Xbox owners - I've had an idea...

Recommended Videos

Irriduccibilli

New member
Jun 15, 2010
792
0
0
Microsoft could implement a system that everytime you earned 1.000 or 2.000 or any other number, you would get 1.000 MS points, but there should also be a possibility to purchase Microsoft Points as you do now
 

GeorgW

ALL GLORY TO ME!
Aug 27, 2010
4,806
0
0
No way. Just no.
I know I'd just borrow like 50 games and get the easiest 'cheevos I could, and then be done for all my gaming need. It's completely unfair and uneconomic. Just no.
 

Jewrean

New member
Jun 27, 2010
1,101
0
0
As a gamer I would love this idea. But if I were to put my Business Owner hat on I would never implement it. Even if I was feeling generous and I wanted people to love my console there would be too many achievement whores and too many people renting 'easy achievement' games. When you are in control of an economic system you can't allow it to fluctuate based on the people's tastes alone. The system you suggest basically hands them the lock and key.
 

Magicman10893

New member
Aug 3, 2009
455
0
0
This idea would suck. I don't want to have to grind through several games just to get the gamerscore to buy DLC for one game! At the current rate, you couldn't afford the map pack for Black Ops even if you got all 1000 gamerscore. To buy all the map packs for Halo 3 you would need to get all 1000 gamerscore in at least 3 games, plus a few achievements in another game. Not to mention Rock Band games. If you only play Rock Band you could only get like 6 or 7 songs if you could manage to get all the gamerscore. I think in the end it would cost you more buying all the other games it takes to get the DLC for 1 game than it takes buying a MS points card for $20.


EDIT: I just read the idea a couple post above mine and I like that idea. Microsoft could set up a milestone system and every time you hit a certain amount of gamerscore you could get some free points. Like getting 20,000GS could get you a free 400MS and then getting 40,000 you could get a free 800MS and so on.
 

Rusty pumpkin

New member
Sep 25, 2009
278
0
0
Cliff_m85 said:
Rusty pumpkin said:
Seems like a fine idea. I know when I got my first cheevo I thought "cool! What do I do with gamerscore?"
Fine idea for you. Economically horrible. What you want is for a person to, theoretically, finish a game fast. Why? So they buy a new game. Doing the above would have people playing their games for much longer to obtain points. Add that they could then download games that earn them more points. It'd end up costing the company more than allowing them to earn off of it.
I'm not an economist, I can't pretend to know what every impact is. If they could use gamerscore for something though, right now it's a arbitrary rating that at most tells people I spend too much time playing games.
 

SageRuffin

M-f-ing Jedi Master
Dec 19, 2009
2,005
0
0
StBishop said:
SageRuffin said:
Strange... but it could work.

Although you have to keep in mind how the world works today. It's a far cry that anyone would actually risk that in this day and age.
No it couldn't.

That's like saying. What if I could use the numbers on my odometer to pay for my fuel. Where's the money coming from for the guy selling the fuel? It's ridiculous. Money must change hands for there to be a sale. Sure the publishers of DLC could get paid out in cash for the amount of Gamerscore they made, but then Microsoft is paying for you to get DLC for free.
The gas analogy doesn't work, and I'll tell you why: you forget, the person has to buy the game in order to reap the benefits of the achievements (and gamerscore by extension) that come with it. Now, that could be bypassed by folks who rent games or borrow them from friends, but you'd be hard-pressed to underestimate the number of people who like their games new.

I'm not saying I agree with the original stance one way or the other, just merely adding a voice to the discussion. As such, I take my leave. Good day, sir/madam.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
NinjaDeathSlap said:
this will become a problem because people can glitch/ alter their gamerscore many different ways. so before this works MS would have to severely clamp down on these fiends.

MS's other concern would be they are very happy with the MS points system as it makes you end up buying more points than you need for whatever your buying (most of the time), and some people are stupid enough to spend those points on unnecessary purchases simply because they are there. so MS would lose out on not only normal sales but possibly lose out on possible sales too.

good idea though, i like the sound of this, but even if this is officially presented to MS, i would not be very hopeful.

also...


what the fuck, i cant read this??? it doesnt even exist on my keyboard...
 

northeast rower

New member
Dec 14, 2010
684
0
0
Well the problem with that is that MS and the third-party companies they are paying to develop games would just not get paid...
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
CrazyJuan77 said:
/OPINION.
changed that for you...

but why do you think GS should be eliminated entirely?

personally i like it because it means i am able to squeeze a little more enjoyment out of a game before i move on.
 

Sad Face

New member
Oct 29, 2010
154
0
0
It seems like a great idea, though I would only extend it to memberships and not games, developers should be paid.

But the problem is that it would prevent Microsoft from cleaning our pockets to the extent they prefer...why would they do this when we still have pennies in the jar on our nightstands?
 

Giantpanda602

New member
Oct 16, 2010
470
0
0
NinjaDeathSlap said:
- Despite not making money through MS points anymore I think it would actually earn a bigger profit for Microsoft and the entire industry. The fairer system would persuade more gamers to buy Xbox's which helps Microsoft, and the idea of using Gamerscore earned from achievements to buy DLC will encourage gamers to buy more Xbox games to get their Gamerscore. This not only helps Microsoft, but the Dev's, Publishers, and Game Retailers too.
What about indie/smaller devs? You would see them all abandon the Xbox and move to the PS3/PC.
 

Zantos

New member
Jan 5, 2011
3,653
0
0
The cost of live is a very small price to pay, and economically giving things for free that cost money to make and run is a dirty trick that leads to poor quality products. Sony have to pay ludicrous amounts of money every year to run PSN that could be used for much better things than just trying to undercut microsoft services.
 

PettingZOOPONY

New member
Dec 2, 2007
423
0
0
Giantpanda602 said:
NinjaDeathSlap said:
- Despite not making money through MS points anymore I think it would actually earn a bigger profit for Microsoft and the entire industry. The fairer system would persuade more gamers to buy Xbox's which helps Microsoft, and the idea of using Gamerscore earned from achievements to buy DLC will encourage gamers to buy more Xbox games to get their Gamerscore. This not only helps Microsoft, but the Dev's, Publishers, and Game Retailers too.
What about indie/smaller devs? You would see them all abandon the Xbox and move to the PS3/PC.
What do yo mean move? They are already there.
 

Luke McDowd

New member
May 26, 2011
1
0
0
NinjaDeathSlap said:
OK, so far a lot of people have made a good point, I didn't consider how indy developers making titles for the Xbox Live arcade would make a profit. However, a solution to that would be to keep MS points around but SPECIFICALLY for this situation. Microsoft could make the rule that only DLC can be bought with Gamerscore, while all full games (weather on disk or on XBLA) have to be paid for.

Other than that I really do believe there would be an increase in Xbox/Xbox Game/Live subscription sales that would make up for not using MS points anymore. I know that's speculation on my part, but isn't every idea at least in some part speculation until you put it into practice?

Edit: Oh, and I would make achievements give out much more Gamerscore so it wouldn't feel so much like grinding.
The main issue I see with this is that DLC doesn't come from Microsoft. It comes from the game developers, they are the one's seeing the profit when you use your points to buy it. Yes your money originally goes to MS when you buy MS Points, but by using those points to buy a DLC for Oblivion for example, Microsoft then in turn goes and gives money to Bethesda for it. If you eliminate this entirely companies will put time, manpower and money into creating more content for your game, all for zero profit.
The only way using Gamerscore for a currency will work is if it is used to buy things available exclusively from Microsoft themselves. IE: As has been said previously, avatar gear, Microsoft produced skins etc. As it stands Gamerscore will only be used as bragging rights, and since that's why and how it was designed, I don't see it changing any time soon.
 

fragmaster09

New member
Nov 15, 2010
209
0
0
Creator002 said:
It could work, but some people say Micro$oft (M$) for a reason. :/
Also, the prices of DLC would have to go down (or the amount of gamerscore per achievement would have to go up). I hardly ever even get close to 1000G in every game I buy. If a map pack for CoD is 1200 MS points (making it 1200G in this new system), that takes 1 game's whole achievement list plus 200G from another game.
i say microso£t, but that's cause i'm from UK, we dont use $, haha, so i replace the letter that looks most like £... then again Ms is after $$$, since my £££ are converted to $$$ and MS uses that, since they are american...

ok, fine idea, but why not something that M$ owns, keep DLC for M$P but LiVe for GS, that way, it rewards players with the equivalent of PS3, but you WORK for it, giving you a sense of it being a REWARD =]
 

fragmaster09

New member
Nov 15, 2010
209
0
0
Zantos said:
The cost of live is a very small price to pay, and economically giving things for free that cost money to make and run is a dirty trick that leads to poor quality products. Sony have to pay ludicrous amounts of money every year to run PSN that could be used for much better things than just trying to undercut microsoft services.
microsoft just HAPPENS to have run their gaming community for longer than PS3 has been around(sony's first REAL attempt at a games console), so they have more experience, money and people, THAT's why we get better services(which is better but still ful of whining kids and Microsoft's auto-messages to any complaints), they charge for Xbox LIVE because they CAN, they dont feel he need to undercut Sony, but Sony is the newest challenger(nintendo didn't really stand a chance), so they need to undercut microsoft.

microsoft makes so much money from everything else that a million or so a year being used to let us ply for free would be like 1p to me or you - nothing, they want PROFIT, so they force us to cough up, and we won't move to PS3 because all our things from our games are on the Xbox, all our games are FOR the Xbox, and we paid £250 FOR the Xbox, totalling more than £300, and we dont want to start again, so they can just keep pumping us dry