Got news?   tips@destructoid.com  |  Never miss a story:   RSS + Twitter + YouTube
Hey! New here? Destructoid is a gaming discussion community, updated nearly every 20 minutes. Make a quick avatar to comment and enter our contests. Take the tour!

 


Home Xbox 360 updates

Developer criticizes 360 Community Games price structure

10:42 AM on 11.25.2008, Jim Sterling 17 comments

Developer criticizes 360 Community Games price structure photo
     Xbox 360

Microsoft has come under fire before, especially from indie developers like Jonathan Blow, for the amount of restrictions and inflexibility one finds when making games for the Xbox 360. Joining the ranks of the frustrated is Weapon of Choice creator Nathan Fouts, finding himself between a rock and hard place when naming a price for his game.

"... an 800 point game 'must' be a great game," explains Fouts. "Is our game long enough to warrant a 800 point price tag? ... Will gamers compare Community Games to XBLA and not pay as much because there are no leaderboards or Achievements available? ... At what price is it an impulse-buy versus a thought-out purchase? ... Do we price our game for our target market or focus on building a larger fan-base? ... And on and on.

"I think the most frustrating part in pricing has been the quantized price points. Microsoft does not allow for user-defined price points like 799 points or even 100 point increments like 500, 600, 700, etc. For a bigger game like Weapon of Choice, only having two options, one of which is double the first option, makes the decision difficult. I felt like we could have priced the game at 600 points and received no backlash from consumers as they compare our game to other downloadables."

Really, any developer who considers getting into bed with Microsoft, as with any whore, needs to be aware of what diseases might be picked up. Microsoft's rigidity has caused problems in the past and even contributed to the detriment of a game (Unreal Tournament III being a fine example). It's a shame that MS won't be more flexible ... especially since most of the Community Games aren't even worth 200 points.


Next page: More XNA stories




Jobson's Avatar
Jobson at 11/25/2008 10:49
Sadly, a lot of people opt out of getting games that cost because of no achievements
Mxyzptlk's Avatar
Mxyzptlk at 11/25/2008 10:50
Thank god they don't allow you to price something at 799 points. It's annoying enough already when you have 30 points left over you can't spend on anything.

Are there any arcade games priced at 600 points? It seems to me like MS is just keeping the community games in line with the existing standard. I can also see the reasoning behind the "greater than 50 megs = 400 points or more" rule. If they're taking up a certain amount of space/bandwidth on MS's servers, then there should be a minimum price.

Bottom line, don't like the way MS is handling it? Don't develop for the platform.
crila's Avatar
crila at 11/25/2008 10:53
weapon of chose should have been free. i got to the second level (about as far as the free demo) and it crashes. way to go xbox community games. now my xbox tells me to contact the game developer. ummm, really?!
GuitarAtomik's Avatar
GuitarAtomik at 11/25/2008 10:55
I would totally have paid 600 points for Weapon of Choice. That game is awesome-tastic.

Though I don't think they should let you price your stuff as specific as 799 points, I do think they should let you choose between 100 point increments. Oh well.
free touch's Avatar
free touch at 11/25/2008 11:20
You guys are missing the point I think. He's complaining because he doesn't want to add the extra bits into the game, like achievements and leaderboards. 2 things that would make the game more enjoyable, and maybe take a few extra hours to put in.

If the game was 600 points, I would still want the achievements.
gamesronlygames's Avatar
gamesronlygames at 11/25/2008 12:18
The point system is lame. Lets work with real figures MS-Oh and give your devs freedom. If they dont want to include acheivements they need to know many xbots are addicted to that now and enjoy that extra feature and sales will suffer for a want of it. But geez let them price their games at a competitive pp.
IndiecisiveLink's Avatar
IndiecisiveLink at 11/25/2008 12:44
free touch - Microsoft doesn't let XNA developers have leaderboards or achievements. If they want them in their games, they have to write them from scratch, provide the server for the leaderboards, etc. And Microsoft doesn't let them use the names "leaderboards" or "achievements" either. Not the developer's call. =/
xenon's Avatar
xenon at 11/25/2008 12:57
His point, according to TFA, is that XBLA games are too cheap, therefore forcing Community Games to have very low prices. The reasoning is if <great XBLA game> costs X, and <Community game> is worth (or is perceived as being worth) X/2, X/3 or X/4, it certainlt the latter certainly be priced at more than X/2. Is he right? I don't think so. I think 1200 points is already too much for XBLA games. Also, I don't know the financial details, but the revenue share actually going in the pockets of the developers is comparatively bigger than the one for retail games, isn't it?
xenon's Avatar
xenon at 11/25/2008 13:00
Also, download size can be a rough measurement of the work put into a game and a very rough measurement of its value, but the related bandwidth and server storage costs can't be considered a sufficient reason for a higher price tag.
Karma-Suture's Avatar
Karma-Suture at 11/25/2008 13:24
This guy sounds like an unsigned band complaining about everything the label "forces" them to do.

And as much as I can appreciate the notion of "sticking it to The Man", you don't call The Man a whore when you're relying on him to afford you the opportunity.

How's about you just sell the game for 5 bucks, succeed, then sell your next game for 10 bucks. Problem solved.
xenon's Avatar
xenon at 11/25/2008 13:44
Certainly they could develop for PC and sell directly, although I think it's proven that centralized systems like XBLA and Steam do help increasing visibility and sales. Of course they come at a price (not only a monetary one), and in this case they chose to pay it, but I think they still have a right to comment and criticize their deal.
MotoRobo's Avatar
MotoRobo at 11/25/2008 14:47
MS's sucking but not as hard as its' competitors. Therein the key to victory.
Demtor's Avatar
Demtor at 11/25/2008 15:14
lol @ MotoRobo, good point. As much as everyone likes to hate on MS (me included) they are still doing better than others in a number of areas.
WarZombie's Avatar
WarZombie at 11/25/2008 17:41
Honestly, Achievements didn't exist before this generation and people *gasp* bought the games anyway. It isn't about the Achievements or leaderboards, if the game itself is good then I would buy, reagrdless of all that other crap. 12 bucks isn't bad for a good game (there are shitty games out there that are more expensive), and even before that people have to learn to SUPPORT INDEPENDENT DEVELOPERS. Buy the game not just because it's good, but because it gives the developer of said game to make MORE games.

Our money + Buying good indie games = More good indie games.

What a concept.
GohanGVO's Avatar
GohanGVO at 11/27/2008 21:53
Interestingly enough, he wanted to move the project onto XBLA. However, Microsoft wanted to keep it on Community Games as a showcase of what can be done by such a small team (as in one guy and some helpers).
prev next

Returning Dtoiders: login now to post a comment

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just Create an avatar now - it's fast and free: PLUS you also get your own gaming blog and begin posting stories and uploading videos in our open community area that may also appear on our home page. Sign up and we'll guide you through it, it's easy and 100% anonymous.




 Original Videos

 Reviews
Mad Dog McCree Gunslinger Pack
Overlord II
Yosumin Live!
Let's Tap
Ghostbusters: The Video Game (Wii)
View all Game Reviews

 Community blogs -   39780 Dtoiders!

This month's theme: Untapped Potential

New to Dtoid? Read the survival guide


 Originals

How Pokemon Red is blatantly better than Pokemon Blue











more original Destructoid stories



 Popular now more













Destructoid is:
Nick Chester
Editor-in-Chief
Jim Sterling
Reviews Editor
Dale North
News Editor
Hamza Aziz
Community Manager
Anthony Burch
Features Editor
Rey Gutierrez
Video editor & director
Niero
Founder, publisher
Letters to the editors
tips@destructoid.com
Associate Editors
Ashley Davis Jonathan Holmes
Brad Nicholson Jonathan Ross
Brad Rice Jordan Devore
Chad Concelmo Matthew Razak
Colette Bennett Tom Fronczak
Conrad Zimmerman Topher Cantler
Dyson Samit Sarkar
Contributors
Adam Dork
Ben Perlee
Daniel Lingen
Joseph Leray
Joe Burling
Mikey
Will Maddock
Stella Wong




get involved

register or login
post a blog
post a forum
enter a contest
discuss a review
contribute a news tip
write a guest editorial
support

new member's guide
login assistance
tech support
report abuse
email our editors
read our dev blog
nuclear crisis?
keep in touch

RSS feed
Twitter
Facebook
Myspace
Flickr
Game nights
Meet-ups
seriously

about us
advertising
terms of use
privacy policy
jobs at MM
buy our crap
our network

Tomopop
Japanator




Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press
living the dream since March 16, 2006