all XBox Live Arcade extra content)