Support NeoGAF

[Solal]

MONETIZATION OF OUR TIME IS UNACCEPTABLE. GAMERS REGROUP !

Today, we just learned that Forza 5 (XBone) and GT6 (PS3) will both have microtransactions to skip their -laborious/glorious- grinding mechanics.

Of course, these are not the first games doing this (EA made quite a big push in this matter..and even Forza 4 already had those in...), but they are the 2 flagships of the 2 biggest actors of the videogame industry.
This dangerous trend is sending a very bad vibe about where we are going to : F2P model in games we payed full price.

Let me try to explain why this is so disgusting in the first place, especially with games where grinding is the very core of the mechanics. For practical reasons, I'll focus on Forza/GT examples. But the reasoning is the same for most of the games.

With games like GT or Forza (or others...), the currency is not actually Credits...it's our time. How much time are you ready to spend on our grinding mechanics before you give up and buy it from us? How much boredom will you endure? They don't even make the game harder... just longer. Monetizing is not buying new cars, it's buying your own time. How sick is that?

PD and Turn10 applied the free2play mechanics to full priced games... and if we do nothing about it, this is not gonna change. It's gonna get worse. It is already actually.

(Edit: Well... Looks like JimQuisition explains all this way better than me. A must see video.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7811-Fee-to-Pay)

And now Eurogamer made an article about it. They obviously share our concerns.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-11-23-whens-a-free-to-play-game-not-free-to-play

USgamer:

http://www.usgamer.net/articles/does-anybody-really-like-microtransactions

Another great input here:

I'm always amazed when someone claims that these kinds of microtransactions don't affect design or gameplay at all, and you can ignore them and have no less lovely an experience than you would have had if this predatory business model had never reared its ugly head.

Sure, right: the designers don't design for microtransactions at all. They don't build in any incentives to spend more money. They tweak progression just perfectly so that the rate at which you acquire new stuff is just perfect, and it wouldn't be any more fun to get stuff faster. They're totally optional, guys! BTW, would any of you gentleman like to buy one of the many fine bridges I have for sale?

There is no such thing as a game with microtransactions whose design is not tainted by them. There is no such thing. Every game with microtransactions builds in incentives to spend more money; every game with microtransactions is designed to ensure that the optimal experience is one in which the publisher gets more of your money. It's just that it's acceptable in games which are free up front because hey, they're free up front. But in a $60 retail game? Come on.

"Pay so that you don't have to play" microtransactions are particularly odious, because they reveal the underlying bad design of any game they're in. If I'm paying so that I don't have to play the game, what does that say about the minute to minute gameplay? It says it's not fun. It says it's a slog, something negative, something I endure rather than enjoy so that I can get the arbitrary rewards I have been conditioned to want. It says that the game has little to offer besides a skinner box, at least past a certain number of hours.

Can you imagine if Super Mario 3D World had microtransactions that allowed you to buy green stars for $1, so that you can get out of the chore of actually playing the levels? Would anyone buy that? Of course not, because playing the level to get the stars is the game, and it's extremely fun. If I'm paying for cars in a racing game because, man, I don't want to race for one more hour, what does that say? It says that the moment-to-moment gameplay is not fun, at least after a certain number of hours, and it says that the game was designed so that I would not acquire cars as fast as I want to, so that I would rather spend real money to get something than actually play the game I already paid $60 for.

Francis made a point too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGGfwPIykAo

Totalbiscuit now :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpx4R9SY98o

Please read/watch these before making your definitive opinion about wether it's a big issue or not. Some gamers didn't see the problem before reading this thread, and understand how disgusting monetization in 60€ games is...

My point, and the aim of this thread is to send a clear message to Sony, EA, MS and co...

We gamers don't accept these f2p models in games we payed.

DLC made AFTER the release? (like new cars, new tracks/maps expending the experience: that were produced AFTER the release) Ok. It's fair to pay because there obviously is a cost for devs.
Monetization of the game mechanics? Paying to avoid the broken/pervert grinding mechanics? Buying our time from them? Fuck no! These are unfair methods.

So what can we do?

First: be vocal about it...just like we were about the DRM stuff with the XBone... Let's send tweets to every executive/journalist in the place: same list as the DRM stuff. the hashtag for this will be #StopTheRipOff Use it wisely and generously.

second: let's send nice tweets to devs that respect their consumers and do DLC well (please feel free to propose names). Let's let them know we appreciate what they do. I think it's important to show that we are not putting everyone in the same boat.

Third (the hardset part unfortunately): Let's just not buy those games/DLC. If you find it too hard to resist to your GT/Forza addiction, at least buy them second hand. We fought for this right: let's use it now.

Here is a list of games that have some sort of monetization:

Upcoming/newly released.

Ryse: Son of Rome
Forza Motorsport 5
Gran Turismo 6
Crimson Dragon
Bravely Default: Flying Fairy
Grand Theft Auto V
FIFA
NBA 2k games
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag

Already released:

Assassin's Creed 3
Dead Space 3
Battlefield 3
Mass Effect 3
Diablo 3
Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Dragon's Dogma
Shin Megami Tensei IV

I am very conscious that this thread is messy and all... English is not my first language and I am a messy mind anyway. Many have explained the issue much better than me and I am sure my logic might not be as strong is I'd hope.

But I really feel that we are at a turning point of this industry: a point where we gamers can make a difference.

Let's do it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSDhhZtRwFU



I think we should get inspiration from famousmortimer's action...

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=568033&highlight=

...and send very clear -but very respectful- tweets to every big man in the industry.

(btw, follow us at http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=719935)

SONY:

Shuhei Yoshida (president of worldwide studios) @yosp (easily the highest level person on twitter and quite accessible)
John Koller (head of hardware marketing) @jpkoller (dude has like 150 followers - heh)
Guy Longworth (senior vice president PlayStation Brand Marketing) @luckylongworth
Scott Rohde (PlayStation Software Product Development Head for Sony Worldwide Studios America) @rohdescott
Adam Boyes (Publisher and developer relations at Sony) @amboyes
Shahid Kamal Ahmad (third party relations, europe) @shahidkamal
Nick Accordino (SCEA ISD A. Producer) @nikoro
Phil Rosenberg (SCEA - reports directly to Tretton, thanks GoFreak) @philrosenberg

MICROSOFT:

Phil Spencer, the head of Microsoft Studios https://twitter.com/XboxP3
Aaron Greenberg, chief of staff for IEB https://twitter.com/aarongreenberg
Phil Harrison, man in charge of MS Europe https://twitter.com/MrPhilHarrison
Mike Ybarra, manager of games developed by external studios published by MS https://twitter.com/XboxQwik
Yusuf Mehdi, marketing for Xbox https://twitter.com/yusuf_i_mehdi
Major Nelson https://twitter.com/majornelson

THIRD PARTIES

EA
@petermooreEA

Activision
@erichirshberg

Here's one of Activisions Board of Directors

https://twitter.com/luciangrainge


Christian Guillemot
Co-founder of Ubi Soft
https://twitter.com/Kristian66


PATRICK SÖDERLUND - EA Vice President: @PatrickSderlund



Social media teams... probably a waste of time.

Ubisoft
https://twitter.com/UbisoftUK
https://twitter.com/Ubisoft

EA
https://twitter.com/EASPORTSFIFA
https://twitter.com/EA
https://twitter.com/EASPORTS
https://twitter.com/EA_ActionMan // EA UK Marketing
https://twitter.com/EA_DICE
https://twitter.com/CriterionGames

Activision
https://twitter.com/Activision
https://twitter.com/OneOfSwords // Activision Community manager
https://twitter.com/beachheadstudio

OTHER MEDIA

Who else to contact in the mainstream media (PLEASE DO NOT SPAM):

New York Times

https://twitter.com/nickwingfield
https://twitter.com/bxchen

Wall Street Journal

https://twitter.com/iansherr
https://twitter.com/DrewFitzGerald
https://twitter.com/RolfeWinkler
https://twitter.com/adamnajberg

Edge

https://twitter.com/Neil_Long_
https://twitter.com/taylorcocke

Wired

https://twitter.com/kobunheat

CBS

https://twitter.com/chendangak

ABC

https://twitter.com/DanMilanoABC
https://twitter.com/JoannaStern

Time

https://twitter.com/mattpeckham

AP

https://twitter.com/liedtkesfc

I got all these informations from famousmortimer's topic. So credits to him and all those who helped him.

I suggest we wait to be numerous and organised before sending anything. Timing and number is the key.

EDIT: we decided to choose #StopTheRipOff as our hashtag for tweets we will send to execs. Please don't forget it when you send them your concerns.

 

[Brashnir]

Should have bought the Wii U, dumbasses.

 

[chickdigger802]

Thank god for cheatengine.

It is all bullshit though, but with game cost rising while games are still $60. What can they do?

 

[Brashnir]

Thank god for cheatengine.

It is all bullshit though, but with game cost rising while games are still $60. What can they do?

They're the ones who set the budgets, not us.

 

[Otakumegane]

Should have bought the Wii U, dumbasses.

Now now let's not get too hasty now.

Mario Kart 8 has a chance to be pretty evil too.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Thank god for cheatengine.

It is all bullshit though, but with game cost rising while games are still $60. What can they do?

Somehow people still make money without ripping off their customers

 

[SovanJedi]

I don't mind being able to pay to skip grinding because that on its own doesn't affect me; crushingly, though, most games that employ such a mechanic are now designed to be purposefully unfun unless you pay to take the grind out, so now people like me are left with no choice but to slog through games made up of nothing but loading bars. They're making you pay to fix the intentionally broken game, which quite frankly is one of the very worst habits that modern gaming (and especially smartphone gaming) has brought to the table.

 

[Alienous]

We lost that battle a loooong time ago.

Games are rarely ever complete experiences now. Nope. Outfits, weapons, even difficulty modes are all easy money makers now.

 

[shandy706]

I think we may be starting this battle way too late.

Would be nice to win though.

 

[Picobrain]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

 

[spekkeh]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

Yep, that's the only way. Same here.

 

[Captain Tuttle]

We lost that battle a loooong time ago.

Games are rarely ever complete experiences now. Nope. Outfits, weapons, even difficulty modes are all easy money makers now.

Indeed, it's way too late for this. Besides, the gaming community is notoriously unorganized, the DRM thing was a fluke. The best way to protest is with your wallet.

 

[Drencrom]

Should have bought the Wii U, dumbasses.

What does that have to do with anything? You don't support shit like this just by owning a Playstation or a Xbox console.

Also, GT6 is on PS3, you mean i should've bought a Wii U instead of a PS3 back in 2007? What a shitty overgeneralizing post.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

So you're quitting gaming?

 

[TouchMyBox]

If they ruin the game, then just avoid buying bad games.

 

[poisonelf]

I think it's generally disgusting. I'm trying to be understanding, next-gen costs for game developing are high, but I find myself not caring for the woes of the publishers that much.

Cut down on your damn ultra-marketing campaigns, that's their problem to figure out, not mine to pay for.

This whole generation is starting to reek from many places. It started with Microsoft's attempts to fuck over each and every gamer, the 'press' actually supporting this, and now so many games (of various companies) with ridiculous monetization schemes. Or kinect's voice commands actually require you to include publisher names and trademarks if I understood correctly from the hardware review thread?

Paid 'DLC' which was essentially parts of the games we already paid for wasn't bad enough, they are trying to add more behind each and every corner. It was the consumers' fault for accepting this, of course.

It's like they're trying to turn the new generation into a shareholders' wet dream.

As long as a game is not free to play to begin with (as far as initial purchase is concerned), and as long as it's pay to win and not just a reasonable monthly fee for truly outstanding continued support and updates, or simply purchasing cosmetic stuff, I will never pay an additional fucking cent for a game. Never have, never will.

It really bugs me that there isn't a more vocal response to what seems to be happening. Perhaps it's just too early and they won't continue down that road, I'm hoping so.
On the other hand the "noDRM" campaign proved that the it was the 'sane, moderate' ones who were laughing at what was called an insignificant internet petition, who were in the wrong.
Voting with your wallet, or even threatening to, obviously works when done correctly and with enough support.

To be honest, I don't even care that much personally, I'm having more fun with games like Legend of Grimrock, and my most anticipated game at this point is Project Eternity. Or, to go a bit more 'mainstream', there are the Witcher games.

So fuck forced multiplayer, and especially fuck micro-transactions, fees and play to win of the "AAA" games of publishers' hopes and dreams.

 

[shandy706]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

You're going to be skipping a LOT of games this gen

So you're quitting gaming?

Heheh, we had similar thoughts.

 

[King_Moc]

Agree 100%. It's anti-consumer bullshit and it's embarrassing that some gamers will actually agree with it.

 

[Picobrain]

So you're quitting gaming?

Are you saying all games will have micro transaction?

 

[drproton]

So now, the logic behind the game mechanics is not: "let's make the best possible game" but "How frustrating/slow/hard must my gaming mechanics be to push the players to buy the cars with real money?"

This is the crux of the problem. Punishment mechanics are what make mobile/social games unfun. Unfun games are bad games. I don't buy bad games.

 

[FryHole]

GAF, ordinarily I'd say we should stand up for what we believe in, but we've been doing that an awful lot lately

/Marge

But yeah, like others have said. The only thing to do if you don't like it is not only refuse to use the microtransactions system, but don't buy the game itself.

 

[Chû Totoro]

Should have bought the Wii U, dumbasses.

Not entirely true but still... for once the first post has all the implicit Wii U / Next Gen related arguments in it : <3

Wii U doesn't have DRM
Wii U doesn't have paying online
...
Wii U have Nintendo games (so it has or will have very good if not the best games in quite a few genres)

But, Wii U doesn't have third parties (only real bad point imo for a dedicated gaming system)

Who said the Wii U was the best choice for this Christmas? Edge? I don't remember. I think I agree with them now that I passed the whole week to compare Xbox One / PS4 tried to decide which one I'm going to buy (result : I wait 2014 or I want at least to try both myself).

 

[Wurstsemmel]

Vote with your wallet and wait for goty editions. If you can't or they won't come, suck it but don't buy shitty dlc. If you do you're part of the problem.

Next stop Assetto Corsa.

 

[mclem]

Demonstrate that we are receptive to low-budget, low-risk projects. If sufficient people are, that's where an impact could be made.

 

[Callibretto]

They're the ones who set the budgets, not us.

so you're okay with GT game with smaller budget and limited amount of cars and tracks?

 

[emb]

I just don't buy anything that I dislike/find exploitative. So I don't buy any DLC whatsoever, and I don't buy subscription services. It makes the gaming experience more and more barebones as time goes on, but that's ok with me.

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

It does seem to me that games are being written for whales and are being designed to hell and back to cater for them alone. It's such a shame that there's no creativity on the financial side of the games industry to match the production side.
The impact mobile has had on big gaming is very disappointing and i can't see it getting any better any time soon.

 

[Solal]

Vote with your wallet is a nobrainer... but we have to realise that videogames sell millions now (especially Sony, MS, Ea games...). If we don't make noise, 90% of the buyers will not even know what kind of monetization is in the game.

And to those who think the battle is lost, there hasn't been any battle yet !

Why not start a hashtag raid ala #Nodrm?

I am gonna need some help with this as I am not into twitter at all.

Any idea for a good, punchy and efficient hashtag ?

 

[Brashnir]

so you're okay with GT game with smaller budget and limited amount of cars and tracks?

Sure, if it's a good game. Cramming a game full of more and more shit doesn't necessarily make it any better.

I don't think GT is necessarily the issue here anyway though. Forza 5 seems to be heading down this road, and maybe GT will too, but most of the games that have astronomical budgets which can't be recouped spend a lot of money on things that have absolutely nothing to do with making them better games.

 

[Salvor.Hardin]

Why would it be better to take away the option to purchase those items? I'm not sure I understand.

 

[molnizzle]

I wanna agree with you here, but eh, my time is more valuable than my money. I bought the $10 "DLC" to skip having to grind out all the upgrades in NFS Rivals. It's not like it gave me some competitive advantage, just saved me from having to perform the exact same actions over and over and over again to max out every single vehicle. For me, that's worth $10.

 

[RaikuHebi]

I blame Apple.

 

[Raw64life]

It's a losing battle but I've been voting with my wallet all generation. I've purchased DLC exactly one time. Any DLC other than that of the full blown expansion pack variety is a terrible business practice that should not be supported IMO. F2P is just as bad and I also refuse to ever play a F2P game no matter how appealing it looks on principle.

 

[Solal]

so you're okay with GT game with smaller budget and limited amount of cars and tracks?

What are you talking about? Battlefield, GT, Forza, Dead Space... these are huge series that earn billions.

Hell: GT6 was already funded just with GT5... and GT5 was funded just with GT5 prologue !

We are not talking about risky new IP (I would be more indulgent in that case....maybe) but million sellers that already have their fan base.

Come on man.

 

[Ultra Magnus]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

Same.
I'm not supporting this garbage trend. Not only do these developers ship an incomplete/ broken game but also they try to bleed their customers dry. I don't mind grinding if it fits the game but what I don't like is unnecessary grinding to make the consumer pay to get out of the bad game mechanic(Plants vs Zombies 2)

 

[RooMHM]

Video games krach. I m counting on you GAF... I wish

 

[jmood88]

We lost that battle a loooong time ago.

Games are rarely ever complete experiences now. Nope. Outfits, weapons, even difficulty modes are all easy money makers now.

This is because gamers have been willing to pay for that nonsense. The problem with a lot of people is that they'll whine and complain, all while paying for a fucking costume pack.

 

[michaelius]

Don't buy the game until it hits bargain bin and don't spend money on microtransaction ?

Problem solved.

Personally I feel very good when i have beaten P2W mechanic without spending anything.

 

[Solal]

I wanna agree with you here, but eh, my time is more valuable than my money. I bought the $10 "DLC" to skip having to grind out all the upgrades in NFS Rivals. It's not like it gave me some competitive advantage, just saved me from having to perform the exact same actions over and over and over again to max out every single vehicle. For me, that's worth $10.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g&feature=youtu.be

 

[snarge]

Why would it be better to take away the option to purchase those items? I'm not sure I understand.

The problem is that people see developers upping the grind to get unlockables instead of making simple "pay to skip" options. It's possible that 60 dollar games will be designed with paywalls and player frustration in mind, something that is acceptable in the F2P realm, but has no business (pun intended) in the full retail world.


Sadly, the "vote with your wallet" stuff simply isn't enough, because you have plenty of people that will vote the other way.

 

[Joni]

You seem to have a problem with games where you need to level-up or save currency to buy stuff. The thing you described was already in the early GTs. Back then you just had the choice between playing or not having the car.

 

[AzaK]

I am voting with my wallet, not buying Forza 5 or any other game that has micro transaction.

And email them and tell them why. They need to know.

 

[EdwardTivrusky]

I wanna agree with you here, but eh, my time is more valuable than my money. I bought the $10 "DLC" to skip having to grind out all the upgrades in NFS Rivals. It's not like it gave me some competitive advantage, just saved me from having to perform the exact same actions over and over and over again to max out every single vehicle. For me, that's worth $10.

That's the point though. I've no problem with you buying bits and pieces to fit your game time enjoyment but i fear that games are going to be designed more and more to push you into spending more money by making the grinding even less fun than before for example. I'd love to dig out an example but i'm at work, just had lunch, no sleep and i've a script to write

Are people more impatient now than before or is it we just have better communication channels meaning we can shout further.

 

[Brashnir]

I wanna agree with you here, but eh, my time is more valuable than my money. I bought the $10 "DLC" to skip having to grind out all the upgrades in NFS Rivals. It's not like it gave me some competitive advantage, just saved me from having to perform the exact same actions over and over and over again to max out every single vehicle. For me, that's worth $10.

You paid $60 for the privilege of playing a game that was intentionally broken in order to suck $10 more out of you.

 

[kotodama]

It's a losing battle but I've been voting with my wallet all generation. I've purchased DLC exactly one time. Any DLC other than that of the full blown expansion pack variety is a terrible business practice that should not be supported IMO. F2P is just as bad and I also refuse to ever play a F2P game no matter how appealing it looks on principle.

+1. Me too, the only DLC I've bought this gen is the Dark Soul's one and that falls under the expansion pack variety I'd say.

Next Gen onward I'm trying to support more big indie projects like Mighty No.9, Torment, etc to hopefully send a message to bigger publishers/developers that perhaps this is a direction they could take.

 

[paynzee]

Why would it be better to take away the option to purchase those items? I'm not sure I understand.

This right here.

 

[chickdigger802]

Somehow people still make money without ripping off their customers

that's not how businesses work.

 

[Solal]

You seem to have a problem with games where you need to level-up or save currency to buy stuff. The thing you described was already in the early GTs. Back then you just had the choice between playing or not having the car.

I think you are missing my point. Nevermind.

 

[sonicmj1]

Let me try to explain why this is so disgusting in the first place, especially with games where grinding is the very core of the mechanics. For practical reasons, I'll focus on Forza/GT examples. But the reasoning is the same for most of the games.

In ecomomy, the price of a product is usually based on its cost of production (the dev won't sell for less than what he spent to make the game...or he will loose money...which is not an option)
-the law of supply and demand: the more people want a product, the more it will cost...IRL that is only true on products with a limited availibity: if you can supply as many products as necessary, then you can't really ask for a high price. Unless you are in a monoply situation. Which is the case in a videogame economy: in GT or Forza, you can only buy to PD or Turn10.


Let's take a concrete example (numbers are not the real ones) :
In GT, a Nissan note will cost 10000Cr...when a Pagani Zonda costs 5millions Cr. In the game economy, this is logical: the Pagani being a better car,you have to work harder to get it. This logic works fine in the virtual currency. It's the core of the game: the thing that gets you to play it. Its rewarding system in a sense.

Now if we apply the real life logic to the same situation... then things start not working at all.
The pagani we are talking about is already in the game: so you already payed it when you bought the game. And also, this Pagani was not harder to produce in the game than the Nissan Note. Its price, in real money, has nothing to do with its cost of production.
And this Pagani is not rare at all: not more than any other car of the game. And it can be supplied infinitly.

So why devs can ask more real money for a Pagani than or a Nissan?
First: because they can. They have a monopoly in their game economy. So they set the price they want. Even if it has no objective justification (cost or rarity)
Second: because they know we want it. That's why we bought the game in the first place: to drive Paganis! So now, the logic behind the game mechanics is not: "let's make the best possible game" but "How frustrating/slow/hard must my gaming mechanics be to push the players to buy the cars with real money?" "Which cars will have the biggest potential for this?" (laferrari, Keonigsegg, F1, etc...) "

What you're describing isn't a new phenomenon. In fact, it's been the basis of these games' career modes for as long as either series has existed.

There are a lot of games that demand your time in exchange for the right to use their content. Whether it's money, fulfilling gated unlock conditions, or just progressing far enough in a campaign, developers have kept cars, characters, levels, and more from the player to "reward" them for getting deeper into the game. People like to feel rewarded. Sometimes, that feeling of accomplishment is even better than whatever tangible reward the accomplishment earns.

What I think you should keep in mind when making these arguments isn't the existence of a currency based progression system on its own. It's the incentives that microtransactions create for the developer.

In a game without microtransactions, you can make a car ludicrously expensive, but if the price is too high, nobody will buy it, and you just frustrate players. But in a game with microtransactions, developers are rewarded for creating lengthy time investments that players wouldn't otherwise tolerate. If they can make the time investment just lengthy enough, and the monetary investment at just the right price, they get more money for a game that's less fun for everyone in the audience. That's the thing that's dangerous, and it's an inextricable part of microtransactions. Even in some of the most lauded examples, like Dota 2, there are a lot of insidious gateways to spending money that don't really benefit the player. Microtransaction systems that can be easily ignored are pointless to implement, even if they're less frustrating for everyone.

 

[gutterboy44]

DLC and microtransactions are two different things. A microtransaction is an additional fee to unlock the exact same content but faster or XP doublers etc. Even on disc DLC, as cringe worthy as that is, can at least be stretched to say, "well we budgeted our teams for DLC so we still have to charge for it, this just makes the distribution model easier, blah blah"

There is not a single justifiable reason you should be charged on top of your $60 to access the exact content you paid for in a different way. It doesn't take much imagination to think of this in parallels to other entertainment formats and how criminal it would be viewed in those contexts.