544 réponses à ce sujet

[Klimy]

bjdbwea wrote...

Klimy wrote...

With other words we have the majority who buy it, and small group that don't.

It's not the majority. Of all the people who bought the game, only a minority buys the DLC. Enough though to make it profitable, especially with the extremely low production costs.

If you can prove it by numbers, then I will never open my mouth again and maybe will even support you in the future.

[HTTP 404]

Klimy wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Klimy wrote...

With other words we have the majority who buy it, and small group that don't.

It's not the majority. Of all the people who bought the game, only a minority buys the DLC. Enough though to make it profitable, especially with the extremely low production costs.

If you can prove it by numbers, then I will never open my mouth again and maybe will even support you in the future.

I agree with bjdbwea, its highly doubtful that majority of people who bought Mass Effect 2 bought this DLC or all DLCs.  but it probably is enough to turn a profit.  However, I believe majority of people on these forums bought most if not all DLCs.  The only hard facts you are going to get is either from EA or Bioware Finance records or some source with a source in the company(i.e magazines)

[cruc1al]

EA_BiowareAccount wrote...

Klimy wrote...

bjdbwea wrote...

Klimy wrote...

With other words we have the majority who buy it, and small group that don't.

It's not the majority. Of all the people who bought the game, only a minority buys the DLC. Enough though to make it profitable, especially with the extremely low production costs.

If you can prove it by numbers, then I will never open my mouth again and maybe will even support you in the future.

I agree with bjdbwea, its highly doubtful that majority of people who bought Mass Effect 2 bought this DLC or all DLCs.  but it probably is enough to turn a profit.  However, I believe majority of people on these forums bought most if not all DLCs.  The only hard facts you are going to get is either from EA or Bioware Finance records or some source with a source in the company(i.e magazines)

According to this poll the number of people who bought or will buy this DLC is a minority, but not a small one by any means. 39% bought it or plan to, 61% didn't / won't buy it. Of those who answered no, 9% stated inferno armor as the reason.

[Monstruo696]

cruc1al wrote...

According to this poll the number of people who bought or will buy this DLC is a minority, but not a small one by any means. 39% bought it or plan to, 61% didn't / won't buy it. Of those who answered no, 9% stated inferno armor as the reason.

Is there a poll that shows how many people got fed up with Bioware/EA's DLC bull**** and decided to crack the game instead?

Modifié par Monstruo696, 06 mai 2010 - 06:24 .

[Zinoviy]

Krigwin wrote...

CatatonicMan wrote...
After reading through some of this thread, I would like to make a comment about the standard 'don't like it, don't buy it' response that every complaint thread seems to spawn.

The entire effort of complaining about the value of microtransactions is to try and make the larger population understand just how bad of a deal they are. The only way that we can get rid of them is to get as many people to stop buying them as possible.

Sadly, considering how little effort (and therefore money) it takes to create one of these small DLC packs, it is going to be virtually impossible to lower the volume of sales enough to make them unprofitable.

I don't believe it! Someone else understands the entire point I've been trying to say all along.

How is someone saying to you 'don't like it, don't buy it', as per stated by CatatonicMan, different from your overall goal of what you've been apparently trying to do all along? You just said you are trying to make people aware of what a bad deal it is, when 1. the value is relevant (this has even been used to defend yourselves against the "it's only $2" argument. That road goes both ways), 2. That goal seems exactly the same. I tell you not to buy it if you feel like you're getting ripped off, yet you think the way you state "not buying it" is somehow different or more 'principled'. No substance.

I could whole heartedly support a constructive thread promoting new ideas for such a standardization regarding DLCs, but ultimately it's up to the company and what makes money. To pretend that this thread has been all honest discussion, though, is dishonest in itself.

Dogging a DLC that has likely been planned by BioWare isn't going to get you anywhere, either, and only makes the people doing it look like pretentious, self-entitled jack-offs. It brings people in who make retarded statements about BioWare's business practices and routines, as if they know anything about it. The only people who know what BioWare is doing are the people who come in here with "BioWare" under their names.

A lot of credit isn't given where credit is due, and perhaps this is the biggest part that turns me, and I'm sure others, off to listening to what anyone has to say in this abomination of a discussion. Someone from BioWare comes in and tells people that their "pie" wasn't sliced previously then resold to them as DLC (Hammerhead, Normandy Crash Site, etc.), then immediately following you have people coming in basically telling him he's wrong (lol) and that they're getting ripped off, etc. It's ridiculous. The people at BioWare worked at making those DLCs free of charge to you if you paid for the original game, and yet they get dogged about it by people claiming to be "fans".

Also, the whole "CN isn't free" argument is pretty stupid and a prime example of that self-entitlement thing. People are faulting a company for promoting new game sales. I mean, it's not like BioWare is in the business of making games, and game sales are what keep them afloat, or anything.

When you're a jackass I tend not to care what you think or if (you think) you're getting ripped off. I'm all for serious and honest discussion. I have no desire to "discuss" something with a 14 year old who thinks he knows how a company is run or should be run, or someone who permanenetly wears the "I'm a victim" blinders.

Modifié par Zinoviy, 06 mai 2010 - 06:42 .

[Zinoviy]

Monstruo696 wrote...

cruc1al wrote...

According to this poll the number of people who bought or will buy this DLC is a minority, but not a small one by any means. 39% bought it or plan to, 61% didn't / won't buy it. Of those who answered no, 9% stated inferno armor as the reason.

Is there a poll that shows how many people got fed up with Bioware/EA's DLC bull**** and decided to crack the game instead?

Take this guy, for example. He obviously likes Mass Effect as he's here in the forums, yet he'd rather crack the game and hurt the company overall over some silly, non-essential armor DLC.

How can you guys possibly think he is helping your cause? Lol.

[Monstruo696]

Zinoviy wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...


Is there a poll that shows how many people got fed up with Bioware/EA's DLC bull**** and decided to crack the game instead?

Take this guy, for example. He obviously likes Mass Effect as he's here in the forums, yet he'd rather crack the game and hurt the company overall over some silly, non-essential armor DLC.

How can you guys possibly think he is helping your cause? Lol.

What are you implying?  I never said I would crack the game, so maybe you should keep your snide insinuations to yourself.

Also, I bought the game at launch (Read:  Put my trust in Bioware and shelled out $50 for them), even if I did decide to crack the DLC, it wouldn't even dent EA's bank account, because *IT IS* only $2 dollars, right?

Modifié par Monstruo696, 06 mai 2010 - 07:00 .

[Zinoviy]

Monstruo696 wrote...

Zinoviy wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...


Is there a poll that shows how many people got fed up with Bioware/EA's DLC bull**** and decided to crack the game instead?

Take this guy, for example. He obviously likes Mass Effect as he's here in the forums, yet he'd rather crack the game and hurt the company overall over some silly, non-essential armor DLC.

How can you guys possibly think he is helping your cause? Lol.

What are you implying?  I never said I would crack the game, so maybe you should keep your snide insinuations to yourself.

Also, I bought the game at launch (Read:  Put my trust in Bioware and shelled out $50 for them), even if I did decide to crack the DLC, it wouldn't even dent EA's bank account, because *IT IS* only $2 dollars, right?

I'm the one making the insinuations after you posted this?

Monstruo696 wrote...


Is there a poll that shows how
many people got fed up with Bioware/EA's DLC bull**** and decided to
crack the game instead?

The logic is overwhelming.

[Zinoviy]

slimgrin wrote...

I don't think the dlc is a bad value. $2 is cheap. But I do think it's a little belated and more than meaningless if you've beaten the game six times already, like I have.

Quoted for posterity. And rationality.

[Krigwin]

I don't even know what you're saying sometimes dude. Like,

Zinoviy wrote...
How is someone saying to you 'don't like it, don't buy it', as per stated by CatatonicMan, different from your overall goal of what you've been apparently trying to do all along? You just said you are trying to make people aware of what a bad deal it is, when 1. the value is relevant (this has even been used to defend yourselves against the "it's only $2" argument. That road goes both ways), 2. That goal seems exactly the same. I tell you not to buy it if you feel like you're getting ripped off, yet you think the way you state "not buying it" is somehow different or more 'principled'. No substance.

What are you saying here? I have no idea what you're talking about. Please elaborate.

Dogging a DLC that has likely been planned by BioWare isn't going to get you anywhere, either, and only makes the people doing it look like pretentious, self-entitled jack-offs. It brings people in who make retarded statements about BioWare's business practices and routines, as if they know anything about it. The only people who know what BioWare is doing are the people who come in here with "BioWare" under their names.

So, you're of the belief that business practices can only be defined by the business involved? That's very interesting.

Also, you're entirely wrong. If everyone dogs the DLC, they're going to get somewhere - a world without micro-DLC. Whether you think that goal is feasible or not is a different issue altogether.

A lot of credit isn't given where credit is due, and perhaps this is the biggest part that turns me, and I'm sure others, off to listening to what anyone has to say in this abomination of a discussion. Someone from BioWare comes in and tells people that their "pie" wasn't sliced previously then resold to them as DLC (Hammerhead, Normandy Crash Site, etc.), then immediately following you have people coming in basically telling him he's wrong (lol) and that they're getting ripped off, etc. It's ridiculous. The people at BioWare worked at making those DLCs free of charge to you if you paid for the original game, and yet they get dogged about it by people claiming to be "fans".

So, by your way of thinking, anyone who disagrees with anything Bioware states is wrong? Again, this is very interesting.

Also, they are fans. They post because they care. For example, if I didn't care about Bioware's practices, I wouldn't be posting, I would just pirate the game and the DLC. That way I get everything I want, totally free of charge, and the only one who suffers is Bioware. It wouldn't matter to me what Bioware does because no matter what, I get everything they make at zero cost. Therefore I would have no reason to post here. But instead I'm here, posting on these forums. What does that tell you?

Also, the whole "CN isn't free" argument is pretty stupid and a prime example of that self-entitlement thing. People are faulting a company for promoting new game sales. I mean, it's not like BioWare is in the business of making games, and game sales are what keep them afloat, or anything.

You just don't seem to understand what the word 'free' means. Free means available without payment. CN is available if you either pay for it or for the original game, and only from Bioware. Either way, there's payment involved. If it was truly free, then it would be available for download, without a price, to everyone - whether you bought the game secondhand or downloaded it illegally or don't even have the game, or whatever.

Let's use an analogy: say a farmer is selling gallons of apple juice. For everyone who buys a gallon of apple juice, the farmer gives them an apple for no additional charge. Now, you might think these apples are 'free'. But they're not. In order to get them, you have to pay for the apple juice. If they were truly free, then the farmer would be giving them to any random person off the street, not just the paying customers who have purchased the apple juice.

When you're a jackass I tend not to care what you think or if (you think) you're getting ripped off. I'm all for serious and honest discussion. I have no desire to "discuss" something with a 14 year old who thinks he knows how a company is run or should be run, or someone who permanenetly wears the "I'm a victim" blinders.

I honestly do not understand how you can read my post and then go on to write this, as if it never happened at all. Obviously you missed my point, so let me reiterate: no matter what illusory abrasion you are feeling, the goal or cause of these people is beneficial to you. Their posting is beneficial to you. You serve no purpose by throwing around blind insults and discouraging them. None at all. In fact it's rather ironic that you accuse others of being 'pretentious' when you keep attempting to claim the moral high ground and dismiss others as being immature or uncomprehending of the issue at hand.

Also, you do not seem to understand what entitlement means. The social definition of entitlement is that one feels they are deserving of a specific benefit or object, usually without payment. No one here is saying that. No one is claiming that the DLC should be free (at least in regards to CN), we're just disputing the current label of 'free', since it is factually incorrect.

To be honest dude I've been ignoring your posts because the ones extremely early on reflect an immature thought process and you just don't seem to be getting what everyone is saying.

I advise you to read these:
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Consumerism
http://en.wikipedia....Business_ethics
http://en.wikipedia....den_(technology)

[Ihatethisstep]

I still can't get past the whole "this costs 160pts, but the lowest amount of points you can purchase is 300pts." bullplop.



It's like buying a gift card and having $0.43 that you'll never get back.





I feel like I'm being treated like an idiot...







but then I look around at my fellow people....

[Dark Glasses]

I never understood why buy these appearance DLCs? We PC Gamers are used to download freely by our lovely community made mods.

[Stounga]

Honestly, I'd pay for DLC which actually gave us more armor to wear and a good amount instead of 2 helmets and 1 fully body suit we'll never really wear because the helmet never comes off!

160 MS is cheap but the value isn't there for me tbh. Also I think they are going overboard with the whole shades motiff...Jack then Thane...now Shepard...who is next? Mordin...actually...NO NOOO!

Modifié par Stounga, 07 mai 2010 - 12:02 .

[Kajan451]

Zinoviy wrote...
Take this guy, for example. He obviously likes Mass Effect as he's here in the forums, yet he'd rather crack the game and hurt the company overall over some silly, non-essential armor DLC.

I fail to see how thats hurting the company. These DLCs do have no physical value, they are simply electrons stored on a device, multiplying it doesn't incur any costs for the company.

If he stole a CD with the data on it, then he would hurt them as there would be a loss. The CD had to be bought and burned. But as long as we talk about something that purely exists as Information without any physical property... how could he hurt them?

I am not saying its right to do it, but there is no differance between him and me. I do not buy the product, thats the same "hurt" as someone pirating data. There is a reason its called pirating and not theft. Even if people at times want to make it worse as it is by calling it datatheft, which only occurs if you'd delete the original on the hosts server so only you got a copy. In which case, mind you, you'd hurt the company again.

But as long as we talk about something purely existing as information, which does not incur costs on multiplying, its hardly hurting the company more as someone who doesn't buy the stuff. And no that doesn't make doing it alright or the laws against doing such unjust. Its illegal, but there is no hurt involved. I am a writer myself and i support the protection of intellectual property.

And, no... i won't ever become a customer of these DLC ripoffs, so there is not much differance between someone like me, who would never ever buy it, even if he would be a billionary and someone who pirates the DLC. Except that some of those who pirate it, might decided to like the DLC enough afterwards to actually spend money on it to buy it.

Back in the day, before pirating became a crime thats more punishable as raping twice, when Games like Buck Rogers had in their install instructions that you should do a copy of the game and ONLY use this copy to install from, or games like Wing Commander who wanted you to do securities copies... back in that time, we been trading games alot... and know what? I bought more games back then as i do now. Simply because "pirating" (mind you, back in the 90ths i didn't even knew that word or what it stood for) was a kind of advertisment. Companies seemed to relie on people pirating to sell their products. And the funny thing is... i bought all the games i liked, because i wanted them original. *shrugs* i was that kind of person.

And i am not ashamed to say that i would still pirate today if it wouldn't be punished by going to jail for 5+ years and or comes with a fines of several tens of thousands, making me work a couple years just for pirating one game.

To conclude. The only one you can possibly hurt by pirating is yourself and your future, but surely not the company.

Modifié par Kajan451, 07 mai 2010 - 02:48 .

[Atmosfear3]

Kajan451 wrote...

Zinoviy wrote...
Take this guy, for example. He obviously likes Mass Effect as he's here in the forums, yet he'd rather crack the game and hurt the company overall over some silly, non-essential armor DLC.

I fail to see how thats hurting the company. These DLCs do have no physical value, they are simply electrons stored on a device, multiplying it doesn't incur any costs for the company.

If he stole a CD with the data on it, then he would hurt them as there would be a loss. The CD had to be bought and burned. But as long as we talk about something that purely exists as Information without any physical property... how could he hurt them?

If you fail to see how that can hurt a company then you are clearly close-minded or simply failing to see the big picture.  Piracy of intellectual property, physical or not costs a company money.  For example, if I decide to pirate a program that a company releases strictly through downloads, that company has lost money because I have acquired their product without purchase.

[CatatonicMan]

slimgrin wrote...

I don't think the dlc is a bad value. $2 is cheap. But I do think it's a little belated and more than meaningless if you've beaten the game six times already, like I have.

Like Christina Norman said, these type of dlc are snacks. Snacks indeed. I thought Bioware took their games, and fans, more seriously.

If you compare the content/price ratio of the DLC to the game as a whole, it is clearly obvious that the DLC is a terrible deal (or that ME2 was super under priced, but I'm assuming it wasn't). It may be cheap, but it does not have good value; too many people fail to grasp the difference between the two when the price is less than a meal, which is why DLC is so successful and profitable. It is basically a license to over charge.

Comparing the DLC to snacks is actually interesting, since the individual snack packs are also horribly overpriced compared to the larger bulk packages. There is a price premium for the individual packaging and what not, but I'm sure that the main reason for the high cost is because they can get away with it. Nobody notices 20 $2 purchases spread out over time, but everyone would notice, weigh, and consider a single $40 purchase.

DLC is designed to entice around the consumers natural reluctance to waste money, and can only be hurt by getting the consumer base to consider value even for insignificant purchases.

[HTTP 404]

DLCs are not charities, its a business. either you buy it or you dont



for those that dislike this DLC, the biggest protest would be for you not to buy it.



For those that like this DLC, then buy it.



constructed criticism should always be welcomed, your opinion whether it be minority or majority should be respected...sigh

[bjdbwea]

Dark Glasses wrote...

I never understood why buy these appearance DLCs? We PC Gamers are used to download freely by our lovely community made mods.

That's probably one reason BioWare made it so hard to mod the game, and it is definitely one reason why the whole industry loves consoles so much: They want people do depend on them for any additional content. All that milking of customers for the smallest things, would never work if everyone had the freedom over their own system that they should have, and that they still have on PCs.

[AlanC9]

Krigwin wrote...
You just don't seem to understand what the word 'free' means. Free means available without payment. CN is available if you either pay for it or for the original game, and only from Bioware. Either way, there's payment involved. If it was truly free, then it would be available for download, without a price, to everyone - whether you bought the game secondhand or downloaded it illegally or don't even have the game, or whatever.

Let's use an analogy: say a farmer is selling gallons of apple juice. For everyone who buys a gallon of apple juice, the farmer gives them an apple for no additional charge. Now, you might think these apples are 'free'. But they're not. In order to get them, you have to pay for the apple juice. If they were truly free, then the farmer would be giving them to any random person off the street, not just the paying customers who have purchased the apple juice.

But in the ordinary use of language, that's what "free" means. That's how you describe the pricing of those apples in English. In fact, that's a common way to hear of something being priced "free." Have you really  never seen a supermarket ad? An electronics ad?

Zinoviy understands how the word "free" is used. It doesn't seem that you do.

[Massadonious1]

cruc1al wrote...

According to this poll the number of people who bought or will buy this DLC is a minority, but not a small one by any means. 39% bought it or plan to, 61% didn't / won't buy it. Of those who answered no, 9% stated inferno armor as the reason.

Yay, the terrorists haven't won.

We can all go crusade against real issues now.

[AlanC9]

CatatonicMan wrote...
DLC is designed to entice around the consumers natural reluctance to waste money, and can only be hurt by getting the consumer base to consider value even for insignificant purchases.

Which means that DLC is probably here to stay. Even as a matter of pure economics, it just isn't rational for people to worry about expenditures that are very small relative to income; the transaction costs lose you more utility than you get back from saving the money.

[xDarkicex]

LOL new blue helmat looks like robo cop