EA Planning To Release Paid DLC Before Boxed Games

[kain4521]

EA Planning To Release Paid DLC Before Boxed Games
Written Monday, March 22, 2010 by Richard Walker

According to Wedbush Morgan analyst, Michael Pachter, Visceral head Nick Earl has been talking up a new intiative being planned by EA to release paid DLC as a precursor to a finished boxed product.

The paid DLC would act as a sort of extended demo that would enable EA to gauge consumer reaction and the market potential of prospective games.
Pachter penned the following in a note to investors: "Mr. Earl revealed a strategy to release premium downloadable content (PDLC) as a product for sale prior to the release of a packaged product.

"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. 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," he added.

The initiative is part of an overall strategy to save EA money, which includes their $10 initiative - successfully implemented in Mass Effect 2 and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 - as well as moving future development to cheaper locations such as Montreal and China, and their acquisition of casual games maker PlayFish.

"This time, we think that EA is on the right path," concluded Pachter.

https://www.ps3trophies.org/news/news-449-EA-Planning-To-Release-Paid-DLC-Before-Boxed-Games.html

I dont think this will go over well with gamers. I know I will not be paying $10 for a demo.

 

[lcummins]

https://www.ps3trophies.org/news/news-449-EA-Planning-To-Release-Paid-DLC-Before-Boxed-Games.html

I dont think this will go over well with gamers. I know I will not be paying $10 for a demo.

Yeah, I don't think I would either! Especially when there will be no guarantee of a final product!

 

[BadMoon]

First companies bring out games and then hit you with DLC a month after and now this. LAME!

 

[DinoDB1975]

Unless EA plans to credit any money a gamer spends on demos towards a finished game, this is a fail for EA.

 

[BadMoon]

Unless EA plans to credit any money a gamer spends on demos towards a finished game, this is a fail for EA.

I don't agree with it but I don't think it will fail at all. All of those foul mouthed spoiled kids that can be found on LIVE will DL this stuff and it will sell. Mommy and Daddy will pay for it.

 

[hairlesswookiee]

I don't agree with it but I don't think it will fail at all. All of those foul mouthed spoiled kids that can be found on LIVE will DL this stuff and it will sell. Mommy and Daddy will pay for it.

Sad but true.

 

[tomandshell]

So I can pay $15 now, then $60 later to play the same levels again?

 

[devastator's balls]

Stupid! Why the hell would you pay for this

 

[The Josh]

Yeah, total pass on this idea for me.

 

[Deckard]

Ah PCs, where all the DLC is always free.

 

[canuck_spartan]

you know some sucker is going to end up buying this... i just feel bad for them

 

[plasmid303]

I could imagine this taking off even with the backlash from the enthusiast gamer crowd.

Imagine them releasing the DLC content demo for, say, Mass Effect 3 a month before the game releases. And if it were 3-5 hours long, I think there would be a lot of excitement for that.

The one bad side of this is the prospect of the DLC demo replacing the standard free demo of most games.

The EA reps probably should've spun it so it didn't just sound like a glorified demo. How about 'paid DLC beta'? Or something that doesn't sound so obviously lame?

 

[devastator's balls]

you know some sucker is going to end up buying this... i just feel bad for them

Just like the suckers who buy clothes for their xbox 360 avatars. Dumb dumb dumb

 

[Jason62]

anything more then $5 and doesnt go towards the final price then its not worth it.

1st post!

 

[SwedishHeat]

"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," he added.

I don't understand this at all. If you've already gotten to the point that you're releasing a demo, you need to release the game to recoup your cost. Their thinking is that if they release the demo and 5,000 people plunk down $15 and realize it sucks, they can save money??

 

[DinoDB1975]

I could imagine this taking off even with the backlash from the enthusiast gamer crowd.

Imagine them releasing the DLC content demo for, say, Mass Effect 3 a month before the game releases. And if it were 3-5 hours long, I think there would be a lot of excitement for that.

The one bad side of this is the prospect of the DLC demo replacing the standard free demo of most games.

The EA reps probably should've spun it so it didn't just sound like a glorified demo. How about 'paid DLC beta'? Or something that doesn't sound so obviously lame?

Yeah, but the thing is EA plans to use these demos as a means to determine whether or not they should proceed with a game's development or not. From the press release:

"The paid DLC would act as a sort of extended demo that would enable EA to gauge consumer reaction and the market potential of prospective games."

So essentially, if EA had this policy in place before they released a new unproven IP like Dead Space, they would have used interest in the demo (or lack thereof) to decide whether they would continue development of teh title or not.

 

[DinoDB1975]

I don't agree with it but I don't think it will fail at all. All of those foul mouthed spoiled kids that can be found on LIVE will DL this stuff and it will sell. Mommy and Daddy will pay for it.

Oh, I agree. I didn't mean fail from an economic standpoint, there will always be people who will pay for DLC and that'll be more money in EA's pockets. I think it's a fail as policy itself. You have game designers / programmers coming up witth a game that gets a 3-5 hour demo. Say demo sales are great, and EA decides to greenlight the whole project. At that point, how long will it take to complete the whole game? There would be no guarantee that interest woudl remain in the six months it would take for a demo to be a complete game (and I use the six month timeframe really liberally).

 

[THX-182]

I think this idea sucks and is a cash grab. I'm not ever going to pay $10 for just an extended demo only to pay full price when the game is released and have to play it all over again. A big fat waste of money.

The really sucky part is that if most people don't pay and get the demo, they will probably assume players don't want the game and won't make it. That really sucks!

 

[Starkiller]

Let me clear my throat.....


NO.

 

[plasmid303]

Yeah, but the thing is EA plans to use these demos as a means to determine whether or not they should proceed with a game's development or not. From the press release:

"The paid DLC would act as a sort of extended demo that would enable EA to gauge consumer reaction and the market potential of prospective games."

So essentially, if EA had this policy in place before they released a new unproven IP like Dead Space, they would have used interest in the demo (or lack thereof) to decide whether they would continue development of teh title or not.

Not exactly. the article explicitly states that the final boxed retail game would be released shortly after the DLC extended demo, which means at the point of which the demo comes out, the game should already be done in terms of development.

It's a less expensive marketing tool, a sort of acid test to see what gamers like and don't like about the game, essentially, and that's what could be changed: marketing.

Demos nowadays are practically commodities, but they aren't complete reflections of how well a game will sell. Not everyone who partakes in the million-selling machine of big titles has access to these demos or even chooses to download them.