* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Aug 29, 02:05.

I don't know what you're talking about with the libre and gratis definitons. I have only refered to gratis, as in "not paying", never libre, though I'm not sure you have really shown the distinction.

Anyways, yes, I expect content to be free. Gamespy is not simply trying to stay afloat. They have many employees, wo are, more or less, payed to play games. If the listed sites can provide bandwidth free of charge ("not paying"), then I don't see why Gamespy, who makes revenue from their Arcade products, should make user pay. Well now, you say, they don't make you pay. Well, have you ever stood in the non-subscriber lines? It is so inconvenient, that it really defeats the purpose. The reason that newspapers and magazines cost so much, is mostly due to printing and disitribution. How many online news (RealLife news, as in in CNN, The Guardian etc) websites do you see charching for content? They may require you to sign up, but there are very rarely subscription costs involved.

The point here is not to see which website can make the best deal with the publisher. This is ultimately harmful to the end-user. The assumed norm, whether you choose to accept it or not, is: Publisher releases the demo, available at the same time to anyone who wants to download. Gamers download. A percentage of those gamers buy the product, thus creating a return on the advertising investment.

This is the way the industry has worked for over ten years, and you purpose that now, when the games industry is making more money than ever, is the time to change this?

I've said it a billion times before, but that is the ONLY way you will EVER get a publisher to take notice.
You can harp and complain about the demo not being distributed all you want, but if you all still rush out and go buy it, Activision is just going to shrug their shoulders while looking confused, and keep on doing what they've been doing.

There's a problem with this policy, though: the company in question has to know why you're not buying their game. Is it because you felt it was poor quality? Was it because you didn't like the non-inclusion of feature X, Y, or Z? Or is it because you were dissatisfied that they didn't release a demo?

Unless you can tell the company why you're boycotting the product, the end result is the same: the company has no idea why sales were low and therefore will not know what changes to make to rectify the situation later.

328 posts, we have now overtaken "Doom 3 Shots" in the top 6 threads of all time. =D

101 - A message board odessy

Imagine this possible future perhaps 3-5 years from now.

There are 3 massive companies that are dedicated to gaming news and downloads. The companies are so big that unlike now they can actually handle the bandwidth they receive when every gamer comes to download a file like a demo of a game or even just a movie of a game.

But no company makes money without charging for their service so these companies all charge for the ability to download from their servers. They make enough money off of this to be able to pay the companies for exclusive rights to certain game demos. And by exclusive I mean only one company gets each game. So if you want to download three different demos you may have to be paying 3 different companies for the right to do this.

Where does this leave "the little guys" like Blues or Shacknews or anyone else on the list of boycotters? Well the problem is two-fold. One, they don't have enough money to pay for any exclusive rights even if they wanted to. Two, they don't have enough money to pay for the massive bandwidth needed to serve the gigantic volume of gamers downloading the file.

Free downloading would cease to exist.

The problem I have with this is that I LOVE GAMES. I buy games all the time. It's my hobby. Games make me happy. But I don't buy many games without playing a demo. So I would HAVE to sign up for some sort of service in order to play these demos. And I'd probably do it because like I said... I love games.

Anyone who doesn't think things are somewhat heading in this direction need only look at how only paying suscribers to fileplanet are getting the Call Of Duty demo when it is released. And fileplanet loves this. They get more traffic than ever. The publisher of the game WOULD love this (right now they probably are merely pleased by it) if everything went in this direction because of the revenue exclusive rights deals would bring in.

It's a scary situation because these deals would benefit both the publisher and the distributor but DO NOT benefit the consumer.

Also look at Gamespot for alot more "exclusive" members only features. In my opinion they have every right to charge for any features a website designs "in house" like a video review but at the same time it is a step in the wrong direction for us gamers who don't want to have to pay to find out how good a game is.

Anyways, just something for people to think about.

Rock on

When it comes down to it, I'm going to play that demo eventually. There are so many games begging for my attention right now anyway, I can wait for the demo a bit.



______________
the mars volta

Let's face it... These websites couldn't care less about some shitty demo of Call for Duty... This is really about the demo distribution rights for the next big Activision game... DOOM 3. Unfortunately, despite this open letter and all of the upset gamers, this probably will become a trend. If Fileplanet had the exclusive distribution rights to the Doom 3 or Half-Life 2 demo, how many of us would pay $6.95, click through dozens of pop-ups, and walk over burning coals to be among the first to play these games? Is there any doubt that Fileplanet would signup more subscribers in one day than they normally do in a whole year?

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory is released for free = ACTIVISION RULES! WOO!

Call of Duty is exclusive to Fileplanet at first = ACTIVISION IS THE WORST PUBLISHER EVER. I NOW ADVOCATE STEALING ALL THEIR GAMES!

C'mon people, get a grip.

People who keep making excuses for FilePlanet/GSi are the reason that so many small businesses are dying and things are becoming so corporate, nobody is willing to stand up for the mall guy.

Bullshit, it's my belief that small businesses are the lifeblood of the economy and should be given every opportunity to succed. As a result tax laws should not prohibit small businesses from growing, my current biggest complaint about tax laws. I also believe that small businesses should be allowed to grow into big businesses and not be penalized. This does not mean I condone unethical business practice.

The fact of the demo matter is that Gamespy/Activision have done nothing unethical. All that has happened is that websites have decided to represent the bitchiness inherent in the hardcore gamer.

318 posts and counting? You people really like your demos, don't you?

Seriously though, Activision isn't going to give a damn about who sends what letter, and who is going to carry their demo or not.
If they HAD cared about who carried their demo, they wouldn't have gone exclusive in the first place.

If you really want to show Activision that you're pissed off at their way of doing things,

DON'T BUY THE GAME

I've said it a billion times before, but that is the ONLY way you will EVER get a publisher to take notice.
You can harp and complain about the demo not being distributed all you want, but if you all still rush out and go buy it, Activision is just going to shrug their shoulders while looking confused, and keep on doing what they've been doing.

Creston

Actually I don't mind if I have to pay for a most-likely buggy demo, at least then I have the right to sue if it crashes or hinders my system in someway.

And in the same vein,

HAPPY 100th POST WAZOOTYMAN!!!
YAY!!!

I would have more, but I only registered when it became manditory. I guess I just don't post very much.

That should just about cover the lost ad hits from actually having the demo, huh?

Profit on, man. Profit on.

"I for sure will not buy the game until I get to see a demo."

Well then wait a freaking week after File Planets "exclusive" period runs out and download the demo then.

SHEEEEEESH!

11 more posts (counting this one) and we make the top 6 threads of all time displayed on the data archive!

Blue,

I am 100% with you on this one. I was looking forward to Call of Duty, but I am sick and tired of these jerks trying to make a buck on something that is to promote and get you to buy the damn thing in the first place. Its like the chesse hostess at Hickory Farms asking .75 cents for you to sample the product they want you to buy.

I for sure will not buy the game until I get to see a demo. There have been so many games that looked good, then ended up sucking ass. If I never get to play the demo for free, then I WILL NOT BUY THE FULL flat out. There are plenty of other up coming games for me to spend my money on.

While I am at it, screw any game company that wants to charge a monthly fee to play their stupid game online, like WWII online. That is just plain stupid, when you can play MOHAA or BF1942 for free, after you buy it that is.

Good for you Blue, for making a stand against the jerks.

OGB_Bandit

"What bothers me is seeing companies that serve up large numbers of game reviews now having more reason to get 'in' with the game publishers."

More reason to get into bed with game publishers? Man, every single game magazine on the planet has ALWAYS relied ENTIRELY on the advertising dollars of a the publishers whos games they review. They don't need more of a reason and this sure doesn't add to the equation much.

This ONE WEEK "exclusive" is not damaging to the game industry in any way whatsoever. It's beneficial, it will help fileplanet suck in a few more subscribers and Activision will make a few extra dollars out of it or get some free advertising. Anyway that the industry we all love can make a buck or two in return for offering a segment of the market something special is a good thing.

File Planet showed be comended for a) supporting it's existing subscribers with a cool one week ahead sneak peak at a great game & b) coming up with a unique way to pull in a few more monthly subscribers.

Anyone who bitches is just whiny and impatient.

"To the people with no foresight who think things like this won't lead to worse, might I point you to either Gamespot or IGN who charge you to read reviews, watch videos and view images? It's only a matter of time, just look at history."

Yes, because paying for original content is such a crime against humanity. Blue's doesnt really generate any content. And that ok, they are great at what they do. Anyone who expects original content for free (as in beer) is either naive or a cheapskate.

And when you think about it, the user paying for content is BETTER than ad supported. If the user pays it keeps the content provider honest and accountable to the reader more than the publisher.

Which way do you want it? Oh thats right, ALL content free (gratis) AND free (libre). Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Aug 29, 01:19.

More words from the grossly uninformed. Some of you should go ahead and not speak if you aren't going to take the time to familiarize yourselves with the facts of the discussion topic. Thank you.