Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by ChrisV, Apr 24, 2002.
GameSpot Complete ?
You beat me to it Chris. I was just about to post.
Not suprising to see and as I stated a while ago when the discussion concerning IGN came up. Allot of the bigger sites are going to moving to this. The cost of running these sites (Bandwidth alone) is to much. As of right now I pay for IGN's service and I might consider Gamespot since both are my favorite spots for gaming news.
At least Gamespot gives you access to all their new content for 7 days, which means if you visit the site regularly, you won't miss out. IGN is the opposite, keeping the content from you for a week or more.
The "one movie" limit is easily defeated by deleting your Gamespot cookie.
Pop-up killer keeps all the annoying ads away.
So basically, you're paying $20 a year for access to OLD stuff. I'll pass.
I subscribe to mags (mainly EGM) because I like the columns, stories, and the other things in their mags. Granted, some info is old, but having a opy to hold in your hands of a picture or storyline or large preview section of a game is different than looking at it on a monitor.
I like the overall mag and think I get my money's worth. If I were to pay for IGN and GameSpot, I think I would feel the same way about those (even though you might be able to find the same info somewhere else).
The future of the internet. $$$$$$
I truly admire the way that GameSpot is initiating their "pay-per-view" type of service.
First of all its structured. You know what will be free and what won't be, all up front. Simple, if you enjoy downloading the movies and gaining access to all possible content, pay the rather low fee and enjoy. If not, get access to all the core information for free. On the other hand, IGN is inconsistent with its service. Occaisonally a review is insider only, sometimes a download, and every few news items are unable to be seen. By paying for the service, I have no idea, day-in, day-out, of what exactly I am getting for my money.
Second, most core news items are free to the non-member. This makes perfect sense. Members should pay for what they use: Bandwidth. Why charge someone for a simple news release that most game companies release in a nice, printable format to all interested press. The gaming sites make their mark by acquiring good interviews, assembling streaming video, and reporting reviews.
While it truly blows that Gamespot is changing to a pay site, at least they are doing it the right way. IGN had, and still doesn't, no idea of what they were doing when they started to charge.
I will never pay for any on-line content, period. The reason being is that on-line content is not a material item, like a magazine, so it's like paying to breath. The only internet related service I will ever pay a monthly fee for is internet service from an ISP. I do understand why these sites have to start charging fees, it's basic economics. However, it's not like IGN and Gamespot are the only places to find the info I'm looking for, although they are two of the best. There are literally thousands of places to find info as well as game trailers, demos, patches etc. Usually, all you have to do is go to the official site of the game in question.
I don't think this will really effect anyway, I rarely download any files from them, I just like thier reviews, Gamespot that is. A site I use quite often is Mega Games, although I suppose it will only be a matter of time before they start charging.
I think one of the reasons that folks are hesitant to pay for gaming web content is the perception that they are paying *already* for Internet access, a computer, an extra phone line, etc. plus money on the games themselves. When you take into account that initial investment vs $25 a year for a magazine with a cdrom and free sites to supplement it, it doesn't seem much worth it.
I have to echo Justin's comments above - I prefer Gamespot's up-front approach to their pay-for-content service. But I respect the review content I get on free forums and various small sites... thus my feelings of respect/sympathy for Gamespot alone are not enough to get my credit card out... yet. If the web's free gaming content runs completely dry (looks like it's heading in that direction, eh?), I wouldn't mind paying if they continue. Anyhow, I wish them success.
Let's keep our fingers crossed they don't go the way of Daily Radar/IGN and start "Gamespot Wrestling" or flashy bi-monthly "top ten videogame babes" and "the best babe booths at E3"-style articles.
This is economic reality, and to some people it's worth the investment. Fair enough.
There is something to be said about the "psychological" effect of printed magazines/pictures versus web content/jpegs. They may both serve the same exact function but I think many people view the former as permanent and the latter as temporary vapor, and thus not "worth" as much. I know it may not add up when you think about it, but that's often the perception, for better or worse.
Jeffrey, if it does happen, it will take a very long while indeed. That's because there will always be some site willing to absorb defected readership and grow as a result.
It's a vicious cycle, but the internet is big enough to sustain it for the near future.
AHAHAHA I told you all SO!
Well it looks like I will be paying for at least one service. Either IGN or Gamespot. So my question is what is better? I'm leaning toward Gamespot but I don't know.