Would you pay for a XBOX 360 DLC/patch?

[DannyBooze]

i would only pay if they had cockpits and patch but i wouldnt pay for just part of game, already did that once......

[Pudgy (V)]

This is pretty much what I wrote in my thread to the Publishers, 1c and 505. I would never give money to pay for a patch considering this was something they screwed up to begin with. Was it my fault that the product wasn't tested correctly or maybe a deadline had to be made regardless if the game was broke or not? What would happen to me if I made a mistake at my job, I would have to fix it or face being fired. Anyway, what is done is done. Now, I would be more than happen to buy a DLC but only after they patched the game first. I wouldn't trust them enough to actually patch the game after everyone purchased the DLC. Then what, we would all be out even more money. The DLC would also have to be a very functional plane and not a Mustang or a TA. Just imagine if they would have patched the game a week after its release and all the people who left were still here. The revenue they could have made off of DLC's alone would have paid for the patch and maybe even a sequel. This game would have been a money maker even when the price dropped to $15.00 a year from now. They could have released a new DLC every month and I am sure everyone of us would have paid for it. In the end their mistakes cost them a lot of money because they didn't release a patch. All we can do is hope for the best and see if they will correct their mistakes and make things right. Until then, keep up the petition work.

[Lexandro]

Would I pay for a patch? Hell no
Would I pay for DLC? Probably if at the right price.
Would I pay for a patch that also contains DLC? No.

Patches are by definition fixes for issues with a game title. These should ALWAYS be free as the end user has already paid for the product and fixing issues with a title is the responstability of the devs/publishers and they should pay for it.

DLC is a different story. But both together would be a totaly kick in the crown jewels to everyone who owns the title and has supported the game. It would instanly create a two tier online play mode, with "the have's" and the "have not's". With the way the playerbase is, any further erosion of the number of people eligable to play with one another would most likely kill of 90% of all online play.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Lexandro

DLC is a different story. But both together would be a totaly kick in the crown jewels to everyone who owns the title and has supported the game. It would instanly create a two tier online play mode, with "the have's" and the "have not's". With the way the playerbase is, any further erosion of the number of people eligable to play with one another would most likely kill of 90% of all online play.

Exactly. Remember people this is a console game so the publishers have to play by Sony and Microsofts rules. One of which is a game MUST NOT have multiple versions of the same game being played online on their (MS and Sony) servers. Everybody playing online MUST have the same game, patched or unpatched.

[TRC Subaru]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

Exactly. Remember people this is a console game so the publishers have to play by Sony and Microsofts rules. One of which is a game MUST NOT have multiple versions of the same game being played online on their (MS and Sony) servers. Everybody playing online MUST have the same game, patched or unpatched.

I was playing FORZA 1 on-line after FORZA 2 was released, in fact, I believe you can still play it now - this is what I'm suggesting.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by TRC Subaru

I was playing FORZA 1 on-line after FORZA 2 was released, in fact, I believe you can still play it now - this is what I'm suggesting.

lol But thats a completly different game. Microsoft and Sony would demand the publishers pay them like it was a new game. This is very expensive. The publishers would have to be insane to want pay twice to release basicly the same (low selling) game again.

[TRC Subaru]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

lol But thats a completly different game. Microsoft and Sony would demand the publishers pay them like it was a new game. This is very expensive. The publishers would have to be insane to want pay twice to release basicly the same (low selling) game again.

Do not know a great deal on the pricing of releases, how much does it cost to release the patch? And how much for a new game release?

[delaner]

Sadly, I think this poll highlights the core issue. Everyone has undermined the purpose of this poll by arguing technicalities and definitions; unfortunately only 26 (now 7) people have voted. Hard to justify doing anything until more people speak up.

I don't see a major need for a patch, there are a few things I'd like to see in the game, but that's all for another thread... =)

[stealth finger]

Originally Posted by delaner

I don't see a major need for a patch,

not played much multiplayer have you?

[kozzm0]

I wouldn't even pay for an xbox360, so no.

If someone gave me an xbox360 for free, I might, but first I'd have to pay for xbox live which I doubt I'd ever do

Especially after hearing about the bop patch, if xbox live is so great, they should go out of their way to make sure the developer can patch the game. They should pay them to make patches. They charge the price of their console for 3 years of service.