142 réponses à ce sujet

[Stoko981]

So, Kasumi's Stolen Memory costs 560MSP. For that you get one new mission that lasts anywhere from 30 minutes to 2 hours, one new casual outfit, one new weapon, one new coin-operated anecdote despenser aboard the Normandy as well as an extra character to bring along on missions, a benefit which boils down to a new power to use in combat and different reactionary dialogue to specific situations, and one new achievement to work towards. In other words, except the casual outfit, it's functionally identical to something we already got for free.

On the other hand, you have Left 4 Dead 2's The Passing, which launches tomorrow and will also cost 560MSP. This offers a new three-chapter campaign, a new game mode, a series of diverse guest game modes that cycle each week for at least the next 20 weeks, a new Uncommon Common infected enemy, the return of three of the first game's main characters, two new weapons and support for infected bot play in Versus. And it's free on PC.

I know what I'll be spending my 560MSP on.

[Sand King]

Two different companies, two different kinds of games

[AnathamaDye]

The mission was longer than Zaeed's and I didn't mind paying for it.

[Bryy_Miller]

Sand King wrote...

Two different companies, two different kinds of games

Exactly. You don't go to Marie Calendar's expecting McDonald's prices.

[Zinoviy]

If you feel like your money is promoting something you support, e.g. epic video games, then I'd say that's worth it.

Did Kasumi deliver for me? Yes it did.

[Dethateer]

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

[Yorick of the Damned]

Dethateer wrote...

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

I personally would much prefer buying a 40$ expansion pack then several 5$ missions. 

[Dethateer]

Isn't that what I said?

[RobertM5252]

Zinoviy wrote...

If you feel like your money is promoting something you support, e.g. epic video games, then I'd say that's worth it.

Actually, what it seems more like we're supporting is the idea that we will, after having completed and enjoyed a game, pay far more than we did for the original game (dollars-per-hour of played time) for any additional content, regardless of its value. It incentivizes leaving content out of the game in order to sell it later at a much higher "markup" (so to speak).later.

Not as many people would have paid $57/$67 (PC/XB360 MSRP + $7) for ME2 simply because it came with 12 companion-characters instead of a mere 11 as there are people are willing to pay $50/$60 at first and then an extra $7 later for that small bit of extra content. It seems like EA loves the micro-payments model of getting people to pay more for a game than they realize by slowly bleeding it out of them after the fact rather than charging for it up front. Add another $7 DLC and ME2, if it had come with that content out-of-the-box, would've been $64 for PC, $74 for XB360. Not a price a lot of people are willing to pay. Yet, paradoxically, many more are willing to pay $50+7+7 (or $60+7+7).

DLC: good for business, not so good for gamers (value-wise, anyway).

[Stanley Woo]

Dethateer wrote...

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

What about those who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases, and who don't want to wait for a full-sized expansion? Don't their opinions count too?

[TJSolo]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

What about those who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases, and who don't want to wait for a full-sized expansion? Don't their opinions count too?

Those that prefer lower priced DLC, with lower amount of content included seem to be short sighted and unable to do addition.
In the long run the cost of the smaller DLC will be more than larger DLC, due to the convenience factor all the while obtaining less content.
Companies too focused on delivering convenience DLC with higher prices are themselves shortsighted as well but they can add.

[Soldier989]

Valve (With TF2 and L4D2) Did DLC right, Bethesda did the DLC for Fallout 3 right as well.



Bioware ****ed up horribly, the DLC isn't even worth 5$ in my opinion, the only DLC Bioware did right was that bonus character for DA:O, Shale.

[Pacifien]

Stanley Woo wrote...
What about those who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases, and who don't want to wait for a full-sized expansion? Don't their opinions count too?

I still rather disliked the pricing on Kasumi's DLC, feeling it was overpriced. I mean, I bought it. I enjoyed it. But I still hate myself for it.

Now I am sad.

[Stoko981]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

What about those who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases, and who don't want to wait for a full-sized expansion? Don't their opinions count too?

Pardon me for using British currency, but that's what's relevant to me. If you get your 2100 MSP for £17, then Kasumi's Stolen Memory costs £4.53. Typically a full fledged retail game costs £40 and a full expansion pack costs £20. I'm pretty sure you'd get more than four and a half Kasumi-length missions in a full expansion pack, and I'm pretty sure you get more content than 9 Kasumi-length missions in the entirety of ME2.

So while I see your point that there are people who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases rather than waiting for a full-sized expansion, I think the point of this thread was that they're not getting lower prices. They're paying through the nose for what they're getting. Other companies offer far more content for the same cost (or less), and any company, BioWare included, would offer more content per £ if it were a full-sized expansion.

tl;dr: Kasumi's Stolen Memory is a rip off. People have been willing to pay it, and that's fair enough. But that doesn't change the fact that it's pretty bad value for money.

[Dick Delaware]

I agree with slimgrim. The problem with DLC is that the content that it provides is shallow and limited content compared to a proper expansion pack. Compare the value of an expansion pack that provides you with a new setting, characters, and abilities, to the downloadable content we've seen so far. It's not even close. Even then, quest DLC is still infinitely better than stuff like appearance packs, which is a hilariously blatant cash-grab.

I like the idea of DLC in theory because it provides a way to extend the lifespan of a product without the devs having to go through the labour of churning out a full title/expansion. However, as it is right now, it just encourages companies to go after people with consumer fever who will buy pretty much anything related to a game they like in front of them, no matter how bad it is.

Whether I like it or not, however, it's clearly here to stay.

Modifié par Dick Delaware, 22 avril 2010 - 12:29 .

[exxxed]

The fact that the new Left for Dead 2 DLC is free on the PC... i think that Valve actually acknowledges that they wouldn't be where they are without us PC gamers, and this is a reward for their loyal fans, in my opinion of course. Which brings to mind what BioWare did with Bring Down The Sky DLC...

Come to think of it... neither EA nor BioWare would be where they are without PC gamers...

IF i think about it further... i can't seem to remember one PC gamer who actually agrees with payed DLC's (note DLC's not expansion packs)... maybe because of moding?... and pretty high quality moding to be exact, i mean check out Oblivion and STALKER.

I could be wrong though, and if that's so, my apologies.

[Kaiser Shepard]

I wonder if announcing the full DLC plans of a title would increase the sales of it's DLC, because people know how much MS Points they'll have to get in advance.

[sammcl]

Kasumi was a great mission but definately not worth the asking price, shoulda been more like $2. I pretty much just used her for overload, backstab was fine but it felt faster using her overload and just shooting to finish off the enemies. Flashbang felt like cheating since it worked through defenses, never used it. Being optional she prolly won't have much of a role in ME3 if any, Balak got a mention in the galactic news and Kate Bowman e-mailed you, I don't expect much more from Kasumi.

Knowing DLC plans ahead of time would help a lot of consumers but I dunno that it would happen unless the publisher cares more about the content than the profit. EA doesn't strike me as that kind of publisher, I mean they essentially release the same sports game every year don't they? At least the free Zaeed content showed us what to expect from the paid Kasumi content, unfortunately I knew it was gonna be overpriced and still paid it coz I'm hooked on ME : / I'm not particularly unhappy with the purchase but I'm not gonna delude myself into thinking it was worth it

[Gaddmeister]

exxxed wrote...

The fact that the new Left for Dead 2 DLC is free on the PC... i think that Valve actually acknowledges that they wouldn't be where they are without us PC gamers, and this is a reward for their loyal fans, in my opinion of course. Which brings to mind what BioWare did with Bring Down The Sky DLC...
Come to think of it... neither EA nor BioWare would be where they are without PC gamers...
IF i think about it further... i can't seem to remember one PC gamer who actually agrees with payed DLC's (note DLC's not expansion packs)... maybe because of moding?... and pretty high quality moding to be exact, i mean check out Oblivion and STALKER.
I could be wrong though, and if that's so, my apologies.

Well, all companies wouldn't be where they are without their consumers. I doubt Valve releases free dlc to reward their loyal fans. All consumers who buy their products on pc, whether they are long time consumers or new ones, get their dlc for free. I don't know Valve's strategy, but maybe they feel that free dlc give them goodwill? Also, I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that Microsoft dislikes (doesn't allow?) game publishers to release major dlc on Xbox Live for free. Either way, Valve employees don't work for free, so free dlc is probably supposed to generate revenue in some other form. As I said, I don't know their strategy. EA and Bioware apparently have another strategy.

But let's not fool ourselves here. Video game companies are not our friends, they're companies and their purposes are to make money for their owners, employees and to invest in future products.

Modifié par Gaddmeister, 22 avril 2010 - 02:45 .

[Darth Drago]

Makes you wonder if there will be some regulatory system set up soon about setting prices and the content they contain. Prices as set by the file size for example in relation to the cost of a $60 game.

Just look at the crap Blizzard is pulling with their vanity pets they are selling at $10 each or the new mount at $25. Or the “stimulus pack” for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Five maps with a file size of 329MB for $15. Kasumi is listed at 991MB if my info is right and only $7. Yet Zaeed was only 421MB.

Clearly something should be set up to regulate prices.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 22 avril 2010 - 02:52 .

[DTKT]

Stanley Woo wrote...

Dethateer wrote...

By buying DLC you're not supporting the company, you're supporting the idea that people like spending more on a disjointed series of payed-for DLCs than a single expansion pack.

What about those who prefer to pay lower prices for more frequent content releases, and who don't want to wait for a full-sized expansion? Don't their opinions count too?

I'm all for it. But if Bioware considers Kasumi as the standard for price/hours of gameplay, you will end up paying more for less content hours than a "regular" expansion.. I would gladly wait for a full fledged expansion if that actually means a sizeable chunk of content.

Of course, it is unfair to base myself off 1 paid DLC, but I look forward to hear more about how much the next paid DLC is going to cost versus the actual content.