1 vs 100 officially dead on XBLA

[Zeus]

Well, there goes your best excuse for having to pay for Live

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6269146.ht ... Btitle%3B2

[Louis]

Well that sucks. I didn't start playing till season 2, but it was fun.

[Shrinweck]

I played the 'beta' a bit and it was my original excuse to shell out for Live. My subscription just ran out last week and I can't see renewing until something else interesting comes. I stopped being able to play when all of the new and interesting stuff happened late night on the weekend.

When I was at work.

Fuck.

[SineSwiper]

So, why? It was pretty successful. Were the sponsors not going to pony up the money for a third season? (After all, all I saw was Sprint commercials on the 2nd season.)

[Shellie]

That sucks, it was a lot of fun.

[Zeus]

So, why? It was pretty successful. Were the sponsors not going to pony up the money for a third season? (After all, all I saw was Sprint commercials on the 2nd season.)

Here's my theory:

1 vs 100 was a very cheap licence, it only lasted a few eps (I think that article said 28) on TV. So Microshaft gets a licence for a year or so for next to nothing, makes that game, and tests out the reaction and response by offering it for free (remember, it never actually left beta). Run some numbers and you get an idea of the feasibility of such a game when it's a monthly subscription (say, $10 for the first 3 months and $5 for each month after with a year pre-paid for $40). Could even be multiple games available at any given time for that fee (like an online Press Your Luck or something) to give people more options and increased value. It also allows them to figure out the technical logistics of how such a thing would work on their Live network. Then, you take it away for a while and bring it back later "new and improved" for a monthly fee. After all, why give something away for free when you can charge for it? They've already proven with Live that people will pay for what's offered for free everywhere else if the fee is deemed nominal enough ("Yeah, Zeus, Live is only the price of a couple of cups of Starbucks coffees a month").

So what's the best way to add new revenue streams from their established products? There's two newer and slightly established ways: monthly fees and microtransactions. They sort of have the microtransactions thing with the Marketplace (should you really be paying $5 for a lightsaber for your avatar?) and we know more of that is coming down the pipe eventually. But they're not actually generating any additional monthly fees from the games directly (Live is indirect) other than some microtransactions and downloadable content. So why not find a way to take the Blizzard model and not only make people pay for your product up front but also force them to pay a monthly fee to keep playing it? We know Activision is going to be doing this with Call of Duty (likely starting with #7) and EA's already started with their sports games. You don't think Microshaft is looking to jump on that bandwagon too?

Basically, consider 1 vs 100 and all the costs associated with it to be R&D to test out the market, feasibility, etc. That's my theory, anyways

[SineSwiper]

Nah, I think they were banking on using the game as a vehicle for sponsorships and commercials, like the real game show industry, but it just didn't catch on with the corporate folks. After all, it costs them a lot in sales giving away all of those games and free points. Deal or No Deal doesn't give away millions of dollars on ratings alone, either.

[Zeus]

Nah, I think they were banking on using the game as a vehicle for sponsorships and commercials, like the real game show industry, but it just didn't catch on with the corporate folks. After all, it costs them a lot in sales giving away all of those games and free points. Deal or No Deal doesn't give away millions of dollars on ratings alone, either.

Of course the ads and sponsorships would be a big part of the game. Hell, they could have their own third parties promote their games on there and yes, it would have to be a big part. But the way the whole thing was done, it felt like an experiment from the beginning, even moreso than a beta. I mean, look how much it changed from season 1 to season 2. I think they used it as an R&D tool more than anything and if it happened to take off more than they thought, great. But it didn't and still served its purpose