Because we're talking about an online game demo.
Online gamers are a crowd that is savvy enough to know that a demo is a marketing tool. They're also accustomed historically to getting demos for free, because the logic is that a demo should get into as many hands as possible in order to get people playing your game and thus buying your game. And the media here is digital, easy to pass around, and generally not something that the publisher wants to restrict due to legal issues like an mp3. There is almost no cost in terms of physical media to distribute it -- no CDs to press, to sleeves to print, etc., if you were releasing it through a magazine. It's different.
Online gamers are inherent file sharers; they want to give a demo they like to their friends. They want to pony up their own bandwidth to get it out there when their friends say they don't want to wait in a line or they don't want to pay or they simply are getting low downstream from wherever they're trying to get it from.
Online gamers are virulent community members. They browse a particular set of sites and expect to see what they want on those sites.
Online gamers don't want to jump through hoops to get anything. The net is an ADD medium; they want what they want now and if you don't give it to them now they will forget about it in a few days. They also don't want to have to sign up for things, pay for things, etc. if it's a demo, which again, they're savvy enough to know is a marketing tool.
By restricting a demo using sign ups, fees, or any barriers to entry, you're actively discouraging the online crowd from doing what they do naturally: give the file out, give it to friends, and talk about it. You're basically telling them that unless they pay to get what they know is a marketing tool, they're not important enough to you to matter, and that's a slap in the face of the online gamer. And they'll pass that sentiment on to the 8 or so friends they talk to and recommend games to.
"Both the “left” and the “right” pretend they have the answer, but they are mere flippers on the same thalidomide baby, and the truth is that neither side has a clue."
- Jim Goad
What if you already have the file from another source and would like to share it via BT? Can you do that?Yes: point your browser at the .torrent (or 'Save As' it to disk, and then double-click it - convenient if you'd need your connection freed up for a while and then like to resume sharing). In the BT client's 'Save As' dialog, select the already completed demo download also on your disk. The client will verify the file against the BT tracker, and then share it.
It's called a competitive advantage. FilePlanet had a perfectly legitimate one until its competitors whined, colluded, and extorted it away. Such behaviour shouldn't be called capitalism.
I have yet to see how this situation differs from the case where magazines are packaged with exclusive demos.
Suppose you own Fox News and I own CNN. If CNN secures an exclusive interview with some VIP no one can get too, is CNN obligated to share it with every other news network immediately?
Either way, it costs the consumer nothing, and the VIP, if they are trying to get their message out, wants it to reach as many people as possible.Well, it costs the consumer whatever his cable bill is, but that's not the point. If the VIP actually has something they want to get out as widely as possible then doing an exclusive interview may not be the best idea.
But FilePlanet didn't do anything wrong. Gamers have a right to complain, but it's pretty lame of all of FilePlanet's competitors to get together and outmuscle them of something that they earned.
It would be one thing if it was the CONSUMERS, via some sort of petition, clamored and Activision ceded the point. However, in this case, it was FilePlanet's COMPETITORS that bullied their way into getting want they wanted. This leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and yes, makes me respect bluesnews a little less.
Thanks for sticking up for me Blue, although I don't remember asking you too. Oh wait, perhaps your real motiviation was defending your own website in the face of new and unusual competition. Perhaps you should discuss future tactics with RIAA...
Gamers have a right to complain, but it's pretty lame of all of FilePlanet's competitors to get together and outmuscle them of something that they earned.
If their core market wanted a green box with Elvis stickers all over it, they would do that, too.
Perhaps I misunderstand, but why is a solution where by 100% of the population is happy worse than a solution where by 20% (maybe, and thats pushing it) is happy? You still get the same demo, and you get it earlier. You can download from FP servers with no lines and fast speeds, so your money is well spent.
Oh and by the way, I don't subscribe to Fileplanet - I just support capitalism.No, capitalism means that consumers are allowed and even encouraged to voice their opinions to the companies they patronize. You seem to think that we should all shut the fuck up and want to call that capitalism. Guess which one of us is closer to communism in this case? Capitalism means that companies try to offer services that people value. It doesn't mean that they are entitled to a damn thing. Gamespy is not entitled to get the demo earlier. Activision (gee, another company that's trying to make money) obviously decided that it's not in their best interests to do an exclusive release. Guess which one of us should shut the fuck up now?
It just encourages people to bitch about the next website-exclusive demo they want to play.
God forbid you have to wait to play a demo because a company wanted to make some money (those greedy bastards!)
I don't know but I doubt it.