XNA Community Games pricing, marketing structure detailed

by Xav de Matos { Jul 22nd 2008 at 4:00PM }

Microsoft has revealed the marketing and pricing plans for its Xbox Live Community Games program, which is expected to launch in some public form this holiday season in North America and select European markets.

Microsoft has set three tiers of pricing for XNA developed titles, games may cost 200MS points ($2.50) for titles 50MB or less and 400 ($5) or 800MS points ($10) for titles that weigh in at a maximum of 150MB.

Microsoft is set to share up to 70% of profits from any XNA developed title. Microsoft has also revealed plans to help promote the more successful titles on the service. "If we help you sell an absolute ton of these, it's going to be up towards 30% [more of your total revenue]," Microsoft chief technology officer Chris Satchell told MTV Multiplayer. "If it's not doing so well, down towards 10%."

As Shacknews described, developers who choose to distribute titles via the Xbox Live Marketplace will not be able to opt out of royalty-cutting promotions. Creators must first agree to a common set of terms when adding a game to the service and, According to Microsoft, "the majority of sales and revenue a creator earns will be generated by our promotions."

Unfortunately, XNA Community Games will not include achievements and the service is structured so no game may be released for free, but we assume we'll see demos for each title.

Tags: community-games, xna

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

The Beta Max @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:11PM

No achievements? No sale. I'll stick with the free demos...

Seanross @ Jul 22nd 2008 5:30PM

Going by that sentiment, you've never played games before the xbox 360 came out?

What is with people and achievements... whatever happened to playing a game because it was good or you liked it?

The Beta Max @ Jul 23rd 2008 8:06AM

I've purchased retail games that I know I'll like or decided to purchase after the free demo. If I REALLY dig the demo I may buy it but for Arcade titles, the achievements come into play. Usually its only a few hours of gaming anyway so I don't feel like I'm missing anything...

Josh @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:13PM

Let me be the first to say that it is L-A-M-E that developers will not have the choice to make there games free...

Karma313th @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:13PM

If I'm reading this correctly, it looks like Xav got the "Microsoft to share up to 70%" a little backwards.

From the information provided by Microsoft, it sounds like they're saying that developers will keep 80 to 90 percent of sales unless Microsoft's promotion helps sell above a certain threshold. In that event, Microsoft takes a 30% cut of the pie.

In other words, it would be more accurate to say that Microsoft will share up to 90% of sales profit.

Xav de Matos @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:24PM

According to the verbiage used to announce this plan Microsoft will hold onto a guaranteed 30% of all profits and has committed to share up to 70% of profits with developers of a game.

The reference in the story is based on the following statements made on promotion which would reduce the shares received from profits.

So, we're reading the same book we're just on different pages.

ZEBRA NINER @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:13PM

No cheevos!!??! What's that all about?!

Aero @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:54PM

They are probably doing that so they don't run the risk of people making games with easy achievements in order to sell loads.

joey @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:13PM

Time to buy myself a new pc and give this XNA a try.
surely, It can't be that hard.

Chase @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:19PM

This is a step in the right direction. Now, if only it were a set 70-percent of profits to developers.

T-BoNe254 @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:36PM

It is. you didn't read it correctly.

Xav de Matos @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:39PM

I think he might mean Xbox Live Arcade developers, which had their royalties cut from 70ish % to much, much less.

MrMuggs @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:39PM

It seems odd that MS would structure their pricing based on the size of the game. Is there a correlation between the quality of the game and the size of it? Does a bigger game mean a better game? I'm sure that there are tons of shitty larger games and vice versa. Maybe the pricing has more to do with the cost to MS for hosting/bandwidth. The larger games cost MS more to host and allow for download therefore they charge the developer more. Will this pricing model cause developers to add more (sometimes crappy) content just to increase the size of the game and the price? Will a game that should be $2.50 be packed with a developer diary of photos and junk? It seems to me that the pricing should be based on the quality of the game and not the size.

As a side note, I don't understand why people are so hung up on achievements. Seriously, who cares? It's interested to see that you've reached certain milestones in a game but what's it really worth other than "bragging rights" and showing others how big your "E-Penis" is because you have no life and spend days getting achievements that hold no real world value. Actually, I would say that achievements are almost a direct correlation to your life. How many guys with a girlfriend/wife/job/life are racking up tons of achievement points. It's obviously important to some people though so whatever.

Jcarpio @ Jul 22nd 2008 5:24PM

I see where you were going with the pricing structure.. but there is a flaw.. Basing a game's quality is a subjective thing, what they're doing is basing it off of something fixed. it seems to be following the pricing structure of XBLA games

MrMuggs @ Jul 22nd 2008 7:08PM

It's okay to base a game price on a fixed point. However, the fixed point to base pricing on shouldn't be the size of the game. That doesn't make sense.

alex @ Jul 22nd 2008 8:13PM

Well said my man! At last someone who can decipher the jargon for us minnions to understand. Great comment mate, top drawer.
Do you worrk for these guys? Just enquiring LOL

Ian @ Jul 23rd 2008 9:14AM

Size of the game is a good factor. The larger the game, the more space it takes on MS's servers, the more it costs them in bandwidth, etc.

Jcarpio @ Jul 22nd 2008 4:57PM

Question..
what if i'm a member of the xna creators club.. I have to pay my fee plus the cost of the game on top of that?

that question aside. the pricing isn't that bad, plus you'd be supporting indie developers without much financial support.

sukru @ Jul 23rd 2008 2:37PM

I think you can upload games directly to your 360, if you're a developers club member.

You'll probably need the source code, which should be available on xna web site.

SadisticHam @ Jul 22nd 2008 6:28PM

Meh, wont bother. Nothing major will come out of it. The Live arcade is mostly full of shit, XNA isn't going to be any better.

Porkfist @ Jul 22nd 2008 7:39PM

I am very excited for XNA, I'm looking forward to some more unusual and experimental games. The PSN seems to have it right with their mix of quirky small titles, and I'm hoping the community can deliver some nice alternatives to traditional games.

Dwag @ Jul 22nd 2008 11:47PM

I believe this will produce excellent games. When people get paid to do something they do it good.

Boff @ Jul 23rd 2008 6:19AM

@MrMuggs: I would have thought the opposite would be true, regarding developers 'bloating' their games to reach the higher price point.

Surely they'd rather sell 1million copies @ 200msp than 500k at 400msp or whatever. A developer, especially a new one, would much rather their game gets maximum exposure than maximum profits? That can come later, when you've got a couple of XNA hits under your belt ;o)

Or maybe I'm just living in an utopian fantasy world where money doesn't ALWAYS talk!