• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

EA actively investigating "free-to-start" console games

Cynar said:
Because they are marketing a term for something that already exists. Every game on the 360 for xbla had a demo and once you bought it you were good to go and continue. The way that they are talking about it sounds like they would milk you hard.
Click to expand...

But this doesn't really exist for retail console games, except for EA Access and PS+. This is fundamentally different than a demo. Demos =/= trials; this =/= demos
 
They are doing this because they want to push digital gaming on consoles, just like they are doing with EA Access and their 10% discount.

With "free-to-start" they want to let players download and test the full game for a certain amount of time. By the time gamers wants to buy the full game, they have already downloaded the full game. All they have to do is to activate it, so they won`t bother to pick up the physical disc, when they can buy it instantly.
 
Rembrandt said:
But this doesn't really exist for retail console games, except for EA Access and PS+. This is fundamentally different than a demo. Demos =/= trials; this =/= demos
Click to expand...

That's the thing though: it already exists with EA Access. Why would EA abandon something that, from last I heard, has been successful for them and lose the revenue from that subscription? Why not just expand it to all platforms?

Seems like a lot of jaw wagging for something they already have implemented.

As I already said, via shameless self quote:
ArkkAngel007 said:
The problem is, they already do this for EA Access. Why would they toss out that revenue stream that can be further pursued?

Either this means that EA Access is getting expanded (which I have no issues with), or there's going to be a catch to make up for that revenue being lost for undermining one of the major selling points of their subscription service (albeit one only currently available on XBO). Given that EA Access isn't mentioned at all or alluded to in a 'diplomatic' fashion, I doubt it's the former.

Demo's have more or less been abandoned before release for the majority significant titles. Share Play hasn't caught unfortunately. Most of the plans implemented by publishers these past few years has been about bringing revenue ahead of a products release, including post-release content, and have been testing out asking for more as soon as the software boots up.

It's obviously not a bad thing in of itself. Just like DLC, micro transactions, and season passes. But somehow all of these things have become problems.

It doesn't warrant quite a bit of the reactions in this thread so far and what is to likely be said after this, but given the above it most certainly warrants looking into.
Click to expand...
 
Rembrandt said:
Lol, you're comparing a mobile game to a console one. You think they're gonna implement a stamina bar in the next NFS because they added one on mobile like all other mobile developers?
Click to expand...

LOL at the belief that companies wouldn't love to start applying the mobile game milking concepts to the console space. They've already started.
 
So, basically, Lite / Trial versions of games, that lets you upgrade to the full game / service version of the game? In theory, I don't see anything wrong with this. At all. Actually, I wouldn't be opposed to see, alongisde complete games, single player and multiplayer parts of those games being sold separately, with much lower prices compared to the complete games (which would become a "bundle" of sorts). Or minigame packs / single minigames alongside a full Mario Party (for example). It means giving to customers brand new options to enjoy their games, and increasing your potential profit from the same project / userbase for DLCs of any kind while still making money from the purchase alone.

In all these cases, what's essential is the execution of the idea. And I can see why people is not that excited to see EA's take on this (count me in as well XD), but let's see if they can surprise us, after all.
 
Altima said:
Why this is bad ?

People are too quick to hate.
Click to expand...

I don't understand either. I'd like to be able to try a full game before I buy it(or not) more often. Right now it mostly happens through betas, but that's not supposed to be their purpose.
Sure demos did that too, and people liked them and wanted more of them. But they could also be misleading compared to the real game, and required additional work from the devs.
 
Remember when Microsoft cut Fable (2? Or 3?) into five chapters and gave away the first chapter for free.

It the numerous games that will let your progress carry over to the main game once you buy the full game.

...it sounds like EA is just throwing every business model they have into one big pot (er...demo) and seeing how much people will tolerate.
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
That's the thing though: it already exists with EA Access. Why would EA abandon something that, from last I heard, has been successful for them and lose the revenue from that subscription? Why not just expand it to all platforms?

Seems like a lot of jaw wagging for something they already have implemented.

As I already said, via shameless self quote:
Click to expand...

Ea access only lets early adopters try a game before buying. If I wanted to try the latest FIFA right now, I couldn't any more.
Sure the mechanics are already used in the ea access, but the service isn't the same.
 
potam said:
You mean...LIKE A FUCKING DEMO?

1274178810.jpg


#only90skids

edit: god damn those Pizza Hut demos went hard
Click to expand...

I think PC users used to call this shareware.
 
GHG said:
Why not simplify it and just call it a demo or a trail?

Oh yeh because they have to be seen to be trying to "innovate" while also shoving microtransactions down our throats.
Click to expand...

Because in a way it's slightly different. It's the idea of trying to get people to pay piecemeal after enticing you to download the "free" game. KI is one of many games using this model.
 
Yo people

When we look at film, television, music, books, very often there is this free trial notion that actually onboards new players, new listeners, new readers, or new viewers into a service.
Click to expand...

Tie into a service, not buy the full game. He's talking about a free month of EA Access, not shareware.
or a future of game licensing where you have to pay monthly in order to keep playing Dead Space 4
 
Three said:
Because in a way it's slightly different. It's the idea of trying to get people to pay piecemeal after enticing you to download the "free" game. KI is one of many games using this model.
Click to expand...

That's called free to play.
 
Creating a demo costs time and money, but it's still good advertising. So what you do is make people download your entire game and block progression. No need for a demo anymore, clever.
 
Game demo discs saved me from getting some games I never liked after playing and showed me some gems I would be missed.

I am all down for this, as long as it's a one off fee and not so getting we have to pay more than once to progress.
 
Wilson went on to say that the next step would be to offer the free-to-start player a full-game download, microtransaction, or a subscription--or maybe all three.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that the player may choose whether to buy the whole game, and not have to do any microtransactions at all, or to go by a pay-as-you-go microtransactions or subscription option for the same game? Because I would be ok with that.
 
suppadoopa said:
you can already do this with PS+
You get 1 hour of the full game then you choose to buy the game.
Click to expand...

User33 said:
It sounds very similar to the free trials that PS+ has, which are very different than demos:

  • You always start at the beginning of the game, rather than a segment the developers want to highlight (only a handful of demos start at the beginning of the game)

  • No features are locked out (ie. only being able to play as 2-3 characters from the starting roster in a demo)

  • No lost progress (some demos let you carry over stats, but it's not a direct save port, not to mention it still being relatively uncommon in the first place)

  • More seamless transition from trial to game (being able to buy full experience while in the actual game)
Click to expand...

yup, it sounds like this exact thing :D and the full game trials are actually pretty great, if you get hooked within the hour mark, just buy the game, if not, yay you rented the game out for an hour and wanted to see what it plays like.
 
Last gen was great because you could just download demos over XBL and play right there. Prior to that you needed demo discs and the like.

I can safely say that demos got me to buy BioShock, Mirrors Edge, Dirt, Batman Arkham Asylum and City, and many more.

Demos are good. Just call them demos and be done with it.
 
This will solve the problem with demos being too small and quick to download. So now we get to download 50GB demos instead.
 
kittens said:
Yeah, same here, but it hasn't taken any particular effort on my part. I skipped most of the big AAA titles of last gen just because they don't seem interesting to me. ¬Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, all the PS3 exclusives except for Uncharted 2, etc. The only first part titles I care about are Halo and Nintendo games. Aside from that, 85% of what I play are indie games.
Click to expand...

Typical Portlandia hipster! I bet instead of Doritos and Mountain Dew you have soy-based chai lattes and multi-grain hemp seeds while you game :)

Unrelated note, did you even try the H5 beta?
 
I m happy with the idea of a demo.
I think it is retarde that a lot of the game developers expect we buy their stuff based on screenshots, youtube videos and hype.
So far, if the games does not have a demo, I have just pireted it to check it out and if I feel it is good enough, then I have bought it. Would be nice to not have to do it, with a proper demo/limited time or level access.

So, in favor, but not too sure it will happen, because that would mean, that a lot of the people would not buy of lot of the games because of the state these games are realeased in - Assasin's Creed anyone?
 
User33 said:
It sounds very similar to the free trials that PS+ has, which are very different than demos:

  • You always start at the beginning of the game, rather than a segment the developers want to highlight (only a handful of demos start at the beginning of the game)

  • No features are locked out (ie. only being able to play as 2-3 characters from the starting roster in a demo)

  • No lost progress (some demos let you carry over stats, but it's not a direct save port, not to mention it still being relatively uncommon in the first place)

  • More seamless transition from trial to game (being able to buy full experience while in the actual game)
Click to expand...

Aside from the last point, everything you described are in Toukiden, God Eater, Phantasy Star Nova demo.

I guess Japan is leading the revolution then.
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
That's the thing though: it already exists with EA Access. Why would EA abandon something that, from last I heard, has been successful for them and lose the revenue from that subscription? Why not just expand it to all platforms?

Seems like a lot of jaw wagging for something they already have implemented.

As I already said, via shameless self quote:
Click to expand...


The trials are a feature of EA Access, not the big selling point. There's no reason they couldn't offer the trial separately while keeping the free games and 10% discount exclusive to Access.

Birgitte2004 said:
LOL at the belief that companies wouldn't love to start applying the mobile game milking concepts to the console space. They've already started.
Click to expand...

What games implemented a stamina system on consoles? Or which games are you talking about specifically?
 
Can't understand the hate in this thread.
Yes, it's basically a demo, but demos have been dead for many years. If EA manages to bring them back it's amazing and should be appreciated.
 
The Sarcastic Dude said:
So basically you can start a game for free and at a certain point, if you like it you can buy it? Sounds good to me. You'll likely be able to keep the progress you made like they do with EA access.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind this, kinda reminds me of xbox live arcade every game had a demo part if im not mistaken.

High speed internet en no caps, so im not mad if downloaded 35gb for nothing.
 
Velurian said:
So, in favor, but not too sure it will happen, because that would mean, that a lot of the people would not buy of lot of the games because of the state these games are realeased in - Assasin's Creed anyone?
Click to expand...

About Assassin's Creed, even disregarding issues with bugs and performance, I think it would positively influence game design too. The thing I hate most in games like AC is that you have to go through one hour (at best) of tutorials and exposition before the game starts getting fun.
If the game purchase is conditioned to a free trial of its beginning, I'm sure game designers will make sure that the player will have fun from the first minute, as it should be.
 
KOHIPEET said:
I don't understand. Just offer a simple demo for god's sake.
Click to expand...

A demo is a standalone product, that requires specific development, testing, "packaging" and distribution. It will always be additional work for the devs and publishers. While having a trial mechanism set as standard in your SDKs reduces that effort ; at the probable cost of requiring the user to download the full game to try it... but it has also its benefits, since the unlocking of the full game would be instantaneous. If anything it would also help filter out people that are more curious than interested, that's less exposition but also less stress for the download servers (bandwidth cost money after all)
 
Alx said:
Ea access only lets early adopters try a game before buying. If I wanted to try the latest FIFA right now, I couldn't any more.
Sure the mechanics are already used in the ea access, but the service isn't the same.
Click to expand...

And what is said that they would allow unlimited free-to-start access in this? Also seems like something that they can easily change within the EA Access program, rather than go in a separate direction.

I just don't see them going the entirely free to try route when they have a very similar set-up under a paid service.
 
ArkkAngel007 said:
And what is said that they would allow unlimited free-to-start access in this?
Click to expand...

What is said that they wouldn't ? They're just considering it anyway, so nothing is set in stone. But if they call it a market model, then it would probably be active for more than a few weeks. Especially if that would make it redundant with an existing service indeed.
 
This is a very honest question, maybe I am a bit dump or my english is way to bad (not a native english speaker) but why do most people think EA is talking about a demo system? They already have the EA Access and the Game Time system for that.

...free-to-start player a full-game download, microtransaction, or a subscription--or maybe all three.
Click to expand...

IMO free to start is as missleading as free to play. As I understand them, they are going to develope special 'free to download games' with a microtransaction and/or a subscription system implemented. So they are just going to test their mobile games concept on home consoles. And that is not something I look forward to.
 
ISee said:
IMO free to start is as missleading as free to play.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's as misleading. The problem with "free to play" is that you could think it will let you access the whole playing experience without paying anything. "Free to start" is quite explicit, you know instantly that only the beginning will be free, which would mean that you will have to pay one way or another to get the full content.
 
Alx said:
What is said that they wouldn't ? They're just considering it anyway, so nothing is set in stone. But if they call it a market model, then it would probably be active for more than a few weeks. Especially if that would make it redundant with an existing service indeed.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I guess we'll agree to disagree. I can see them taking specific titles to experiment on as another poster suggested rather than something like Battlefront or Mass Effect, but otherwise I doubt there won't be a catch given that they aren't just going to toss one of the advantages of EA Access to the side that can be broadened to widen the appeal of that existing service.

But I'm recognizing this as me just being incredibly cautious. If they truly do implement a system that isn't manipulative or detracts from a game's design, I'll be relieved with them taking a favorable direction.
LSauchelli said:
Free-to-start is a good concept that could help gamers if done right.

I wonder about the whole 'micro transaction' thing, though. I like the Killer instinct model
Click to expand...

That's what I'm hoping for if they decide to combine these vectors. Never got into Killer Instinct as I haven't played fighters in years, but it looked like a decent system.
 
Free-to-start is a good concept that could help gamers if done right.

I wonder about the whole 'micro transaction' thing, though. I like the Killer instinct model, it could even work for FIFA, instead of buying all the team I may only want the Spanish league or National teams. But if you buy everything it shouldn't be more expensive than the current model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[WC] Microsoft and Xbox are "actively investigating" a rampant 'can't connect' issue for backwards compatible Xbox 360 games
2
57
193
reinking replied
Console Gacha Games - Which?
8
382
Danjin44 replied
What new 1st Party games will start Next Gen?
41
470
yogaflame replied
Digital Foundry: "Forgotten" Console Games That Demand To Be Remastered
2
61
829
subskark replied
Modern Vintage Gamer: Early Console Modchips - From Piracy to Freedom
Retro Trailer Hardware 
10
412
MayauMiao replied
Top Bottom