A Case for a New Business Model

[CM Hooe]

The problem with this argument is that I'd venture to guess that the cross-section of people who have high-speed internet access and a next-generation gaming console with a dedicated hard drive (that last factor to account for people who have XBOX Live Arcades or Nintendo Wiis) is still relatively small, at least compared to the cross-section of people who only have a next-gen console (without regard ot internet access or hard drives).

Granted, the size of that minority is ever-increasing, but until the majority of consumer who purchase a game console have high-speed internet access and hard drives, I don't see how this is a feasible business model to replace the current yearly iteration business model.

[Jimmy_Fairplay]

Krioniq: Well, EA publishes Burnout Paradise and they seem to have moved away from the yearly iteration model towards ongoing DLC support with that franchise, so it would seem like it would work with their sports games too, no?

[Da_Czar]

Krioniq... good point I did not consider that. Everyone I know literally has dsl or cable. including my parents...lol One mom and pop jump on board I figure the WHOLE world is in on it. But that of course is a faulty assumption.

I would still think that section of people is much smaller than it used to be though.

[Smokez4DAyz]

Many people who don't do online gaming, would still want to purchase the game. Digital Download is still a very new. 5 or 10 ipod albums are far different than getting Madden 10. I'd like to hear what Walmart and Target feel about digital video game downloads.

[TheTodd84]

I am absolutely in love with this idea. If only for the potential. Think about it this way, if all of the extra features that gamers do or do not want, like be a pro or EASHL, were separately downloadable then EA would have all of the extra space on the disc to just focus on putting in the gameplay engine, physics, AI and what not and then the features can be added through the hard drive processor, right? Or would not it work that way?

Either way, I love this idea.

[rondoman]

Maybe it's just me being an "old" 30 year old gamer, but I hate this idea.

First off, I don't have my PS3 hooked up to the internet, and a bunch of my friends don't either. Unless I need a patch that fixes a broken game, I don't see the need or want in my personal preference.

Second, what if I purchase all these games? I need to upgrade my hard drive. Maybe I need to upgrade my internet as well.

What if my hard drive takes a crap? Are all my bought and paid for games gone for good? Can I get them back without paying for every game and add on I already purchased?

And, maybe it is just me again, but there is something about having the game physically in my possession. It is mine, here it is, I can take it to my buds house and we can play. He can bring his games to my house and we can play.

To me it doesn't really seem to benefit the consumer at this point. I really think it would drive more people away from console gaming altogether.

[CM Hooe]

Quote: Originally Posted by Jimmy_Fairplay

Krioniq: Well, EA publishes Burnout Paradise and they seem to have moved away from the yearly iteration model towards ongoing DLC support with that franchise, so it would seem like it would work with their sports games too, no?

Point taken, and in fact Burnout Paradise could very well be the guinea pig for the new business model, so-to-speak. It's easier to justify the charges for the additional content in that game, however, as the additions are very evident: new cars, new gameplay modes, new worlds, etc. Similarly, when I buy new content for Rock Band, the content is very evident, as there's new songs to play.

I'm not sure such a system would go over well in a sports game when we already expect working and well-tuned franchise modes, frequent internet roster updates, and innovations over last year's game out of the box, and all for no more than the initial $60 charge.

I would consider paying a monthly charge for something superbly ambitious in a sports game, such as a persistent massively multiplayer EASFL where I control one character with many other players, a la the EASHL, but also where there would be owner players do not play per se but who manage team rosters, buy / sell / trade players, draft new players, etc.