Microsoft Forces Valve to Charge For L4D DLC on 360?

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
You know, this story just doesn’t sound right. The first downloadable content for Left 4 Dead was free. Valve promised more free DLC. Now all of the sudden it is "Microsoft is forcing us to charge for it." Something tells me that if Valve wanted it to be free, it would be free. Oh well, it is only $7 but it sure sounds like Valve is making Microsoft the scapegoat on this one.

"[Microsoft] helped us get the first one out for free," explained Faliszek. "We had the one DLC out for free. And I think... they have to look and say, wow, we're kind of being unfair to everybody else if these guys can do that."
Click to expand...
 
anthrex said:
They said this was gonna happen. Sounds like non news to me. :confused:
Click to expand...

Who is "they?" The only thing I remember was Valve promising free new weapons, characters and campaigns for L4D. Now they want to charge for it. Okay, it is their game, they can do what they want. But blaming Microsoft?

Trust me, if Valve wanted it free (like the first DLC), it would be free. What changed between the time they released the first bit of free DLC and now? Why can other studios repeatedly release free stuff?


As for "non news" it sure seems to have the gaming news sites up in arms today.
 
this is why I won't buy an xbox, people should be more outraged for having to pay for xbox live period, let alone more content. I can understand if it's a full on mission pack but not a few levels, or in some cases one level.
 
Does not surprise me if MS did not let them post it for free. Or Valve is doing it to recoup the costs of posting on XBL.
 
MS probably wants Valve to pay them storage and bandwidth fees on their xbox live servers, which would noramaly be paid for from MS's cut of the profits if it was paid DLC.

Valve is just trying to spin it publicly to make it look like its all MS's fault.
 
the days of economical yearly fees are gone. soon we will have to pay 50 cents to open a door at a restaurant, pay a quarter to wash our hands, pay for the meal, then pay to use the trash can. at least the exit at the door will be free, what a deal!
 
Who cares. No self respecting member of this former plays a fast paced twitchy shooter like this below 60 frames. And that means no controllers!

I read somewhere that MS allows a certain amount of content for free, then they enforce charging. Maybe that's it. Either way, between this and the whole Left4Dead2 debacle, Valve seems a lot more like EA nowadays. :(
 
DLC has to be tested. Bandwidth is expensive. Stuff isn't free. This is normal, expectable, and just fine in my book.
 
Depends on how much they are charging for the stuff... if its suppose to be free but due to bandwidth/storage/support costs that MS won't comp them on... then the fee shouldnt be too big.

Too bad you can't DL the stuff online via your PC then just import the stuff via your USB for install... bypass XBL altogether, but MS won't let you do that. If the fee they are charging is like the standard costs... then Valve is pushing the blame to MS.

MS could always post and say BS to it and then what will Valve do then?
 
The new Batman DLC will be free, and Valve's previous stuff was free, and there's free shit all the time on XBL. If I were MS, I would come out and call BS on this. Unless MS told Valve they would take the heat for it if they wanted to charge, which I bet is what happened.
 
I say valve should not release it. Microsoft should pay valve for even making games on the consoles.
 
Doubt that they told Valve they would take the heat. I mean that really is a stretch. I believe they were told it is gonna cost you to host the DLC which = we have to charge for it.

I bet you won't see the PC dlc in the steam store anytime soon.
 
Isn't this DLC small too? Like 1 new 2 map campaign? Where are all the new weapons, bosses, zombies, abilities, special items, randomizing shit options (I want my 2 tanks vs 0 tank back!)?
 
Well, the PC version is free and the console one is not... so kinda seems like it to me.
 
Instead of saying M$ is making us do it, why don't they charge 1 point to download it and pick up the tab for the difference of what ever M$ is charging them or telling them what to charge for it. Greed!
 
krupted said:
the days of economical yearly fees are gone. soon we will have to pay 50 cents to open a door at a restaurant, pay a quarter to wash our hands, pay for the meal, then pay to use the trash can. at least the exit at the door will be free, what a deal!
Click to expand...

<Rubs his lobes> My plans to convert Earth into Ferenganar are advancing faster than I hoped.
 
*Some* DLC is free. Most DLC is in the form of updates, which are free.
Add-on stuff is 99% of the time not free. Microsoft tells those companies to charge accordingly for it. This isn't news; there have been many cases in the past including Bizarre Creations saying they wanted to release Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved for free, but Microsoft told them they had to charge for it so they picked the smallest amount they could - 400pts.

Let's compare things shall we?
Are maps on PC free? Yes. Are the TF2 class updates free on PC? Yes.
Are those same updates on 360 going to cost money? Yes. Why? Because Xbox Live is Microsoft's proverbial "playground" and what they say, goes. If Valve is so greedy (like some of you claim they are), then why would they have all those updates free on PC then? Hmm? It makes no sense.

[reposting my comment from Shacknews on this topic]
...and in other breaking news, the sky is blue and water is wet.

I freely admit that I pay for Xbox Live, because I'm forced to since the only way to play online on the 360 is through Microsoft's pay service. It's really sad though that for all that it's not, Live isn't free. Microsoft seems very keen to hold onto that cash cow, despite the competition offering similar free services (PSN and Steam). No surprise that they force developers and publishers to charge for the content they'd rather serve free of charge as well.

Guess they've gotta make up those billions lost on shoddy hardware *somewhere*, and last I checked, people weren't lining up to buy hard drives with ridiculous $-per-gigabyte ratios and overpriced wireless network adapters. But I digress.

Live is a great service. Microsoft needs to loosen the reins a little bit and quit being such greedy bastards though. I love my 360, my Ps3, and both of my gaming PCs; truth be told, if an FPS comes out on all 3, I buy it for PC because a) online play will always be free, b) KB+M control is still superior to controllers, and c) there's the updates, freebies, and mod communities to keep PC FPS alive.
Click to expand...
 
re: TF2, read the link Bacon put on at the bottom of page 1

Though the updates were free on PC, Valve affirmed it is being forced to charge for the Xbox 360 release, which is why the studio waited until it had an abundance of content.
Click to expand...

Proof #2 that Valve is not a bunch of greedy SOB's. If they were, they'd nickel and dime all of the 360 TF2 owners for 200+ points for 1 class update, instead of releasing a bundle at one time for slightly more.

I love my 360 like there's no tomorrow despite having 2 RRoD's and 2 other repairs in the 3 1/2 years I've had it, but man it really pisses me off that Microsoft is so damn greedy with Live and charging for Live and their whack "points" nonsense.
 
I actually had no idea what he was talking about so I googled it. When google corrected me, I jumped at the chance to correct a fellow forumite cause I'm having a bad morning and taking it out on others makes me feel better.
 
Makes perfect sense to me. This would likely explain L4D2 also. If MS puts pressure on Valve to charge for updates/DLC, and if Valve had big plans to update L4D, they might have just rolled everything into a sequel, and provide even more content. But can't have a sequel on the 360 without PC, so PC kinda gets dragged along for the ride.

Hopefully since 360 sales are usually more, they will be able to pass on some savings to their PC customers.
 
Microsoft really is the bad guy here. They've done this with a few other games. The authors were making stuff for free, but MS made them charge for it, so that M$ could rake premium off it.

They used to say it was a fee to help pay for "bandwidth usage" but then they were publicly humiliated when Gold members said "That's what we pay for monthly!".
 
I'm positive that the last time someone said this that MS made a statement saying that devs can charge whatever they want for dlc. I tried to find it briefly but searching is useless because everyone with a blog has this story posted.
 
I think that MS would not take the claim of "MS made us charge you" laying down if it was not at least partially true. Let's see what pops up over the next few days.
 
Would definitely give MS the fault. If what I've heard is true, then devs/publishers are charged $25k per patch released for a game after the first one. If that's so, then MS likes to bend devs/publishers over badly.
 
I love how some have spun this into a "PSN is free and better" argument. I have both, and I have seen a consistent approach on both sides to charge for DLC...

Two things to realize here, Sony and Microsoft host direct connections to all this content, your not getting it from the developer. This costs them money, Sony has tried to put more of the cost back on the Developer while Microsoft has tried to play the middle ground.

Valve owns Steam, they have their own bandwidth supportive servers and also make money from Steam's game purchases to offset and profit from it's operation. Free DLC for their games will also increase the sales of the game it is for, if only for a brief time.

Too many variables come into this argument and Valve is not a console friendly company. With a game that was so popular at launch like L4D (I have it for both the 360 and PC), I can understand the concern of how much bandwidth the DLC adopters will consume.

I'm sure the alternative would be for Valve to put the money out of their pockets for the bandwidth, but considering the sequel to this game is coming out soon, I think the last thing they want to do is to pay beyond the development costs for any free DLC...
 
Derfman said:
I love how some have spun this into a "PSN is free and better" argument. I have both, and I have seen a consistent approach on both sides to charge for DLC...

Two things to realize here, Sony and Microsoft host direct connections to all this content, your not getting it from the developer. This costs them money, Sony has tried to put more of the cost back on the Developer while Microsoft has tried to play the middle ground.

Valve owns Steam, they have their own bandwidth supportive servers and also make money from Steam's game purchases to offset and profit from it's operation. Free DLC for their games will also increase the sales of the game it is for, if only for a brief time.

Too many variables come into this argument and Valve is not a console friendly company. With a game that was so popular at launch like L4D (I have it for both the 360 and PC), I can understand the concern of how much bandwidth the DLC adopters will consume.

I'm sure the alternative would be for Valve to put the money out of their pockets for the bandwidth, but considering the sequel to this game is coming out soon, I think the last thing they want to do is to pay beyond the development costs for any free DLC...
Click to expand...

Why don't these companies just use BitTorrent for downloads and save the bandwidth costs altogether?
 
AVT said:
Why don't these companies just use BitTorrent for downloads and save the bandwidth costs altogether?
Click to expand...

or microsoft could allow them to host there own stuff, the way it's supposed to be with the internet.

I'm taking Valves side on this one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top