941 réponses à ce sujet

[KennethAFTopp]

Is that King Maric's sword?

[Amagoi]

Definatly getting this. Cailan had awesome gear, and I can't wait for the extra backstory. Plus I'm a sucker for the royal family (as I'm sure no one could guess)

[TheMadCat]

Wild Maiden wrote...

They already raked in $1 million in DLC sales alone for this game, the notion that EA and/or Bioware is somehow losing money on Dragon Age is absurd. 

That's what I said, kind of. Dragon Age universe is going to rake in plenty of cash, but the base game itself is going to run at a loss, at least for a bit. Sell the base for a loss, make it up with DLC, expansions, and sequels. This isn't a new idea.

I can agree with you fully on those sentiments.

I, however,
stand by the idea that the pricing, while is evidently meeting market
demands, is not priced fairly for the consumer if you compare the
dollar value of the retail box purchase and its content with the $22
(44% the cost of the retail price) that is spent (without promos) for a
new character and 3 quests.

Isn't value by definition whatever a person or consumer group is willing to pay for something? If the most someone is willing to buy the Mona Lisa for is $100 doesn't that make it's value $100 despite the fact everyone else would claim differently?

Value is relative to what people are willing to pay for, there is no fairness to be taken into consideration.

phew.  i was wondering when someone pretending to know any of the
financial aspects of this game would show up and pull some random
numbers out of his ass.  this thread is now complete.

Oh indeed everything I said is a guess, but a guess based upon facts nonetheless. Now if you'd like to hold an intellegent debate and challenge my claim feel free to start, if not then take your witty remarks and fine someone else to talk to.

Modifié par TheMadCat, 20 novembre 2009 - 05:54 .

[Wild Maiden]

Dnarris wrote...
I, however, stand by the idea that the pricing, while is evidently meeting market demands, is not priced fairly for the consumer...

It's impossible to price an optional commodity "unfairly".  The notion of "unfair" implies that somebody was wronged.  It's their content, they can charge whatever they want for it, and as a consumer I can choose not to buy it.  You would like to see the DLC cheaper (or longer), so would I , but you can't say it's "unfair" to charge more than our personal ideal price for it.

[Pinkleaf]

Personally I would liked to have paid more for the original game and had these extra bits bundled in free with patches.

[Dnarris]

TheMadCat wrote...

Isn't value by definition whatever a person or consumer group is willing to pay for something? If the most someone is willing to buy the Mona Lisa for is $100 doesn't that make it's value $100 despite the fact everyone else would claim differently?

Value is relative to what people are willing to pay for, there is no fairness to be taken into consideration.

Luckily since we're talking about a specific product with a specific medium for introduction for new content we can discuss specifics rather than generalities.

We've already established that the current prices are faring in the market and thus price is set appropriately to economic standards.

And you're right value is relative to what people are willing to pay for an item or service.

However, logic would dictate that a depreciation in spending power is not what would be indicated as a good value.

The content of the retail box is priced at $50 and provides up to 120 hours of playtime with at least two play throughs with additional content in the form of origins.

I'll be very generous and say that Warden's Keep and Stone prisoner provide 10 hours of gameplay. Through two play throughs you get 20 hours of gameplay. With that comparison those two DLC for $22 would provide you with 17% of the retail box content (Rounded up from 16.6%), but costs 44% of the retail box price.

Logically and monetarially, I don't see value in those purchases nor do I see respect to the consumer in the current pricing model.

Speaking in absolutes for this purpose, do you believe that when compared your dollar holds the same purchasing power that it did when you bought the retail box?

[Wild Maiden]

...What would be the difference? You pay more up front and get the content later, or you pay less up front and buy the content as it's released... At least this way you can choose not to buy DLC that you aren't interested in...

[Rwraith]

sugasugaki wrote...

deathwing200 wrote...

It's $5. Skip your lunch (god knows, most of you need it) for one day and there you have it. No need to cry and ruin it for people who want more DLC.

On the contrary, sheep like you who waste their money on junk like this only further encourages them to make cruddy DLC. I'm guessing the ones that need to skip lunch are the mouthbreathers that foam at non-content like this.

Baaaa Baaaaaa 

I'm going to buy it. I love DLC. Give us tons more !!!!!

Baaaa

[Dark13cloud]

I already set aside my 5 bucks for it.

I love little extras like this.

[Dnarris]

Wild Maiden wrote...

Dnarris wrote...
I, however, stand by the idea that the pricing, while is evidently meeting market demands, is not priced fairly for the consumer...

It's impossible to price an optional commodity "unfairly".  The notion of "unfair" implies that somebody was wronged.  It's their content, they can charge whatever they want for it, and as a consumer I can choose not to buy it.  You would like to see the DLC cheaper (or longer), so would I , but you can't say it's "unfair" to charge more than our personal ideal price for it.

I am, of course, speaking in reference to the purchasing power of our currency in comparison to what was spent on the retail box and what is deemed to be spent on DLC.

I can't find it reasonable for my currency to weaken when purchasing additional content for a game.

[Wild Maiden]

Dnarris, it sounds more like you're making the argument that the main game is a fantastic value rather than the DLC is a rip off...



By comparison, Crysis was $59.99 retail at launched, and offered at best 20 hours of game play. By comparison to THAT game (which got fantastic reviews, and was generally considered "worth the money"), the DLC at 20 hours (by your numbers) is a GREAT deal.

[Dnarris]

Wild Maiden wrote...

...What would be the difference? You pay more up front and get the content later, or you pay less up front and buy the content as it's released... At least this way you can choose not to buy DLC that you aren't interested in...

I think that my point hasn't been very well conveyed evidently. It isn't about how or when the content is received. It's about what you get for your money.

Though if we are discussing that, I would certainly prefer an expansion where content is more fully intergrated as a whole in the game rather than tiny stand alone pieces (for the most part).

[Yai-Kai]

I stopped reading after 5 pages, too much whining, QQing and complaining.
I'll buy this, my money, my choice, my enjoyement when it's installed ^^
But...

Shazzie wrote...

I will happily return to Ostagar, but c'mon Bioware, does ALL your special armour have to be heavy?

THIS!!!!! >_<

[Dnarris]

Wild Maiden wrote...

Dnarris, it sounds more like you're making the argument that the main game is a fantastic value rather than the DLC is a rip off...

By comparison, Crysis was $59.99 retail at launched, and offered at best 20 hours of game play. By comparison to THAT game (which got fantastic reviews, and was generally considered "worth the money"), the DLC at 20 hours (by your numbers) is a GREAT deal.

You could say that as a secondary point, I am certain supporting the value of the retail box. However, my main concern is indeed the pricing of the DLC for what you receive.

I'll admit to never playing Crysis.

And you have a point, logically, I can't see 20 hours of gameplay being "Of value" in this comparison. However, if they added a DLC that add 20 hours of gameplay, I could say that the value of that DLC would be worth while assuming that the DLC was of a quality that commanded the fantastic reviews that you said Crysis received.

[Wild Maiden]

I don't think you can measure the utility or value of something solely in the number of hours of entertainment provided. I can go see a baseball game for $7, and that's like 3 hours of entertainment, but once inside a hot dog costs me $3 but only offers like 10 minutes of "entertainment". By your logic, charging anything more than ($7/180minutes)*(10minutes) = 39 cents for a hot dog would be a bad deal because "your purchasing power of your currency has weakened".

edit: $3 for a hot dog IS a rip off, so that's probably a bad example, lol.

Modifié par Wild Maiden, 20 novembre 2009 - 06:14 .

[Dnarris]

Wild Maiden wrote...

I don't think you can measure the utility or value of something solely in the number of hours of entertainment provided. I can go see a baseball game for $7, and that's like 3 hours of entertainment, but once inside a hot dog costs me $3 but only offers like 10 minutes of "entertainment". By your logic, charging anything more than ($7/180minutes)*(10minutes) = 39 cents for a hot dog would be a bad deal because "your purchasing power of your currency has weakened".

Now, I don't know if you're being serious, but I think "my logic" is being convoluted.

I'd like to avoid the idea of comparison of unlike objects or activites (I.E. comparing apples to oranges.)

When discussion entertainment I think the amount of entertainment given in terms of time is important, yes.

However, comparing a baseball game to a hot dog avoids the application of the logic I'm using by applying it to unlike objects/activites.

Comparing a hotdog at a ballgame to a hotdog I buy from the grocery store. A pack of 8 hot dogs is approximately $4 while your comparison of a single hotdog at a ball game would be $3. Yes, of course that would be a poor value. However, if you have no options and you want a hotdog you'll pay that $3.

You do have an option to buy other games or seek other forms of entertainment when it comes to the DLC for this game. However, that is a given. That, however, doesn't change the poor value of the DLC.

I am not fully certain we're addressing the topic anymore if we are dicussing my logic, which I believe is sound enough.

((Heh, didn't catch your edit))

Modifié par Dnarris, 20 novembre 2009 - 06:22 .

[Wintermist]

Wow, I so missed this! LOVELY! REVENGE!!!!

[cainx10a]

jynthor wrote...

The negative responses really make me sad.
This dlc looks alot better than wardens keep, bioware works hard so we can play this and all you suckers can do is whine.

seriously

This. THIS. and THIS.

Seriously, I'm tired of my so called "PC Brethren", almost feel like a bunch of hobos as time pass. As if we are entitled to get everything for FREE. Be grateful BioWare bothered to release a toolset, be grateful BioWare might keep true to their word and deliver professionally made addons and extend our enjoyment of the best RPG of this decade. (Screw Bestheda and Fallout ;p)

[packardbell]

Awesome!



Will the companions be voiced, does anyone know?



Alistairs reaction should be interesting.



I also wonder if we'll come across the corpses of the King and Duncan since the Darkspawn are not likely just to leave nice armour like that rusting.

[TheMadCat]

Dnarris wrote...



Luckily since we're talking about a specific product with a specific medium for introduction for new content we can discuss specifics rather than generalities.

We've already established that the current prices are faring in the market and thus price is set appropriately to economic standards.

And you're right value is relative to what people are willing to pay for an item or service.

However, logic would dictate that a depreciation in spending power is not what would be indicated as a good value.

The content of the retail box is priced at $50 and provides up to 120 hours of playtime with at least two play throughs with additional content in the form of origins.

I'll be very generous and say that Warden's Keep and Stone prisoner provide 10 hours of gameplay. Through two play throughs you get 20 hours of gameplay. With that comparison those two DLC for $22 would provide you with 17% of the retail box content (Rounded up from 16.6%), but costs 44% of the retail box price.

Logically and monetarially, I don't see value in those purchases nor do I see respect to the consumer in the current pricing model.

Speaking in absolutes for this purpose, do you believe that when compared your dollar holds the same purchasing power that it did when you bought the retail box?

You're absoutly correct in this point, pound for pound they do not match and not even close. However there are a few issues at hand with this idea. You derived value purely from a monetary position which is fine, however this is an entertainment product and that adds weight so to speak.

Entertainment products are judged more so on the entertainment and/or joy they will bring vs. cost rather then simply going on time vs. cost. What one finds entertaining another may find dull and drab, what one would spend $3 another may spend $10. An entertainment product is even more subjective in nature then most other products and services because that plays more towards individuals rather then literal consumer gorups.

Another crucial aspect you need to look at is company loyalty. Bioware has a rather large following which they've gathered over the years. What one consumer may not do for one company they may do for another simply because of their past relationships. There has been a few posts here that have said they'll do this simply because it's Bioware. It does play a part in ones determining of value.

I agree pound for pound it doesn't line up, from a purely fiscal standpoint it's a terrible buy. There is so much more to the purchasing of a product  to most then the fiscal standpoint, it plays a part obviously but in the end I think it's a small part when discussing a small number such as $5. If we were talking thousnads of dollars then your point would hold a ton more water, but the lower the amount the less people look at it from a fiscal standpoint and more towards the fun vs. cost.

[GabrielRayven]

Here is my thing. Some of you people have it on PC and can get the hotfix's and the mod's and all that. Some of you that have it on PC have the capability to get the armor and whatnot. Those of us that have it on console cannot get the armor without DLC. Bioware has yet to do wrong by my eyes, and I feel that $5 is not too much to ask. I paid $20 for GTA4 TLATD expansion... THAT, made me feel hosed. Bioware has done really well for DLC for me. I have not even finished the game yet, but the DLC really gives the game depth for me.

Yeah, the game has bugs...

And yeah, it would have been nice to see a patch...

That is why the DLC is not coming out until around Christmas...

There is still time for a patch.

People need to chill out. You don't want the DLC? Then leave it alone and stop complaining.

[Wild Maiden]

I'll stop complaining once they patch the main game. They release a game with, literally, dozens of acknowledged bugs, some of them serious, and yet they are cranking out DLC after DLC after DLC. As soon as they fix the things I've already paid for, then they can go about creating whatever they want to and trying to sell it to me, until then I'm going to whine and moan with the rest of us!

[Dnarris]

TheMadCat wrote...

You're absoutly correct in this point, pound for pound they do not match and not even close. However there are a few issues at hand with this idea. You derived value purely from a monetary position which is fine, however this is an entertainment product and that adds weight so to speak.

Entertainment products are judged more so on the entertainment and/or joy they will bring vs. cost rather then simply going on time vs. cost. What one finds entertaining another may find dull and drab, what one would spend $3 another may spend $10. An entertainment product is even more subjective in nature then most other products and services because that plays more towards individuals rather then literal consumer gorups.

Another crucial aspect you need to look at is company loyalty. Bioware has a rather large following which they've gathered over the years. What one consumer may not do for one company they may do for another simply because of their past relationships. There has been a few posts here that have said they'll do this simply because it's Bioware. It does play a part in ones determining of value.

I agree pound for pound it doesn't line up, from a purely fiscal standpoint it's a terrible buy. There is so much more to the purchasing of a product  to most then the fiscal standpoint, it plays a part obviously but in the end I think it's a small part when discussing a small number such as $5. If we were talking thousnads of dollars then your point would hold a ton more water, but the lower the amount the less people look at it from a fiscal standpoint and more towards the fun vs. cost.

I can't argue with your logic as far as other non-absolute factors that must be taken into account when considering an entertainment product or service.

However, I find it difficult to deal with unknowns when determining the value of a product unless you purchase it and determine it for yoursef.  By then the consideration of value is personally moot. Fiscially, I did at least want to make it known that it is not a monetarilly sound purchase, as I don't believe everyone always takes such spending in consideration.

I do, however, have an idea that players will eventually be paying more for content then they would have waiting for an expansion. Though, I by no means am claim that as an inevitability.

[Schuback]

When these devlopers keep producing these small DLCs for money, I really have no choice but to resort to pirated copies. sorry... but nothing personal, strictly business!!

Modifié par Schuback, 20 novembre 2009 - 06:44 .

[Dnarris]

Wild Maiden wrote...

I'll stop complaining once they patch the main game. They release a game with, literally, dozens of acknowledged bugs, some of them serious, and yet they are cranking out DLC after DLC after DLC. As soon as they fix the things I've already paid for, then they can go about creating whatever they want to and trying to sell it to me, until then I'm going to whine and moan with the rest of us!

As far as this, I agree. I'll whine, complain, and maybe from time to time throw a hissy fit until the bugs are addressed.

This riles my ire more than anything else when it comes to buying a software product. Especially since I start to consider whether they just missed the bugs through incompetece, ignorance, time mismanagement, or through sheer apathy. Who knows? I just start thinking about it when I run into a bug and it...."Bugs" me....get it? Bugs me? 

Yeah...I digress.