Really though, I think the only reason there even is a 360 version of the orange box and L4D is because 1) its cheap and 2) EA probably put a little bit of pressure on valve to do it.

VERY few of my Xbox360 owning friends own the 360 version of the Orange Box. Mainly because I told them not to.

@subtlefrog:

Ramen, brother.

People are too busy wanting to put down Microsoft, but software licenses cost money, too.

@Jerkamie:

Answer:

because the free demos create a stronger possibility of a consumer purchasing the full versions of games at market value. Give them a taste of 1 level, and they want the rest.

In summation...you're getting the tokens with a package cheaper than the digital ones.

First off, I have to say I enjoy xbox live a lot. Next thing though is that I have to admit that over the past few years it has become increasingly apparent that GREED is the name of their game. Prior to the 360, there were quite a few "open" platform games that allowed you to create your own maps (Time Splitters 2 comes to mind. (Great game that they never allowed to become back-playable on the 360. Hmmmm. Tons of cool maps were developed by fans for free!). Then, the expansion disc for Halo 2 came out. One guy buys it, and all his friends load it on their consoles and split the cost. MS did not like this, I guarantee it. Next, the 360 generation. New game released, a couple months later, expansion maps released for a fee, followed by the maps being released for free a few months later. Not any more. No more holding out! No tickee, no washee! If you don't pay (generally about 30-40% the cost of the game for 3 maps, you do not get the maps in addition to getting booted from a game if the map cycle has a map you don't "own". You may have noticed "". That's because if your 360 dies, or something happens to it, You must buy it again (Please note: No "" around the word BUY). On top of this, they're nailing more suckers to the wall with the "avatar outfitting store" (or whatever they call it). I gave my son a couple xbox live points cards for his birthday and was dismayed to see he used his points on some of this meaningless crap (shades of Joe Camel). Sure, it was his to spend, but I think they're targeting a captive and underage audience with their marketing. I no longer allow the kids to have open points on their accounts so as not to fall prey to such unscrupulous marketing activities. Yeah MS, we'll keep playing, but we'll also badmouth your GREED at every oportunity!

I'd like to know why I'm buying a gold membership every year for play multiplayer games that are hosted by other peoples internet/xbox's

I didn't see them charging me $10 for the 6 gig windows 7 RC image that I downloaded.

I'm not sure of how cod4 but cod5 which I paid $65 + tax for might as well be a paper weight on my desk. I usually just play hardcore free for all, and I get about 2-3 rounds in before being kicked.

Even when people skip to the next map a map pack map usually comes right on after and you can't vote on the 2nd map.

That's just what I'm doing. I was two days away from upgrading to an awesome quad core pc and my jeep broke down costing me $800.

Hey, really off topic but when are we gonna see an updated version of Goldeneye - I'm talking completely revamped re graphics but with the same awesome flow/feel of the original? Gosh darn that would rock my little world. Annnnnd, while we're at it SOF4 much?? A sequel that DOESN'T suck (SOF3 much?)

They also want to keep strict pricing controls strict to have a monopoly. Since Microsoft gets a cut, it's better for them if they keep the pricing consistent so that no one feels the need to lower prices to compete.

I didn't buy the mappack and have never been kicked from a game because of it. The game just changes matchmaking options to pair you up with other players who don't have the map, and even if you are in a party with friends who have the maps, the game still refines the rooms to the lowest common denominator in regards to map packs.

...and why is it always Microsoft's fault? Sony does this on the PS3 too...

"MS even with the price of XBL still loses money on XBL"

.citation needed.

It's no one's "fault," MS knows they can sell the content at $7 and Valve doesn't want to charge on Steam.

If they are using the whole bandwidth excuse. They could have just got with a magazine or game store and allowed them to put a disc that downloading it to the system. I'm sure gamestop would've had loved to hand these out with as a preorder bonus when you preordered the second.

@mazzic1083: Well, Devil May Cry is for the PS3 and Resident Evil 3 is on PC. But mt larger point was that I really don't ever play games on my PS3, I watch DVDs on it.

They cannot easily do these smaller updates on the xbox and have stated that they are expecting to do a bigger update which includes class updates and have stated that they would like to give it for free, but that is not entirely their decision.

I blame the devil that is Microsoft.

@tawni: Left 4 Dead's previous DLC was free, would be a bit unfair for Value to have free DLC for it's game all the time compared to any other game on Xbox, no?

You are right, Valve will always favor the PC in the sense that they will always follow tradition and release extra content for their games for free on the PC. They've stated multiple times that they'd release free content for Xbox, but MS's policy has always been to "suggest" that certain content is paid for.

In addition, Valve has stated that they're trying to find ways to fit all of the new TF2 content onto the Xbox, since the Orange Box pretty much took up all the Xbox's memory and they can't have a HDD requirement for the game, a la MS's policy again. This is why, I believe, Valve decided to release "Left 4 Dead 2" as a stand-alone game and not as more free downloadable content on the PC.

BTW, I own both an Xbox 360 and a PC and I love them both.

How many people are downloading that 500MB to 1GB of data, though? I doubt that $7 is keeping their company profitable. I would bet that $7 has just a little profit baked into it, but I don't see them making $6 or $6.50 off of this thing per download.

I think people need to value their entertainment. Do you think you will get $7 worth of entertainment out of the download? If so, buy it. If you do not see yourself getting your $7's worth, don't waste your money. If they were pushing expansions on us at $60 a shot and requiring them for online or offline play, it would be a different story. If they are offering additional entertainment at a low price, people just need to do a little thinking and decide on their own.

@pecan 3.14159265:
Well here's a perfect chance for everyone to exercise capitalism.
Let the free markets do its thing

I agree with above posters: Microsoft could be a little more flexible with DLC in terms of costs set by the developer. This "Paid DLC on 360 and free on PC" scheme only serves to alienate fans of the game on their console. Most look down on Valve for this decision, even though Valve supports free downloadable content.

@Trai_Dep: Haha I love the attempt to divide the masses here.

Though I do agree that pc shooters (and pc games in general) seem to have some better advantages like free patches and more user generated maps/patches/hacks etc.

Keep in mind, Valve has (according to multiple interviews) asked Microsoft over and over to offer their downloadable content for free, just like it is on Steam. It's for that reason that the extra content for Team Fortress 2 on the Xbox 360 has suffered.

I think that if it's the developer's wish that they receive the extra content for free, then that should entitle the purchasers of L4D. This is a greedy money-grab on the part of Microsoft, and nothing more.

@pecan 3.14159265: Do you have an old ps2? Those both still run fine on that to my knowledge.

The latest DLC on Steam for FEAR 2? It costs cash. Not all PC DLC *is* free. A vast majority of it is, but not all of it (see: Oblivion Horse Armor fiasco).

Valve always has and always will favor PC, at least that seems to be the companies reputation. TF2 almost never gets XBox patches, but PC version has tons of new content in that game alone. It's just easier for them to do PC updates I guess. (I assume because their approval process is internal.)

So they aren't greedy, they are just recooping some of their losses due to the extra requirements for XBox publishing. Buy a PC if you don't like it, or just don't buy the expansion.

Just like the movies, when was the last time you spent less than $20 for 2 people at the movies? It's all about the addons.

Valve says 'Free as in Beer for everyone!!'

MS says 'noooo you gotta charge for it!!'

Valve says 'fine, whatev'

MS says 'ok...$7, and oh you get a slice of the pie too'

Valve says 'the pie is the truth! *nom* *nom*'

Exactly, the fact that I download free demos has probably saved me hundreds of dollars on games I would have immediately regretted. That's money neither Microsoft nor the game developer got for a service rendered.

It really just boils down to the culture of different gamers. PC gamers have long gotten all their downloads for free (largely) whereas XBL gamers have virtually always had to pay $7 for the same add-ons. Therefore many gamers won't even bat an eyelid anymore when MS puts them up at those prices.

@Bhockzer: Guess I never thought about that before. I also edit video and render 3D graphics with my PC so I have to keep it updated constantly and never really thought about the fact that PC game makers constantly use higher end graphics and force people to get new hardware, good point though.

As someone else said, there's a difference between protecting consumers and being anti-commerce.

And why would anyone buy an l4d update on xbox? The 2nd one comes out in november and it will most likely get the same treatment of almost no game on the disk and no real updates. It's pretty clear valve relies on user provided content. Content that cannot be made available on the xbox. So valve games suck on the xbox.

If you want l4d 2, wait til spring and pick it up for 20 bucks. 60 dollars is way too much for a game that will nickel and dime you for content and not give you access to all the user generated content. The pc version is cheaper and provides all the extras for free.

Most of the Fallout 3 DLC was riddled with problems so much that they required people to delete the DLC and download a new version of it. So "hundreds of hours of vetting" has allowed huge game crashing content to be sold to thousands on multiple occasions.

So Valve decides to give stuff for free for THEIR game on THEIR distribution system and that's cool.

Microsoft charges to distribute someone else's content on their system and that's bad? I fail to see the logic here. Bandwidth/distribution/support ain't cheap last time I checked. Also last time I checked Microsoft wasn't running a charity.

There's a fine line between Consumer Protection and being anti-commerce. This article crosses that line.

Paying the money is better than the alternative, which is having nothing extra at all.

And just because Valve can put an update out for free over Steam doesn't mean it won't be pain free. Hell, they've had to constantly tweak updates and add-ons in the past. MS is attempting to make sure that sort of thing doesn't happen. If MS didn't try and make sure everything worked right the first time XBL would be flooded with tons of bullsh*t updates and addons. And then you'd be complaining out there not being some sort of quality control.

@tawni: Devil's advocate...

You bought the game, and you received the game. You bought online gaming, and you receive online gaming.

What entitles you to additional content that the publisher decides to release?

I don't know about Left 4 Dead or COD, but Halo map packs were never required until they were a free download. They were always optional for the first 3-4 months.

@logicalnoise: As a tri-platform gamer (PS3, 360, Wii) and someone who built his own gaming rig I have to ask, what quirks are you speaking of?

@dgruzew: An XBox is about $300 now, so your figures are off - and you do realize that the difference in cost between an XBox and a PC basically dispute your "PCs are better" argument. We're not talking $50, we're talking at least a $400 difference. That's not pocket change.

When you purchase a closed platform - you should expect this. Its the same as iPhone ap store, theres all kinds of crap they charge you for on there that is free on the PC.

Get a PC if you dont like it , all the games are on the PC and you usually get better graphics.

A tricked out Xbox with all accessories costs you 400-500 bucks , a PC that runs Left 4 dead well - 800-1200+ bucks.

I have a Gaming PC and XBOX and a Wii - I prefer the PC , but I have alot of friends on XBOX so often I pay for this stuff and I dont like it either, but its somehting we have to accept if we are willing to use closed systems.

It really is not shady for them to be making money out of there own service.

@dtmoore: I wanted one PC in the house (we're an Apple household) just for games, and Mr. Pi patiently reminded me of just how much time I've spent playing the PS3 (about 20 hours total). I still don't have a PC to run Resident Evil 3, and I also still haven't played all of Devil May Cry.

This is pretty shady on the part of Microsoft. They own one of the most popular consoles on the market - they can't spare a measly add-on? It's an add-on, for heaven's sake, one that Microsoft itself values at $7 - I guess it can shrug and say, "it's only $7, what's the big deal?" but it's a stupid move on their part.

And they annoy you into buying it. The last time I tried to play I managed to get about 2-3 rounds in before being kicked out of the game for not buying the map pack.