How long before the January transfer update becomes DLC?

Every self respecting gaming business is trying to maximise every revenue stream they can from a game, with the advent of DLC bringing about a totally new purchasing culture for games. The questions is how long will it be before Sports Interactive join their peers and find a way to monetise services that were previously free, such as the January transfer update.

Of course it may well be that there are "no plans to ever charge for additional content", but plans change and DLC is big business.

Why would they? it'd only cause uproar, and besides, we pay full price for a game is only "current" for around a year, cutting that more seems weird.

They can do whatever they want. It's up to you if you want to buy any DLC.

No point releasing it as DLC seeing as the community can and will make one if SI doesn't. Bugfixed are never DLC.

You have nothing to wory about, i could see stadium packs becoming DLC and with a decent price(1-2€ for 10 or so stadiums) it would be a good things IMO. DLC is good, it's just that some companies go overboard with it(I'm looking at you, call of duty)

Why suggest something that is atm a figment of your imagination?

Would I buy January transfers for $5, probably, but only because that is around the time that I start my game. (I play around with the editor making the "perfect" setup for a long time)

But if they did it would probably cause me to wait until February to buy the game anyways, thus defeating the point.

Why suggest something that is atm a figment of your imagination?

Because despite it being a figment of my imagination it is not beyond the realm of possibility?. Because this is forum for the general discussion of the PC/Mac version of Football Manager? Because DLC is prevalent in virtually all AAA video games out there and the only way a video game analyst looks at a company who doesn't explore the DLC approach is with their mouths agape at how they could not be squeezing every penny out of their product? Because currently Sports Interactive provide a service halfway through their game's lifetime they provide a free database update?

Of course the fact the editor exists means a certain group of people would never buy DLC, but there is also a certain group who would buy it. I guess why I would suggest something that at the moment is a figment of my imagination is because it's shocking to me that the FM business model hasn't moved yet to capitalise on the addictive nature of their game.

Wouldn't mind a zombies mode for FM actually....

Because despite it being a figment of my imagination it is not beyond the realm of possibility?. Because this is forum for the general discussion of the PC/Mac version of Football Manager? Because DLC is prevalent in virtually all AAA video games out there and the only way a video game analyst looks at a company who doesn't explore the DLC approach is with their mouths agape at how they could not be squeezing every penny out of their product? Because currently Sports Interactive provide a service halfway through their game's lifetime they provide a free database update?

Of course the fact the editor exists means a certain group of people would never buy DLC, but there is also a certain group who would buy it. I guess why I would suggest something that at the moment is a figment of my imagination is because it's shocking to me that the FM business model hasn't moved yet to capitalise on the addictive nature of their game.

Because contrary to popular belief they aren't totally profit motivated, you have to know the people to properly appreciate that but it's true.

They might have to fight off Sega at times but so far they they've done so pretty well, long may that continue.

I give it 2 years.

I trust SI and Miles to keep all patches and updates free. I think it would be quite harsh to suddenly start charging for something which essentially fixes issues in the game.

I was trying to imagine the kind of riots we'd see on here if it did happen:D I'm very much inclined to think it won't but I've recorded that forecast in my calendar just in case I need to eat my hat.

Because contrary to popular belief they aren't totally profit motivated, you have to know the people to properly appreciate that but it's true.

They might have to fight off Sega at times but so far they they've done so pretty well, long may that continue.

Absolutely, it would certainly alienate a very loyal fanbase. But you have agree that there is an air of inevitability over some form of DLC, particularly as the model in the gaming industry is to have the consumer becoming a continuous purchaser, similar to MMO's.

They won't do it, ever.

The simple reason is that they January patch is a patch primarily, data update second.

If they started charging for it then they are into a whole world of pain. Every single magazine & website would crucify them for charging money for what is effectively the final attempt to get rid of the bugs in the game and their sales would drop by a huge amount the next year.

Absolutely, it would certainly alienate a very loyal fanbase. But you have agree that there is an air of inevitability over some form of DLC, particularly as the model in the gaming industry is to have the consumer becoming a continuous purchaser, similar to MMO's.

It works with big games like Civ but FM is tiny in comparison and I can't see the potential profit being enough to make it worthwhile.

SI are one of those awesome companies who don't need to charge for dlc or updates, like valve

SI are one of those awesome companies who don't need to charge for dlc or updates, like valve

And Radiohead. God bless Radiohead.

Trouble is, FM isn't really the kind of game that fits in dlc territory.

If they did come up with a stadium editor then that would be the perfect dlc however. Go on SI... think about it

And Radiohead. God bless Radiohead.

And nine inch nails too!

I trust SI and Miles to keep all patches and updates free. I think it would be quite harsh to suddenly start charging for something which essentially fixes issues in the game.

I 2nd this.

I trust SI and Miles to keep all patches and updates free. I think it would be quite harsh to suddenly start charging for something which essentially fixes issues in the game.

They would have a tough time trying to charge for software updates that are there to fix bugs & data errors, as for chargeable DLC I'm not sure what sort of content would justify a charge other than a season data update if SI/Sega ever decide to skip a full release.

I will however keep a hat next to Kriss' on the off chance.

I think they've done enough by making it steam only for now. If it doesnt get hacked they'll probaly make more than ever. I hope they get what they deserve.

I just wonder if it is SEGAs pressure also to make japanese players look good in general. It seems that way a bit.

unless they plan to make the editor obsolete , there is just no profit to be had in this....

community made updates will be released easily.... and they couldnt charge for bug releases .

They could charge for the editor though

SI have already shown they are willing to upset some customers in the name of money. Why would they not feel the same with DLC?

Anger towards DLC isn't going to harm Battlefield 3's bottom line. Enough customers will still buy it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Sega test the waters with DLC rather soon (maybe with something not as controversial as the January transfer update, though).

Dont really see it happening or working for something like January Transfers. Lots of high quality (free) community content about.

besides they bring out an update every year in oct and charge us £30.00 for it already, what other game has been going for 15 odd years and brings out a new one every year which is basically an update

Because contrary to popular belief they aren't totally profit motivated, you have to know the people to properly appreciate that but it's true.

They might have to fight off Sega at times but so far they they've done so pretty well, long may that continue.

I believe in santa claus as well.

2 years and everyone on here will say : "They have known this 2 years ago".

The thing is the DLC you pay for adds something new to a game, like maps in COD/HALO, FM doesnt release updates like that, its data updates that can be downloaded for free outwith SI and game fixes, you get game fixes for the likes of COD for free, but you pay for additional playable content. Unless they start offering a lot more to their updates then i cant see this, i wont put a hat aside, ill just buy one to eat if this happens

Maybe they haven't thought of it and we should shut up now?

The thing is the DLC you pay for adds something new to a game, like maps in COD/HALO, FM doesnt release updates like that, its data updates that can be downloaded for free outwith SI and game fixes, you get game fixes for the likes of COD for free, but you pay for additional playable content. Unless they start offering a lot more to their updates then i cant see this, i wont put a hat aside, ill just buy one to eat if this happens

+1. I'll be buying a Stetson

Sports Interactive is not a charity it's a business as is SEGA. Anyone who has a hard time imagining, any company passing on an opportunity to add new revenue streams, doesn't understand capitalism.

Not passing judgement on DLC, capitalism, or SI, but no large business would pass up more profit because it would annoy it's customers.

Sports Interactive is not a charity it's a business as is SEGA..

Yes, and why do you assume that they are all morons? They have been doing a pretty good job for a decent amount of time, I doubt they will screw up their business by introducing something that doesn't fit with the game.

Not all games have DLC, Football manager will never ever have it, period. You can quote me on that in 10 years when we still don't have DLCs.

Yes, and why do you assume that they are all morons? They have been doing a pretty good job for a decent amount of time, I doubt they will screw up their business by introducing something that doesn't fit with the game.

DLC is just one of the many mechanisms to convert pirates into paying customers, as the paid product is differentiated from the pirated product.

DLC is also one of the most effective mechanisms as most customers are idiots enough to not think twice.

I have no doubt DLC has been thought about by Sega and SI in the last few years, and I don't think you can ever rule it out in the next decade. Not at all.

Yes, and why do you assume that they are all morons?

SI have already shown they are willing to upset some customers in the name of money. Why would they not feel the same with DLC?

Anger towards DLC isn't going to harm Battlefield 3's bottom line. Enough customers will still buy it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Sega test the waters with DLC rather soon (maybe with something not as controversial as the January transfer update, though).

Well, they're a business, they do want to make money, but making the transfer database updates (not the actual patches themselves) bought DLC just likely wouldn't make economical sense. Some people hesitate to even buy once a year, why give them another reason to hesitate? if they know at least they'll be "up to date" for around a year, at least they'll feel more secure to perhaps buy the title every year. The only way DLC would make sense would be if FM transitioned to a more 2-year model and tried to add and refine more substantial moves with the game each title release, while releasing DLC updates inbetween to try and keep the revenue flowing, but that would likely still be less income, especially when you factor in box-sales lost.

Sure, all I can do is speculate really, I dont truly know how things would pan out. Yet I just don't think DLC for FM make sense. They make sense in an RPG where you can add extra adventures, or a strategy game for adding entirely new modes. But for transfer updates? for a game that is "current" for such a little time I dont think it makes sense. Other games can safely be played for years after release, some people still play games that are 7 years old, while FM might be able to give more hours of enjoyment than most titles, I just feel it doesn't work with the whole yearly new title model.

I haven't bought any DLC since buying some crappy unit pack for Empire Total War which I had to mod anyway to make it even remotely playable.

So no, I hope SI don't follow this path. Can't see how it would work - a kitpack maybe? Although you can download those anyway so what would be the point.

Well, they're a business, they do want to make money, but making the transfer database updates (not the actual patches themselves) bought DLC just likely wouldn't make economical sense. Some people hesitate to even buy once a year, why give them another reason to hesitate? if they know at least they'll be "up to date" for around a year, at least they'll feel more secure to perhaps buy the title every year. The only way DLC would make sense would be if FM transitioned to a more 2-year model and tried to add and refine more substantial moves with the game each title release, while releasing DLC updates inbetween to try and keep the revenue flowing, but that would likely still be less income, especially when you factor in box-sales lost.

Sure, all I can do is speculate really, I dont truly know how things would pan out. Yet I just don't think DLC for FM make sense. They make sense in an RPG where you can add extra adventures, or a strategy game for adding entirely new modes. But for transfer updates? for a game that is "current" for such a little time I dont think it makes sense. Other games can safely be played for years after release, some people still play games that are 7 years old, while FM might be able to give more hours of enjoyment than most titles, I just feel it doesn't work with the whole yearly new title model.

The conspiracy theorist in me will take a look at how "polish" was so well-received for FM11 that the temptation will be to split development over two releases, one of which is DLC ("polish" the first, real development in the second).

Possible? I wouldn't rule it out. It works for EA financially despite backlash towards EA's "abuse" of DLC.

besides they bring out an update every year in oct and charge us £30.00 for it already, what other game has been going for 15 odd years and brings out a new one every year which is basically an update

Every single Sports games franchise. Except they all charge £50 for it.

Every self respecting gaming business is trying to maximise every revenue stream they can from a game, with the advent of DLC bringing about a totally new purchasing culture for games. The questions is how long will it be before Sports Interactive join their peers and find a way to monetise services that were previously free, such as the January transfer update.

Of course it may well be that there are "no plans to ever charge for additional content", but plans change and DLC is big business.

I could see people paying for a proper "Extra league levels in playable leagues" add-on pack for instance,but not for bug fixes or a january transfer update.

I could see people paying for a proper "Extra league levels in playable leagues" add-on pack for instance,but not for bug fixes or a january transfer update.

To tell you the truth, I will be one of those people WILLING to pay for extra league levels or extra playable nations. I am currently just sick that FM have not yet covered the whole footballing world of nations and leagues. Now that would be something!

They don't have time to make DLC.. Once FM is released they start working on patch and the next FM version.

To tell you the truth, I will be one of those people WILLING to pay for extra league levels or extra playable nations. I am currently just sick that FM have not yet covered the whole footballing world of nations and leagues. Now that would be something!

There you go

What do you mean whole footballing world...there are other leagues?? :confused:

Joking aside,I agree I think many would pay for something like that or other things that ADD to the game.

I'd guess this is more due to the fact that the editor is now a free seperate app (for patching reasons) rather than any actual plans for paid DLC.

I think they have already thought of this, due to the link up with team fortress. I think they want to see how many have bought team fortress since it was announced. Bug fixes would be fed through the automatic updates and January transfers and maybe new add-ons for graphics could be charged for.

I know some will say that people will create graphics on here and other sites but it wasn't until something went wrong with FM2006 (I think) I came on here, so if nothing went wrong I may have never came on here.

Also how many people out there are sceptical about downloading unofficial databases or graphics etc. Nothing against the people who spend ages doing these, I have downloaded a few myself, but on the extreme if one of the downloads buggered up your computer (I'm not computer savy, so it may never happen) where would you stand compensation wise etc. If SI released a graphics pack so you could get newgens with punk rocker hairstyles in the photo etc. and there was an undetected fault with the pack that buggered up your computer then you would be able to get compensation.

I complete trust SI for this not to be the case. But even Dell sold computers that caught fire, and Apple released its Iphone that needed a special case to get a signal.

This years version already fees like a DLC TBH