Gaming Signal: Is the XBox Live Marketplace a Crutch?

Is the XBox Live Marketplace a Crutch?

That is an excellent question isn't it? This comes up as part of the fallout from the latest list of content that can be purchased for Marketplace Points for the new EA game, Need For Speed: Carbon. Now if you go through the entire list of items, you will see some interesting things in that one of the options is an 800 point unlock of every performance package in the game (its listed as the Ultimate Performance Bundle). Now there are two angles here with this stuff, the first being that it is added content that enhances the experience above and beyond the base game. This is definitely where the content that Oblivion adds, and while I don't agree with the pricing model - it is a good thing. The second is that game publishers can release half a game for full price and then make even more through these content downloads. And it is this second angle that concerns me in that a single successful release will start a landslide where every game that follows will be done that way. This is also where the question used in the title comes up. Would the game that we are discussing today be done this way if XBLM (code for Xbox Live Marketplace) did not exist? My gut feeling is that these companies are already embracing the concept of added content, and that would be provided through a proprietary storefront if the Microsoft provided one did not exist.

I fully understand that creating games costs money, and I am willing to pay for good games. What I am unwilling to pay full price for is half a game that is completed by buying content patches that wind up doubling the overall cost of the game. I think adding content that enhances the game is an excellent way to supplement income, and these can be the addition of special cars and tracks or adding new quests that are not core to the game. These are wonderful additions that should result in compensation for the developer.

Who is responsible for policing this stuff? Some believe it should be Microsoft who puts thier foot down in order to protect customers, but I honestly don't think so. Microsoft is simply providing a mechanism to purchase the content, and since they are not providing the content cannot be responsible for what publishers do. They may go to these publishers and say that was really not a nice thing you did, but I don't think they will prevent this stuff from happening. So the power falls to the consumer (as it should), if this type of activity is something that sets your blood boiling - then hit the publisher where it hurts, the pocketbook. Nothing sends a better message than finding out something is not selling. So for those out there who hate this microtransaction stuff, vote with your pocket book. If folks do decide to be more verbal, remember that these companies are more likely to listen if a non-emotional appeal is used. Calling names and use of colorful language do not help your situation, but showing respect and documenting your points will get you a lot farther... It is the whole flies with honey thing.

I think in EA's case, they are charging points to unlock game content that is unlockable via gameplay as well (that isn't 100% clear.) I guess I don't mind charging for the 'cheat code' kind of thing.

The only part that's a bit odd is the Collector's Edition one - that content is all on the disk, but you don't get it unless you buy the CE or buy the unlock? That seems odd, but OK.

If it were on the PC, you know there would be a way to unlock all the content using a cheat program the day of launch.

Posted by Scott on Thursday November 02, 2006 at 5:58 PM