Murphy's Law: That'll Be $5 For 45 Uses of Your Paint Brush



+ Add a Comment


it will be worth it because of all the new features they add to games every year to make them even better and more realistic.  i hear the new ones are going to be AMAZING! graphics, sound, career mode, co-op, etc, etc, plus much much more. WOW!

my franchise is going to pwn noobs omg. 


Fecal Face

I think this would actually be interesting to try on games being sold now, except it would be applied to brand new games as well.

For example, Far Cry 2 (not new, but whatever). You could pay $30 for the game brand new (brand new as in on release date), and you would get the singleplayer campaign. For an extra $5, you can buy the multiplayer part of the game. For another extra $5, you could buy the map editor.

Of course you would still have the option to pay full $ for the full game (in this case it would be $40), and you would get everything as you normally would.

This could save people some money, if you didn't want multiplayer, you could save yourself $5. If you didn't want multiplayer or the map editor, you'd save $10.

Not really sure how it would benefit the companies selling the games though. Heheheh


|Intel Corei7 920|BFG Tech GTX295|ASUS 9600GT|Corsair XMS3 6GB RAM|Caviar Black 1TB|Lexa Blackline Red|Razer Mamba + Carcharias + Moray + Destructor|Logitech G15 + X-540|

Zune HD = Happiness



Regarding games, I'm not sure how I would feel about this model, since I don't play many recent games.  The previous commenters have had some cool ideas, though, such as only paying for multiplayer or singleplayer if that's all you want.  I could go for that since I usually just stick with singleplayer.

As for shareware, though, I'd love to have this option.  Recently, my boss came to me with an Outlook inbox so bloated and SNAFUed it would freeze his computer whenever he opened it.  I backed up his computer and reinstalled Windows because it was about time for that anyways, then set myself to the task of spiltting his multigigabyte PST files into smaller ones organized by contact.  Unfortunately, though, the biggest one was corrupt and scanpst.exe failed to fix it, and that's when I found out that there aren't any free or open source PST repair programs.  I ran one which did find all his messages, but I would have had to buy the entire software for a couple hundred dollars to actually recover the messages.  I'm probably never going to need this program again.  I'd love the opportunity to drop them a reasonable one-time-use fee, then uninstall it.

On a more macro scale, this would be great for some of the more expensive software packages.  What if you only need Photoshop for a week, not forever?  And in the realm of superexpensive software like my engineering simulators, it'd be nice to not have to drop $15k on a year's license for a program I only need for a month.

I don't think this would increase pirating significantly.  Many of these programs are already pirated as some very easy searching will show.  If anything, it might negate the all-or-nothing dilemma that spurs pirating.  I think it's an idea worth serious consideration.



The moment I got to "But when I fired up the title on my trusty Xbox 360, I nearly threw up." I knew EXACTLY what he was gonna say, the online key :P We had an article about them chargign for MP for sports games on consoles a long while ago :O


DICE semi-did the same thing with VIP keys.

 Can't have consumers getting our games for cheaper, now can we? - Console Game Devs



I really don't understand any backlash against this really. PC gamers have been doing this for years now. You DO NOT have to pay for a code unless you buy the game used. If you buy it brand new, it has the code already. What's the problem with that?

At least you have the option of getting a new code. If a PC game's code is already used, you're SOL.You could argue the old PC games had a CD key not tied to an account, but most PC games have long ago switched to being account based. Unless you hand over your game plus the account to another person, it can never be used by anybody else. And often, that's a violation of terms of use, and if it's discovered, the account is banned. And in the case of Steam, you'd have to give someone your entire account and all the games with it.



For me, the point is that -- I purchased a game.  I want to be able to play the full game, regardless of where I got it from, without having to buy "special access" to features I should already have just because I didn't chug down to Best Buy and purchase the guy brand-new.

Though I agree with your point -- PC titles really do need to be account-based nowadays since, well, there's no real measure in place to "get another key" for PC titles unless you buy another game / run miles with customer support / etc 



I can only see options like this being a good idea if you give the product away for free or a very low fee and then ask people to pay to unlock the features they want. The problem with games is that they aren't doing this. They are specifically trying to devalue an item you paid full price for on the used game market. This ain't right. If I bought it I have the right to sell it in the exact same form and function as I received it. It would be like buying a used car and finding out you had to pay a few thousand dollars to buy a code from the manufacturer that unlocks the windows, trunk, or radio. It's retarded. And it all smells a bit illegal to me. To purposefully cripple an item to prevent its resale is clearly illegal.

The flip side they seem to have conveniently forgotten is that many people only pay full price for a game knowing they can sell it in a month or so after they've finished it. Remove the resell option and I think a lot of people are going to think twice about buying it. So now those who would have bought it used won't, and many of those who would have bought it new won't. And then there are people like me that won't buy it just on principle. So golly, seems like a whole lot of people not buying their game. And when the final sales figures are in and it's clear their new model is an utter failure they'll just blame piracy.



I see where you're coming from. But that's why I shop on places like where you can get new games at a substantial discount, assuming you're willing to play the waiting game (new, as in not used, not new release). For instance, I've been wanting to get Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks on my DS. Amazon now has it for 55% off for now. If it's a game you have to have right away, yes you'll need to fork over the full price. But really, if you have to have it on day one, you'd be paying that regardless and wouldn't be buying it used anyhow.

Basically, I'm just saying you can buy unopened new games at a large discount if you're willing to look around and not rush down to Best Buy or Gamestop.



Or wait a year or two, which by then chances are you don't care anymore.



Just think for a second how many times You wanted a game just because of some certain future ? I mean let's say Battelfield Bad Company 2 , what if You would pay for multiplayer and not singleplayer ( which is sucks anyway ) ? Or Call Of Duty MW2 ? Or vice versa.  You get the game , free with let's say time limitations and if You like certain future You pay for it . Here is one more example - " Crysis " how many of You were sick to play second part of the game , which is basic arcade ?  I was recently was playing " Splinter Cell Conviction " . I was playing and thinking " God damned I payed 45 bucks for it ? really ? " What if I could have an option to buy " Full " or " Levels " .  Usually singlplayer has something like 8 to 9 levels . Even if You would pay for every level 5 bucks  9 * 5 = 45 bucks in case You like the game and You buy the whole pack . What if You buy first level and You don't like it ? You spend just 5 bucks instead of 45 . 



Hey they're not making us buy the product, I don't care what they do.



I think this is a bad Idea on all levels. and will only up the pirating rate. But, history suggests this would be welcome with open arms by sheeple users who's rebuttal to this would be "don't like it, code you're own", that would be the cousin of the already patented arguement "don't like it, don't buy it" then it will resort to where there are no free alternatives, we, the end user's will still be nickle and dimed to death in some other form.


seriously? paying for certain features of a program? so would I still have to do a full install of the program, yet can't user all features installed? because you know, I don't want anything taking up unnecessary space.

 sure microtransactions on useless apps like farmville and stuff like that may be cool, who knows I sure don't play them. but full application suites? no thanks. because as much as we dream about an ideal pricing model for it, say paying for just word, excel, and access for a office suite, we all know good and well we'll end up having to pay for the entire suite, and then paying micro transactions to unlock more "features" that were originally included in the original price tag during the "non" micro-transaction era. the office situation was just a rough example. but if this is what normal everyday pc usage is headed toward, it's truely frightening. we already get siphoned for internet services(i'm paying $50 for a 1mb connection every month from comcast with no alternative services in my area....and no I can't just "not buy it", I require a broadband connection for my line of work) which hold virtual monopolies, it really makes me sick to think that someone would even defend a microtransaction model.





Wouldn't be a bad idea.  I will always go the shareware route but for people like my parents, grandparents, friends, etc. it would actually save a lot of money.


I would friend you on WOW but am currently enjoying my free to play mmo DDO.  :P

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.