142 réponses à ce sujet

[Brako Shepard]

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?

Well said Dr Woo-idge.

If there is one thing that BioWare do give us. It great content at great prices.

Ok so they aren't always the biggest in tems of mission size. But you can bet that each piece of DLC they release cost more than the 500 MS points cash equivalent to make. The one thing Mass Effect has always had, is how replayable it is. If new content is released on a monthly basis, this makes each playthrough constantly different to how you last played it.

How many games have died due to not releasing DLC in time, only to then lose major profits. Personally I like how BioWare have handeld DLC issues since Dragon Age, and learnt from there first Mass Effect DLC delays.

[Dethateer]

Pray tell, how many?

[YR_Lim]

How many games died due to "not releasing DLCs in time"? Please name a few examples. And so far I am not impressed with the new content being offere so far, as there is not much content when you compare the depth of ME2 game itself to the the DLC and ME2's price to DLC.

[Gaddmeister]

Destructo-Bot wrote...

That's just the thing though... more and more people are getting into gaming all over the world. As the population grows, the market is just going to keep getting larger. So the cost of the game can be recouped for a lower cost per unit sold in greater volumes. The higher price point will prevent many of those customers from paying for the product, resulting in either the same profit for the Dev and a higher cost for the consumer (bad for customers) rather than the same profit for the Dev and a lower cost for the consumer (win/win).

Only the price of games is not equal in all countries. And not dlc either (at least not on the xbox, don't know how it works with those Bioware points).

I guess one reason for MS to use their stupid points is to make it possible to charge differently for dlc in different countries while they keep a universal points tag. This is done charging differently for the MS points depending on where you live. For example I don't pay 10 USD for 800 MS points. I pay 90.40 SEK ~ 12.50 USD. So I 'll have to pay $8.80 instead of 7 if I decide to get Kasumi. Does it work like that for Bioware points as well?

Modifié par Gaddmeister, 22 avril 2010 - 09:02 .

[exxxed]

YR_Lim wrote...

How many games died due to "not releasing DLCs in time"? Please name a few examples. And so far I am not impressed with the new content being offer so far, as there is not much content when you compare the depth of ME2 game itself to the the DLC and ME2's price to DLC.

 I don't thing that "died" is the right term for this... got old or maybe became obsolete or something, not that i know any that did and were actually good games (Like Thief The Dark Project and Metal Age, Call of Cthulhu Dark Corners of The Earth, Deus Ex) games like that are immortal.

 Anyway, modding is great for a game's lifespan, and the reason why devs are so involved in making DLC's (that the community could do much better because it's a hobby not a job, and they do it for pleasure), the way i see it, is because they're trying to get money out of free content that made the modding communities famous in the first place, see STALKER, Half-LIfe , TES and many more! Maybe it works for consoles but on the PC i could never see payed DLC's being popular.

[Obtusifolius]

Edix wrote...

The ****ing problem I have with ****ing DLC is not the price or the content. Everything is set up in the ****ing crazy point number. 560. WHAT THE ****? I can only buy 800 points.

No. I will not buy your points. Give me a ****ing USD and I'll ****ing buy your DLC. Until then go **** your self and your point system.

This post speaks 'Champion' to me

[Vena_86]

YR_Lim wrote...

Edix wrote...

The ****ing problem I have with ****ing DLC is not the price or the content. Everything is set up in the ****ing crazy point number. 560. WHAT THE ****? I can only buy 800 points.

No. I will not buy your points. Give me a ****ing USD and I'll ****ing buy your DLC. Until then go **** your self and your point system.

I second that, you said that you are selling for 560 points but we have to pay the price of 800 points, this is UNETHICAL!

Thats the point behind the system. You always end up having spare points, that usually are not enough to buy something from it alone, so you have to fill your stock again to buy the next DLC...which again leaves you with spare points that you dont want to go to waste etc. etc..
And starting out with "free" DLC (eventhough it was paid with the game already) just softens up the customer for the DLC idea...that all is suspiciously close to what drug dealers are doing.
And the quality/prizing? Horse armor, alternative appearance pack, MW2 map pack, flying WoW pony...these are things everyone laughs and complains about but somehow enough people buy it to make it profitable.

[YR_Lim]

Vena_86 wrote...

YR_Lim wrote...

Edix wrote...

The ****ing problem I have with ****ing DLC is not the price or the content. Everything is set up in the ****ing crazy point number. 560. WHAT THE ****? I can only buy 800 points.

No. I will not buy your points. Give me a ****ing USD and I'll ****ing buy your DLC. Until then go **** your self and your point system.

I second that, you said that you are selling for 560 points but we have to pay the price of 800 points, this is UNETHICAL!

Thats the point behind the system. You always end up having spare points, that usually are not enough to buy something from it alone, so you have to fill your stock again to buy the next DLC...which again leaves you with spare points that you dont want to go to waste etc. etc..
And starting out with "free" DLC (eventhough it was paid with the game already) just softens up the customer for the DLC idea...that all is suspiciously close to what drug dealers are doing.
And the quality/prizing? Horse armor, alternative appearance pack, MW2 map pack, flying WoW pony...these are things everyone laughs and complains about but somehow enough people buy it to make it profitable.

Yea I know that is the point of the system, which is why I am against it.

Money good, points bad...free is best!

[piemanz]

YR_Lim wrote...

Vena_86 wrote...

YR_Lim wrote...

Edix wrote...

The ****ing problem I have with ****ing DLC is not the price or the content. Everything is set up in the ****ing crazy point number. 560. WHAT THE ****? I can only buy 800 points.

No. I will not buy your points. Give me a ****ing USD and I'll ****ing buy your DLC. Until then go **** your self and your point system.

I second that, you said that you are selling for 560 points but we have to pay the price of 800 points, this is UNETHICAL!

All you have to do is click 'Profile' on the left,then 'Add Bioware Points' and you can buy exactly 560 points.....

Thats the point behind the system. You always end up having spare points, that usually are not enough to buy something from it alone, so you have to fill your stock again to buy the next DLC...which again leaves you with spare points that you dont want to go to waste etc. etc..
And starting out with "free" DLC (eventhough it was paid with the game already) just softens up the customer for the DLC idea...that all is suspiciously close to what drug dealers are doing.
And the quality/prizing? Horse armor, alternative appearance pack, MW2 map pack, flying WoW pony...these are things everyone laughs and complains about but somehow enough people buy it to make it profitable.

Yea I know that is the point of the system, which is why I am against it.

Money good, points bad...free is best!

If you hover over 'Profile' on the left,then 'Add Bioware Points' ,you can buy exactly 560 points....

Also to the OP, you cant really compare anyone to valve when it comes to DLC ,they are the exception to the rule especially if you own a PC ,pretty much all their content is free.As far as i know the only reason they charge for the Xbox is because microshaft forces it.

Modifié par piemanz, 22 avril 2010 - 01:56 .

[Klimy]

I like DLC *hides behind the table* I like expensions more than DLC and full games even more. But still DLC is fine.



As about pricing, i don't know how it works out. But there are so much crap happening around me these days that last thing Im planing to worry about is price of DLC. It costs a pack of smokes and I smoke two packs a day. So in a way DLC helps my health because i cut my smoking by one pack with every DLC

[hex23]

If you don't like the DLC, or think it's over priced, DON'T BUY IT. Stop making excuses for why other people shouldn't buy it....it's pathetic. Mind your own business. How old are you people?



The situation will sort itself out one way or another because either it'll sell enough to be viable, or it'll fail miserably and they'll change the way they do things. Sitting here saying things like "OMFG people who pay for Thane's shades or Kasumi are stupid" is retarded. It's not going to make anybody not buy it, and it makes you look like a tool for trying to criticize how complete strangers spend their money. Like I said mind your own business.

[TJSolo]

hex23 wrote...

If you don't like the DLC, or think it's over priced, DON'T BUY IT. Stop making excuses for why other people shouldn't buy it....it's pathetic. Mind your own business. How old are you people?

Talking about the lack of consistancy of pricing is not talking about how others spend their money.
These are not excuses about others purchasing decisions , you are the one in this topic trying to deconstruct the topic into overly simplistic terms.

[hex23]

TJSolo wrote...

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.

Or maybe you shouldn't concern yourself with how complete strangers choose to spend their money? Maybe they realize that the cost of smaller DLC is more than larger DLC, and don't care?

I fall into that category. I don't care. If something is $7 and I want it, I'll buy it. The average person isn't going to sit there and do the math to see if $7 per 1 hour of DLC is greater or less than $50 for a full length game. Why? Because it's only 7 freakin dollars. If you need to think that hard about whether or not to spend $7 that's more a reflection on your economic situation that anything else.

Bottomline, don't want the DLC, don't buy it. I will continue to buy it. The end.

[hex23]

TJSolo wrote...

Talking about the lack of consistancy of pricing is not talking about how others spend their money.
These are not excuses about others purchasing decisions , you are the one in this topic trying to deconstruct the topic into overly simplistic terms.

There's no such thing as consistency in pricing because not everyone agrees. This seems like common sense. To one person Thane's shades shoud be free....another person might not care about paying $2.50. To one person Kasumi isn't worth $7....to another person she is.

So who dictates the consistency here? You? Me? Who exactly? What you're saying....that Kasumi be priced based on the content added vs the cost of the total package....sounds good on paper but it won't work because some people beat "ME2" in 30 hours. Some beat it in 50 hours.And that's not even taking into account the fact that most people simply DON'T CARE. It's $7....most people have better things to do with their day than sit here and do the math of "gee, is $7 really worth one hour of content in a 30 hour game that was $50?". Who thinks like that in the real world, over $7? Either you want something and you buy it, or you don't.

The DLC has it's price set. It's not negotiable. If you think it's too high, don't buy it. If you think it's not too high, buy it. I swear this board turns everything into a lengthy angsty philosophical debate. It's 7 freakin dollars. You'd think we were discussing the meaning or life or something.

Modifié par hex23, 22 avril 2010 - 09:04 .

[TJSolo]

"Or maybe you shouldn't concern yourself with how complete strangers choose to spend their money? Maybe they realize that the cost of smaller DLC is more than larger DLC, and don't care?"



Still trying to break down the topic into overly simple terms, this is not what the topic is about.



"I fall into that category. I don't care. If something is $7 and I want it, I'll buy it. The average person isn't going to sit there and do the math to see if $7 per 1 hour of DLC is greater or less than $50 for a full length game. Why? Because it's only 7 freakin dollars. If you need to think that hard about whether or not to spend $7 that's more a reflection on your economic situation that anything else."



I don't know what your definition of being an average person is, is it because you believe yourself to be average and that if you take that action it means it is the action of the average person?

Pricing and buying are a reflection of the economy large, small, and personal yes. There is no need for your attempt to insult me or anyone else who values 7 bucks differently than you.



7 bucks for the amount of content offered seems way off. There was a poll here following the announcement of Kasumi, with all the relevant information given. The general price people thought would be fitting was around 3-5 bucks.

This is just a measure of value not an argument over the 2 dollar difference. Which you seem to want to bring the topic down to.

[hex23]

There is no such thing as a "measure of value". Why? Because everyone doesn't think alike. $7 for the amount of content offered seems "way off" to you. Guess what....it doesn't to me....or people who chose to pay it. Or maybe it did seem off, and they paid it anyway. Why? Because it's only $7.

I don't understand how some of you guys think. How can there be "consistency in DLC pricing" when not everyone agrees that there is a problem with the pricing in the first place? Why would Bioware or whoever bother changing their DLC pricing in light of this?

Modifié par hex23, 22 avril 2010 - 09:25 .

[Stoko981]

hex23 wrote...

TJSolo wrote...

Talking about the lack of consistancy of pricing is not talking about how others spend their money.
These are not excuses about others purchasing decisions , you are the one in this topic trying to deconstruct the topic into overly simplistic terms.

There's no such thing as consistency in pricing because not everyone agrees. This seems like common sense. To one person Thane's shades shoud be free....another person might not care about paying $2.50. To one person Kasumi isn't worth $7....to another person she is.

So who dictates the consistency here? You? Me? Who exactly? What you're saying....that Kasumi be priced based on the content added vs the cost of the total package....sounds good on paper but it won't work because some people beat "ME2" in 30 hours. Some beat it in 50 hours.And that's not even taking into account the fact that most people simply DON'T CARE. It's $7....most people have better things to do with their day than sit here and do the math of "gee, is $7 really worth one hour of content in a 30 hour game that was $50?". Who thinks like that in the real world, over $7? Either you want something and you buy it, or you don't.

The DLC has it's price set. It's not negotiable. If you think it's too high, don't buy it. If you think it's not too high, buy it. I swear this board turns everything into a lengthy angsty philosophical debate. It's 7 freakin dollars. You'd think we were discussing the meaning or life or something.

Dude, it's overpriced, that's the point of the thread, not whether or not you bought it anyway. You don't care that it's overpriced, you bought it anyway. Great, that's fine. I don't care that you don't care. I'm not talking about you or how you spend your money. I think they're charging too much for it, other people apparently do too, so we're talking about it. It's a message board. If you don't like the subject we're discussing, why are you in the topic?

I can't imagine how empty the board would end up if all the topics I imagine you must consider "lengthy angsty philosophical debates" were deleted. It's a reasonable, realistic concern we're discussing. What did you think we'd say in response to your post? "Oh yeah, sorry man, you're right, the way you spend your money is none of our business. We take it all back, lock please, mods?" Hardly.

[piemanz]

I'm with hex on this one ,the kasumi DLC cost about £4.40 wich is about £1 cheaper than a pack of smokes in the UK ,so it's not exactly a huge decision on my part.

[hex23]

Stoko981 wrote...

Dude, it's overpriced, that's the point of the thread, not whether or not you bought it anyway. You don't care that it's overpriced, you bought it anyway. Great, that's fine. I don't care that you don't care. I'm not talking about you or how you spend your money. I think they're charging too much for it, other people apparently do too, so we're talking about it. It's a message board. If you don't like the subject we're discussing, why are you in the topic?

I can't imagine how empty the board would end up if all the topics I imagine you must consider "lengthy angsty philosophical debates" were deleted. It's a reasonable, realistic concern we're discussing. What did you think we'd say in response to your post? "Oh yeah, sorry man, you're right, the way you spend your money is none of our business. We take it all back, lock please, mods?" Hardly.

It's over priced to you. It's not to me. So.....who is right? How can there be consistency in pricing when nobody agrees?

For the record I don't have a problem with people saying it's over priced. I do however have a problem with people trying to tell others they're "wrong" or "bad at addition" for choosing to buy it. That's why I came here. If you didn't do that then obviously I wasn't addressing you, so I have no idea why you quoted me. It's not as if I singled you out.

[hex23]

The main problem I have with this board is it's disconnect from reality. Anything a few people agree with is suddenly "reality". A few people across 4 pages says the DLC is over priced, and magically it's over priced and the industry needs to be more consistent in it's DLC pricing.



The only way DLC will be consistent in it's pricing is if everyone agrees on the same price. And we don't. And even if "we" did as a collective of gamers, the industry as whole probably wouldn't. Why? Because Activision might think 2 hours of content is worth $15 and Bioware might think it's worth $7, despite the fact that both sell games for about the same price.



So consistency in DLC pricing will never happen. *shrugs*

[Rogue Eagle]

I'd rather buy a full fledged expansion pack than DLC.



As it currently is, bioware may have some of the best DLC out there (costume dlc excluded) but I'm far from sold on it yet.

[TJSolo]

hex23 wrote...

There is no such thing as a "measure of value". Why? Because everyone doesn't think alike. $7 for the amount of content offered seems "way off" to you. Guess what....it doesn't to me....or people who chose to pay it. Or maybe it did seem off, and they paid it anyway. Why? Because it's only $7.

I don't understand how some of you guys think. How can there be "consistency in DLC pricing" when not everyone agrees that there is a problem with the pricing in the first place? Why would Bioware or whoever bother changing their DLC pricing in light of this?

There is such a thing as measure of value. Just because it is not universal to everyone, does not mean the concept does not exist.
Your tirade of calling it only $7 is a version of "measure of value". Smaller numerical price tags are ways some companies try and bypass the "measure of value" of people.
"It's only $7." This is a short sighted and immediate gratification viewpoint. Money adds up hence EA Bioware understand $7 adds to their bank account in a meaningful way, the opposite is true that it subtracts from my bank account in a similarly meaningful way.

DLC pricing and standards are still to this day being tested by most companies. Changes are going to happen even if all of them are not positive. EA will over pay to play demoes, bad. While Valve will continue to offer free DLC for PC gamers, good.
You can take the pricing for what it is and call it that, but the truth is the industry is still evaluating and changing.

[hex23]

slimgrin wrote...

Its not about having the choice to buy it or not, that fact is self evident. Its about what we can expect companies like Bioware to deliver. Earlier Stan Woo asked, in effect  "Don't the opinions of those who want dlc matter too?"
Judging from the amount of worthless dlc crapped onto the market each year by every major developer, I'd say their opinions more than just matter - THEY ARE DRIVING THE MARKET.

Meanwhile, expansions are becoming a thing of the past, except in the case of some pc publishers who consistently offer quality expansions. The console market is a different story.

Those who champion 'free market' ideals on this thread are completely ignoring a significant minority who also have a valid opinion on what we want to see in the future of gaming. Again - no one is trying to tell people how to spend their money in this thread. That is not what the topic is about.

So they are driving the market....that's the way of the world. I think the "Twilight" series is crap, that doesn't change the fact that it's insanely popular and lucrative and has a ton of fans.

The very reasons you're giving for this thread exising....that the "significant minority" need a place to vent their frustrations at the "worthless crap DLC".....is ironically the same reason things won't change. Why? Because the majority obviously have zero problems with the way things are, be it pricing, or content.

What you think is "worthless crap DLC" another person loves. No offense but in business there is no such thing as "a significant minority". Nobody makes money catering to the minority of a fanbase.

Modifié par hex23, 22 avril 2010 - 09:47 .

[hex23]

TJSolo wrote...

There is such a thing as measure of value. Just because it is not universal to everyone, does not mean the concept does not exist.
Your tirade of calling it only $7 is a version of "measure of value". Smaller numerical price tags are ways some companies try and bypass the "measure of value" of people.
"It's only $7." This is a short sighted and immediate gratification viewpoint. Money adds up hence EA Bioware understand $7 adds to their bank account in a meaningful way, the opposite is true that it subtracts from my bank account in a similarly meaningful way.

DLC pricing and standards are still to this day being tested by most companies. Changes are going to happen even if all of them are not positive. EA will over pay to play demoes, bad. While Valve will continue to offer free DLC for PC gamers, good.
You can take the pricing for what it is and call it that, but the truth is the industry is still evaluating and changing.

False. There is no such thing as a "measure of value" considering no one agrees on what exactly it is.

You saying somoene spending $7 is "short sighted and immediate gratification" is proof of this. The person is spending that money because they want to. You can spin that or frame it however you want for you own agenda, but it doesn't chang reality. You think it's too much, others don't. Period. This simple difference of opinion is exactly why "consistency in DLC pricing" is virtually impossible. For every 1 person complaining about Kasumi there is probably 5 that plopped down the $7. Who do you think EA is going to listen to? A few guys spread across 4 pages, or people who actually went out and spoke with their wallets?