Recommended Posts

Less than a year old isn't the same as less than a month old.

 

That's not how you quantified it originally so it's a moot point. The service launched with Titanfall and other new games have been part of the service since.

That's not how you quantified it originally so it's a moot point. The service launched with Titanfall and other new games have been part of the service since.

Here's what I said, verbatim:

 

This is a brand new game that you could potentially beat in the time frame they're giving. Steam almost always does this for old games, as does EA. Not really comparable. I don't see anyone else offering something like this.

Titanfall was not brand new, it was old. That's how I quantified it. Why shouldn't people be happy that a game that's less than a month old is getting a free 24-hour trial (again, for the entire game)? Who else is doing that with a major release? Anyone?

Here's what I said, verbatim:

 

Titanfall was not brand new, it was old. That's how I quantified it. Why shouldn't people be happy that a game that's less than a month old is getting a free 24-hour trial (again, for the entire game)? Who else is doing that with a major release? Anyone?

 

Only you understood that "brand new game" is less than one month old. I didn't consider Titanfall old when it launched on Game Time and I still don't consider it an old game today for any platform.

 

And I don't even think age has anything to do with it either, unless every game going forward from MS will be part of the scheme within one month. I'm sure they'll do it when sales drop off for any title, which is why I brought Steam/Game Time into the discussion in the first place.

 

Further, I didn't say anyone should be sad / angry or whatever at the news. I just think the availability should be longer.

 

Jeez louise...

Definitely won't take half an hour for the average household in the UK either, can tell you that for a fact :laugh:

 

Define "average". My lil lady's secondary connection is 40mbit, and so far Sunset Overdrive has taken over two hours. Our primary connection is an 120mbit FTTP, but I'm not allowed to use it for games, it's her mini datacentre connection for our home server room link to her full size datacentre in the North West UK.

 

Average, to me here in the UK is probably 4 to 10mbit.

Define "average". My lil lady's secondary connection is 40mbit, and so far Sunset Overdrive has taken over two hours. Our primary connection is an 120mbit FTTP, but I'm not allowed to use it for games, it's her mini datacentre connection for our home server room link to her full size datacentre in the North West UK.

 

Average, to me here in the UK is probably 4 to 10mbit.

 

If you go by statistics and reports, average for urban areas is <20. Rural is hovering around 10.

 

 

 

 

AB is on dialup :P

Only you understood that "brand new game" is less than one month old. I didn't consider Titanfall old when it launched on Game Time and I still don't consider it an old game today for any platform.

 

And I don't even think age has anything to do with it either, unless every game going forward from MS will be part of the scheme within one month. I'm sure they'll do it when sales drop off for any title, which is why I brought Steam/Game Time into the discussion in the first place.

 

Further, I didn't say anyone should be sad / angry or whatever at the news. I just think the availability should be longer.

 

Jeez louise...

It's not possible for me to make all my posts tailored to someone else's views. When I say "brand new," I'm clearly giving my view of what constitutes "brand new." While I can understand the subjectivity on what quantifies newness, there's no debate that there was a clear difference in time when the deals were offered. "Sunset Overdrive" is less than a month old; "Titanfall" was about three and a half months old when it was playable for 48 hours on Origin.

 

Regardless, I go back to my original comment: "Steam almost always does this for old games, as does EA. Not really comparable." In terms of what both Valve and EA do, "Titanfall" is the exception, not the rule. The first time it was offered, it was easily the newest game available on Origin or Steam's free play services. Microsoft just did that for a game that released less than a month ago.

 

Your original comment was entirely negative, calling the offer "pretty damn stingy" and comparing it to dissimilar offers from two PC services. Those offers are an attempt by companies to get potential customers to use their services to begin buying games; the same situation doesn't apply here, as no one is going to buy an Xbox One ($350) and Xbox Live subscription (at least $5 a month) just to play a free trial of a $60 game. It's hard to view your original comment as anything but angry, hence why my response pointed out the differences in the offers.

It's not possible for me to make all my posts tailored to someone else's views. When I say "brand new," I'm clearly giving my view of what constitutes "brand new." While I can understand the subjectivity on what quantifies newness, there's no debate that there was a clear difference in time when the deals were offered. "Sunset Overdrive" is less than a month old; "Titanfall" was about three and a half months old when it was playable for 48 hours on Origin.

 

Regardless, I go back to my original comment: "Steam almost always does this for old games, as does EA. Not really comparable." In terms of what both Valve and EA do, "Titanfall" is the exception, not the rule. The first time it was offered, it was easily the newest game available on Origin or Steam's free play services. Microsoft just did that for a game that released less than a month ago.

 

Your original comment was entirely negative, calling the offer "pretty damn stingy" and comparing it to dissimilar offers from two PC services. Those offers are an attempt by companies to get potential customers to use their services to begin buying games; the same situation doesn't apply here, as no one is going to buy an Xbox One ($350) and Xbox Live subscription (at least $5 a month) just to play a free trial of a $60 game. It's hard to view your original comment as anything but angry, hence why my response pointed out the differences in the offers.

 

Clearly there is. What's the reasoning behind 1 month? Why not 1 day? Or 1 week? It's completely arbitary.

 

Titanfall is not the exception. Again, if you use the arbitrary rule of "1 month" in your mind then sure. However, they've offered more than 1 new game via Game Time. Heck, they gave a whole week for BF4 which is the current in a series. Even if it goes over your "1 month" rule, it's about as new as BF gets.

 

I wasn't angry? Not sure what gave that impression. I think the 24hrs is stingy and the countdown to only play within one day, not even from when you boot it the first time, worse still. I'm not bothered if you think they're dissimilar or not. I'm not trying to change opinions. In my opinion, they are very similar. Steam free weekends have nothing to do with getting people to use the service. Even if it were, what's the difference between it and what MS' plans are? Nobody is going to buy a gaming PC at least three times the cost of an X1 + XBL sub just to play trials for 72+ hours to turn your argument on it's head :s Not sure what that has to do with anything, but hey ho..

Clearly there is. What's the reasoning behind 1 month? Why not 1 day? Or 1 week? It's completely arbitary.

 

Titanfall is not the exception. Again, if you use the arbitrary rule of "1 month" in your mind then sure. However, they've offered more than 1 new game via Game Time. Heck, they gave a whole week for BF4 which is the current in a series. Even if it goes over your "1 month" rule, it's about as new as BF gets.

 

I wasn't angry? Not sure what gave that impression. I think the 24hrs is stingy and the countdown to only play within one day, not even from when you boot it the first time, worse still. I'm not bothered if you think they're dissimilar or not. I'm not trying to change opinions. In my opinion, they are very similar. Steam free weekends have nothing to do with getting people to use the service. Even if it were, what's the difference between it and what MS' plans are? Nobody is going to buy a gaming PC at least three times the cost of an X1 + XBL sub just to play trials for 72+ hours to turn your argument on it's head :s Not sure what that has to do with anything, but hey ho..

You misread what I wrote. I wrote that "there's no debate that there was a clear difference in time when the deals were offered." As in one month is different than three and a half months. That isn't debatable. As for the debate to what quantifies newness: I gave what I considered to be "brand new." As I stated in the first sentences of my post which you just quoted, I'm not going to try and fit your view over what constitutes "brand new." I gave my opinion. You have yours. Clearly they differ. What point are you even trying to make here?

 

As the context of my post clearly states, "Titanfall" is the exception in terms of when it was offered. It was the newest game offered on EA's Game Time service. They haven't yet offered another game that's been more new for a Game Time session.

I spent a couple of hours playing SO last night and it was really fun.  Went to buy it today and Microsoft have added a 20% discount today (?44 down to ?38).  The free day plus the discount is a good way to encourage sales.

  • Like 2

Clearly there is. What's the reasoning behind 1 month? Why not 1 day? Or 1 week? It's completely arbitary.

 

Why does it have to have a reasoning? Microsoft have been pushing this game hard, it sold well and after a month they wanted to puch more sales on it so they put it up as a demo for people to play.

 

Far from stingy and a pretty legit way to boost sales. Here's to this happening more.

I spent a couple of hours playing SO last night and it was really fun.  Went to buy it today and Microsoft have added a 20% discount today (?44 down to ?38).  The free day plus the discount is a good way to encourage sales.

 

I think it was a really smart thing to do with a new game like Sunset Overshoot. Put up a new Halo game and people already know what to expect, but SO looked so wacky I wasn't really sure if it would be my kind of game. I tried the demo and liked it so I bought it. If I didn't have the demo opportunity I might have passed on the game.

I spent a couple of hours playing SO last night and it was really fun.  Went to buy it today and Microsoft have added a 20% discount today (?44 down to ?38).  The free day plus the discount is a good way to encourage sales.

We can also currently get a digital code for it via CDkeys.com for ?37.90 - 5% for liking via FB.

Why does it have to have a reasoning? Microsoft have been pushing this game hard, it sold well and after a month they wanted to puch more sales on it so they put it up as a demo for people to play.

 

Far from stingy and a pretty legit way to boost sales. Here's to this happening more.

 

It wasn't a demo, it was the first foray into their new incentive 'Play Time'. I don't have an issue with the service itself, just the stingy time frame and restrictions it has/had.

 

Steam and Origin have a good mix of hitting the sweet spot. I don't begrudge any dev trying to boost sales :)

it was the first foray into their new incentive 'Play Time'. I don't have an issue with the service itself, just the stingy time frame and restrictions it has/had.

 

I totally agree. I just got into it, earning cheevos, loving the colours flying by as I grind on poles and stuff, then bam it stopped working and I had to delete it. They should do a two or three day trial, or even just 48hrs, 24h is just too short if you factor in life, eating, working, sleeping. I know some people game 24h, but I don't, I have something called life going on!

  • Like 1

I didn't have a chance to pre-load it so only managed to squeeze in a few hours, but I loved it. I'll definitely be buying it before the end of the year. Hopefully in a sale of some sort :P

 

I think that 24 hours is a good amount of time to make in available, but what they really need to is make it available to pre-download a week in advance so you don't spend much time trying to download it. 

 

They want to give enough time to give everyone a taste and then encourage people to buy.

It wasn't a demo, it was the first foray into their new incentive 'Play Time'. I don't have an issue with the service itself, just the stingy time frame and restrictions it has/had.

 

Steam and Origin have a good mix of hitting the sweet spot. I don't begrudge any dev trying to boost sales :)

 

"Here play this for 24 hours without paying" Sounds like a demo to me. No matter what branding it is all painted with it's all just demo's evolved.

"Here play this for 24 hours without paying" Sounds like a demo to me. No matter what branding it is all painted with it's all just demo's evolved.

 

I can see why but I'd argue that a demo would only allow you to see/play/experience a small portion of an overall product, this was access to the full product. If you had absolutely nothing to do that day, you could have put a lot of time in and got a massive chunk of the game done.

 

I'm glad they did this because I've been on the fence about this title, but leaning more towards not buying it. This pretty much gave me enough of the game to know I won't enjoy this so can cross this off a list of maybes :)

  • Like 1

"Here play this for 24 hours without paying" Sounds like a demo to me. No matter what branding it is all painted with it's all just demo's evolved.

 

I'm in the same boat at Skiver on this. I've seen in a few places that many folk managed to finish the game in the time it was free. For the completionist there will always be things to do so it won't be enough, but for most the one play through will be enough. 

 

Can we call it an extended demo? :P

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Yes, it was amusing at the time because even then dbrand was well known for stealing the designs of products from other companies. That’s what they do.
    • Didn’t Dbrand once complain that Casetify was ripping off their designs a well? seems pretty bad of them to try and get around Valve’s copyright this way with that in mind.
    • Dbrand thought they could get away with this Steam Machine case, Valve disagreed by David Uzondu Image via Dbrand Dbrand has cancelled its highly anticipated Companion Cube enclosure for the Valve Steam Machine, which it teased back in November of last year with a concept render and sign-up page, because it did not ask Valve for permission first before manufacturing the case. According to Dbrand, it took the "backwards approach" of building the product first before asking for permission from the copyright holder. Seven months of work went into the project, requiring over a thousand engineering hours from the design team. Workers developed forty-four sets of injection molding tools, making a unique mold for each sub-component of the crate. When the Companion Cube went live on Monday last week, it, according to Dbrand, quickly became the second-fastest-selling product in the company's fifteen-year history, racking up orders for hundreds of thousands of units. Customers eagerly bought the $129.95 deluxe edition or the bare-bones $99.95 version, which the manufacturer cheekily branded as the "Poverty Cube". It was around this time that the legal eagles at Valve descended on the accessory maker with a formal demand. The developer pointed out that the iconic block design remains protected intellectual property from the game Portal, so unlicensed sales had to stop. Dbrand said that all its pleas to salvage the project with the Valve team, including proposals to run a properly licensed release under official terms "with their blessing", fell on deaf ears, so it had no choice but to obey and remove every trace of the product from the internet. If you bought the enclosure, the company said that banks will process your refund by the end of this week, but if it still hasn't arrived in your account by then, you should not hesitate to contact support. The Steam Machine itself is a high-performance console that Valve designed directly to bring PC gaming into the living room. It was announced on 12th November 2025 (the same day Dbrand announced the Cube) and runs on the Linux-based SteamOS, the same OS that powers the Steam Deck. As for the price, due to the shortage of memory and storage chips, the hardware cost landed much higher than people were expecting, starting at $1,049 for the 512 model (without a controller) or $1,128 with the new gamepad. The premium 2 TB model pushes those prices even higher, selling at $1,349 for the standalone console and hitting $1,428 if you want the bundle.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Rookie
      Almohandis went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Apprentice
      jahara21 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      534
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      148
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      97
    5. 5
      macoman
      57
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!