July Games with Gold for XBOX One

[ncxcstud]

So, the new Games with Gold for XBOX One for July are...

Guacamele (which is a debut on XBOX One I think...)

and.....

Max: Curse of Brotherhood

You'd think they'd throw in LocoCycle about now... Oh well. If you missed Max in June - it's good enough to get again in July!

 

[ncxcstud]

I'll definitely pick up Guacamele and I've been enjoying Valiant Hearts: The Great War (great storytelling!)

Lots of new games downloadable games for the XBOX One recently too... Really hard to not purchase these things with the hope that they'll be on Games for Gold in less than a year...

 

[Keith Wallace]

Thing is, I got Guacamelee! FOREVER ago on PC with a Humble Bundle, but I never bothered touching it. It's just a Mexican-themed platformer, but maybe I'll try it on Xbox sometime. It's pretty pathetic that they're only giving us a single game this month, after all that "you spoke, we listened," crap. So their listening right now is:

--1 game for free
--No more keeping the free games
--$10 off Ryse], which is a launch title that's been as low as $35 in physical form from other stores.

That really sucks.

 

[ioaniro]

I'm not sure the "you spoke, we listened" thing was referring to free stuff, free stuff is free stuff. I would also like to see better games for the One but is a bit early. From the looks of it Guacamelee might be worth it as a couch co-op so not too bad.

 

[Keith Wallace]

The issue isn't getting better games, to me. There are plenty of games I'd try, for the right price. It's how they think that $10, MAYBE $20, off of a launch title is a good deal, 7+ months later. Why would I spend $50 on a digital copy of Ryse when Amazon has it for $45 for a physical copy, which I can trade in? Guacamelee! seems so much like a ho-hum platformer, with a slight twist (as it seems 50% of the indie dev scene is nowadays). I'd rather they give away something semi-fresh in gameplay, like Strike Suit Zero. More-importantly, the crap decision to repeat Max the second month in is really disappointing. I've had it almost a month, yet I've felt no desire to play it. Telling me it's there in July won't change that.

 

[michfan]

There is a growing niche of gamers who expect development companies to spend 10's of millions of dollars to produce AAA games, then want them for free or at least 1/2 price (but won't even bother if a couple of reviewers decide they're not good). I'm glad these people tend to prefer Sony consoles. Though unfortunately some of this mentality is also growing on Xbox -- e.g., people refusing to pay for Contrast because PS4 owners got it for free.

I think game companies should be rewarded for making good games and will happily pay not only for games but also DLC if I like it. I'd hate to imagine what my career would be like if people expected me to provide services for free.

 

[Keith Wallace]

That's a ridiculous comparison, though. Goods fade in quality/usefulness over time. NBA 2K14 won't be worth a purchase pretty soon, because it'll be an outdated title once NBA 2K15 releases. So, if the game's developers and publisher are only going to make it a useful purchase for 4 months, what logic is there in charging me the same $60 that those who purchased the game at launch (and had the game's content relevant for a year)?

In another matter, when Microsoft talks about the benefit of digital, I have yet to see it. The issue isn't expecting things for free or less. It's why should I pay more as a "perk" of my Gold sub for Ryse, when they THEN add on the inability to recoup some of the cost (because you can't trade in a digital game).

I'm fine with putting money on the table for quality content. However, I never see companies dropping their prices when that quality isn't met. Did Batllefield 4 go to $30 when its game wasn't working more than half the time? No, they expected $60 just the same. Is Microsoft dropping the price of Xbox LIVE Gold when they're lessening the perks (fewer free games, smaller game discounts, removing apps from the paywall)? No, we are expected to pay the same for Gold when the benefits are less.

People act like there's a one-way street of entitlement with consumers, but businesses pull the same stuff. It's not about deserving things, it's about how Microsoft is charging the same for stuff, yet lowering the quality. Some cases might be how Microsoft lessened the graphical detail, along with the car and track counts, in Forza 5. The graphics were downgraded from announcement to release, but the price certainly wasn't. Watch_Dogs was shown off with better graphics than resulted (and at a higher resolution), but that lower-quality result wasn't discounted.

So, just as companies will overcharge for stuff that isn't as-advertised, I'm not going to offer up full payment for that content. I'll wait until I believe the price is in-line with the quality of the product. I don't care to spend $50 for 15 hours of entertainment with Ryse, it's just not worth it to me.

 

[Reflexx]

I'm not going to judge Games with Gold on XBOX ONE too harshly yet.

I am disappointed that you can't keep them games if you are no longer a Gold subscriber; unlike on the 360.

But as for the actual games made available through the program... I'm going to give it time. Right now there just aren't that many games period. If they keep offering different good games for free, then we'll just have a bunch of people waiting for up-and-coming Indie games to go free instead of buying them.

When there are a lot more games and popular ones have already passed the period where they are getting decent sales, then I expect to see those games on Games With Gold.

​I do agree with stuff like NBA2k14 though. That game should be $10 right now.

 

[Keith Wallace]

I agree, and my issue isn't necessarily the game quality right now. I know that they're needing to build up a year-old (or more) catalog of retail titles before they can start giving them out. It's more that after one month, they're repeating a game already. There are plenty of low-end, indie titles they could have replaced Max with, but they're instead leaving it there with just one game this month. That's disappointing.

 

[MobileVortex]

I just dont follow your line of thought.

What we are talking about is entertainment, not the price of milk or gas. The companies can charge w/e they want, and you vote with your wallet.

I see no point/use/ or reason to complain about it. The value in gold is Online Multiplayer... that's it everything else is a perk. I started paying for Gold when that was literally THE ONLY THING IT OFFERED, and it was never on sale. Now its almost always found on sale for $35-40.

There 100% is an advantage to buying digital in my eyes. Especially if its a game I'm going to buy at full price. Not to mention all the free Microsoft credit ive gotten over the years. In the past two i've gotten about $200 of Microsoft money for free. (most of that is through windows phone and other offers).

Offering the same game 2 months in a row does kinda rub me the wrong way, but i have no issue with it. Would have seemed better if they would have came back to it next month or in a few months.

Never judge a game buy it's announcement, only judge it once it is out and reviewed by reputable sources. Anything before that is just hype and what the PR department wants you to know.

 

[ioaniro]

I totally agree with Reflexx , my biggest disappointment is that I don't own anymore the games given with the gold. If they want to do that they should have made a library of free games available to gold members always.
On the benefits of digital vs physical copy... I guess right now only if you are buying the game launch day and is a game you'd play often (multiplayer) it's worth it. No disk to change and jump in the action.

 

[coip]

Guacamelee: Super Turbo Championship Edition is a great game, and a perfect one for Games with Gold, especially since it's a brand new game instead of an old one. Last month's games were solid as well: Halo: Spartan Assault and Max: Curse of Brotherhood. It's not surprising to me that they didn't choose Lococycle. The game was critically panned and only costs $10 as is. If that was the free game of the month, Microsoft would've taken a lot of heat. Still, it would be nice if they gave two free games away per month. The Deals with Gold, though, are not very good, for the same reasons others pointed out above.

 

[Coreldan]

I think the games so far have been great picks. It's great to get my fiancee so into a game like she did with Max and now Guacamelee

That said, I do hope that it won't become a trend that they have the same game available for two months and rather offer new things, but I guess for now we can just put it on the GWG thing being so new on X1.

 

[Svoboda]

Finished up Guacamelee last night. I don't have the reflexes to 100% this game, unfortunately. I can't seem to get the Combo Chicken quest done nor the orb in Tree Tops. Fantastic title for free.