297 réponses à ce sujet

[Beertastic]

Wickedjelly wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

I don't have to accept anything.  I can simply refuse to pay additional costs and demand that the content be released for free.  You can do this as well and it just might work.

You essentially want them to spend x amount of hours creting additional material for you without them receiving any compensation whatsoever for it.  Who would do that?

Don't worry, he's just another guy who expects the world to be handed to him on a silver platter. Eventually everyone matures out of this stage.

[BlindHamster]

honestly, it wont though.



The reason for the cost of the content was explained by I believe Rob in the return to Ostagar thread.



It essentially comes down to paying for the voice actors to do additional voice acting, paying for the artists to create the additional areas, paying the web team to update the site and maintain the additional bits for the DLC, paying writers to actually write the story elements.



Do you honestly believe that it doesn't cost Bioware to create DLC? In the jobs I've had there has always been a general rule of for every £1 spent it needs to make £10 (or thereabouts) this is because there are litterally hundreds of things in any business that incur costs but don't bring in any revenue.



While I agree to an extent that it is at times hard to swallow that we have to pay money for what is often very small additions.... I'd rather pay that money and get a good polished product.



perhaps you could ask Bioware to release versions which make no use of new art, no use of voice acting and no use of any new writing? then it wouldn't cost them very much at all and they might just offer it for free... of course then it wont be worth using.



p.s. I am to some extent a bit of a fanboy as I'd love to work for Bioware eventually. However It's simple business and I don't think they've done anything wrong, I'll simply purchase the DLC that interest me and not those that do not, I suggest everyone else does the same

[toronto13]

nothing3839 wrote...

toronto13 wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

I  $50 to $60 is not a small amount of money to pay for a limited user licence for a peace of software (thats right, limited user licence, not ownership, read your user agreement) and charging money for several hours of additional content is not considerate toward the average gamer's budget.  In my opinion this is a clear example of an industry wide trend of developing new strategies and schemes to extract as much money as possible for the consumer.  

 
For $50 to $60 from BioWare you get 40 to 100 hrs gameplay,while others give you 10 to 15 hrs gameplay,in the end it turns out that you owe them money.

What?  I was not aware there is a price per hour free as well.  This just keeps turning out to be a bad deal for me...

Do you have cable TV at your home,for certain amount of money you get certain amount of fun,but they also ofer you choice to chose other chanels also, for whom you will have to pay additional amount of money,but you have a choice there,to buy them or not..........same here,for $50 you get a epic game,if you like more content you will have to pay more,in the end it is not something that BioWre invented.

Modifié par toronto13, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:33 .

[nothing3839]

Wickedjelly wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

I don't have to accept anything.  I can simply refuse to pay additional costs and demand that the content be released for free.  You can do this as well and it just might work.

They aren't going to keep making this content and give it away for free.  I could see arguing the pricing, the quality, or saying you would prefer an expansion rather than being nickel and dimed through dlc but come on...

You essentially want them to spend x amount of hours creting additional material for you without them receiving any compensation whatsoever for it.  Who would do that?

Why do you insist they would be loosing money?  Adding additional content for "free", or in other words, increasing the value of the product, is a pretty common strategy in increase sales.  

[xcorps]

Increasing sales != increasing profit.

[nothing3839]

Thank you for your time, drive through.[/quote]

Spoken like a true Bioware PR person.  You should fill out an application...

Modifié par nothing3839, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:36 .

[Beertastic]

nothing3839 wrote...

Wickedjelly wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

I don't have to accept anything.  I can simply refuse to pay additional costs and demand that the content be released for free.  You can do this as well and it just might work.

They aren't going to keep making this content and give it away for free.  I could see arguing the pricing, the quality, or saying you would prefer an expansion rather than being nickel and dimed through dlc but come on...

You essentially want them to spend x amount of hours creting additional material for you without them receiving any compensation whatsoever for it.  Who would do that?

Why do you insist they would be loosing money?  Adding additional content for "free", or in other words, increasing the value of the product, is a pretty common strategy in increase sales.  

The question is: Will the increased sales cover the development costs and will it generate more profit then DLC that cost money?

Unless you can answer this with facts, I suggest you stop trying to advise Bioware how to run their company.

[nothing3839]

xcorps wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

xcorps wrote...

In my opinion this is a clear example of an industry wide trend of developing new strategies and schemes to extract as much money as possible for the consumer.

You do realize that this statement describes all business, no?

Banks-they exist to make a profit by providing a good/service
Newspapers-they exist to make a profit by providing a good/service
Cereal makers-they exist to make a profit by providing a good/service

ad naseum

Ok ok Good!  Now we are getting somewhere.  Now, do you think this is acceptable.  And if not do you think you should just accept these terms even from a gaming company?

Do I think it is acceptable for companies to be profitable? Absolutely.
Do I think it is acceptable for companies to maximize profitability in an honest, transparent transaction? Absolutely.

Do I think the terms of sale of some DLC are acceptable?
No, I don't accept them. Which is why I haven't purchased Wardens Keep. I won't however demand that they "give it to me for free" because they aren't in the "give me stuff for free" business.
I would accept the terms if the content was longer, or the price lower.

Ok so we are in agreement completely.

Modifié par nothing3839, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:43 .

[aries1001]

If anyone has the right to complain about game/ratio/price length I do think it is people like me who also play adventure games (like Syberia 1, Dreamfall and Memento Morti, Still Life 2 and the like). We usuallu get to play 8-10 hours and still pay full price or nearly full price for the game, which means finding 40-50 US dollars to buy the game. Some games are a bit cheaper, others are a bit more expensive. The point I'm getting at it is this: People will pay what they think the content is worth (value to them), not how much it costs. And yes, 5 US dollars for an hour seems (too) much. 10 hours would then be 50 US dollars, well, hello Modern Warfare 2 or Uncharted 2. I probably won't be buying any of the DLCs for a long time, but that's my choice.

My mother always told me that there's no such thing as a free lunch. Someone always has to be pick up the bill. And that someone will often be you - the consumer, the buyer of a certain product or service. And Bioware is a company; surprised am I when someone doesn't seem to realize this. And as such Bioware needs to make money by providing goods/products/services.

Modifié par aries1001, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:35 .

[ladydesire]

nothing3839 wrote...


Sir, I am afraid you have to disagree on several points.  

Nothing that comes with the game is for free.  You are paying a whopping $50 for it.

No kidding... Games cost money to produce, you know.
  

Charging additional costs on top of the original costs is not intended to pay anyones salary.

So the DLC team doesn't need to be paid for their work? I know this might be hard to believe, but Warden's Keep and the upcoming DLC were not ever part of the game, like some people seem to believe; Shale was intended to be in the game, but was cut for some reason, so that's how the Stone Prisoner DLC came about.

I don't have to accept anything.  I can simply refuse to pay additional costs and demand that the content be released for free.  You can do this as well and it just might work.

Since most of the content being released is not required to play the main campaign (you can play DA without having Shale in your party, the Armor you get from Warden's Keep isn't super powerful, stat-wise, etc), I don't see why there being optional content for those that want to get it is a problem for those that don't.

[Pillslanger]

Making DLC free is not going to increase sales, stop and think about it. When was the last time you bought a game because it had free DLC? It is not a selling point. If you don't like it then don't purchase the DLC, I have not and do not plan to.



They are a business, you are never going to be able to sell a product to everyone so it makes perfect business sense to engage in a little price discrimination. As a software developer in a perfectly competitive market they are not going to be able to set their price in the market, but with DLC they can try to make extra profit over "0" in the short-run. These trends will continue so long as people continue to pay for their DLC it is just how a competitive market works and eventually no one will make extra profits from DLC because it will be a typical practice. Bioware is just trying to keep up with the trend.



The DLC makes them extra money on a game in a market where people will typically purchase the product used once time has passed. Used products make more money for companies like Gamestop, but the developer does not see a dime of that money, that is why it is cheaper. This provides the company with a way to release new content and make more money on a stale product over a year from its release.



Bioware is also on record as saying that they love 3rd party developers to release add-ons, so if you don't want the DLC then you will have to wait for new content from other players.



I could actually go on about why paying for DLC sucks, but you shouldn't complain, but I won't I think I have made enough points here.

[Naminator236]

toronto13 wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...

I  $50 to $60 is not a small amount of money to pay for a limited user licence for a peace of software (thats right, limited user licence, not ownership, read your user agreement) and charging money for several hours of additional content is not considerate toward the average gamer's budget.  In my opinion this is a clear example of an industry wide trend of developing new strategies and schemes to extract as much money as possible for the consumer.  

 
For $50 to $60 from BioWare you get 40 to 100 hrs gameplay,while others give you 10 to 15 hrs gameplay,in the end it turns out that you owe them money.

I keep hearing this over and over and over again of these forums and it is just getting annoying already.
Why do you people feel the need to justify the cost by comparing the games Hr/$ of DA:O to some random FPSs?
Almost every RPG out there that is not a complete failure takes as much time to complete. Maybe a bit less since most RPGs to require you to sit though a dialog ever time you take a step.
It is also hypocritical as you people use this as an argument against anyone who points out the horrible Hr/$ ratio of the DLCs.

But alas I'm tired of this discussion. Fanboys will be fanboys and any negative criticism that Bioware can use to improve themselfs or at least use to get some new ideas get buried under and avalanche of flames and excuses.

I'm done with this.

[nothing3839]

ladydesire wrote...

nothing3839 wrote...


Sir, I am afraid you have to disagree on several points.  

Nothing that comes with the game is for free.  You are paying a whopping $50 for it.

No kidding... Games cost money to produce, you know.
  

Charging additional costs on top of the original costs is not intended to pay anyones salary.

So the DLC team doesn't need to be paid for their work? I know this might be hard to believe, but Warden's Keep and the upcoming DLC were not ever part of the game, like some people seem to believe; Shale was intended to be in the game, but was cut for some reason, so that's how the Stone Prisoner DLC came about.

I don't have to accept anything.  I can simply refuse to pay additional costs and demand that the content be released for free.  You can do this as well and it just might work.

Since most of the content being released is not required to play the main campaign (you can play DA without having Shale in your party, the Armor you get from Warden's Keep isn't super powerful, stat-wise, etc), I don't see why there being optional content for those that want to get it is a problem for those that don't.

I think you missing the thrust of my argument.  I do agree that we should have access to the content, but not that there should be an additional cost.

Also, there seems to be a premise that everyone is this thread shares.  Namely, that the content was developed in additional to the game?  What makes you so sure that this content was not developed as content to be integrated within the original game but perhaps it was a business decision to cut it and make it available post release to justify additional cost?

For example, for WK, do you think they developed that content and did the voice acting after the fact? 

[SalinUngatha]

I like the concept of DLC and have no problem with it existing as such.



Having a location on your map that looks interesting and you look forward to exploring. Then going there, being excited and finding you can only access it by paying more money? That

1. Detracts from the game.

2. Gives the user who doesn't want to pay extra a bad and disappointing experience

3. Gives you the feeling you've got an incomplete game.



So in short :

Bioware/EA, DLC is fine. But don't waste the time and emotion of those who choose not to experience it.

Don't make your game worse.

[bjdbwea]

Yes, it sucks. Yes, it will probably get worse. No, there's nothing you or I can do about that except not buying it. Not much use in telling BioWare about that plan though, they'll judge the degree of acceptance only from the sales numbers and decide from there how to proceed. Throughout history, companies have thought to have found the ultimate idea to milk their customers, but often enough the customers have surprised them.

[KalosCast]

These anti-DLC arguments would make sense was Dragon Age a clearly unfinished game or otherwise not worth its initial cost, which no anti-DLC person is arguing, meaning that you're just whining because people don't spend time and money to give you free ****.

[GoldenusG]

toronto13 wrote...
 
For $50 to $60 from BioWare you get 40 to 100 hrs gameplay,while others give you 10 to 15 hrs gameplay,in the end it turns out that you owe them money.

Alright, by your logic:

I play a game called X3:  Terran Conflict, a space combat/trade simulator, cost me £20 ($32).  My current game, I've put over 300 hours into, and that has no end in sight.  In past games, I've probably got another 500 hours.  Ergo, I'm 700 hours down, and $11 short on my investment.  I demand a refund of £12 or 600 free DLC's (Based on each DLC taking one hour to complete by the current WK and the forthcoming RtO).



This is of course, nonsense.  I'm only slightly bitter at the cost ($12 for two hours content?  You're kidding...  Right)?  What bugs me is the vendor in camp trying to force you to buy, by screaming 'Look at me!  LOOK AT ME'!!!  The lack of bang-per-buck 'Weeeee!  I got a shiny new sword, weeeeee' so far.If Bioware release a fair-sized pack at a fair price, I'll be first in line.  But what we've seen/had announced thus far is NOT fair.

(Back on X3, a fairly recent patch, added a good 10 hours worth of free content (Well, a few hours playing, and more stations to build) for their loyal customers, and a forthcoming patch is offering at least another couple of hours - free).

By all means, release DLC, but make it worthwhile.  A two hour minimum first playthrough rule maybe.  Give us something to sink our teeth into and savour.

[Rexxean]

Sure the ia question in the back of everone mind espscially beacause on DLC of Wardens Keep for 7$ but it believe this was whole DLC thing had been a great trail ballon by Bioware, to see if makes fiscal sense to have a team working on DLC's and another team on the upcoming expasnion pack. In there terms I think it is a yes, since they reported a additional 1 million dollars in income from the DLC.

I think it's a good way to keep content coming out and a loveable game alive, it's still the consumer's. choice when the DLC becomes not worth the $$ we will see with next one coming soon, pp; will not buy it. Basic Capititalism at it's core working.

We have to severly **** about a MMO that charges 15$ a month and 2 29.99 expasion a year, that you bbasically have to buy otherwise you cannot play with the rest online in new content or guilds. I.E EVERQUEST has 14 expansions pack i think now, that 29.99x14 +49.99 when i bought and not including the play time per month the game cost $469.85 to date just for software.. think about that one.. ALso that does not even mention all the other scandlous charges SOE has done for  Everquest to milk every penny  out of a customer,  I quit! because it was gettting  so  rediculas , they would try to sell anything for $$ 

Modifié par Rexxean, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:55 .

[Melchiah109]

You guys might want to look up what fanboy means, since people love to toss it around as an insult, when they, themselves, are being fanboys as well.

[KalosCast]

GoldenusG wrote...

toronto13 wrote...
 
For $50 to $60 from BioWare you get 40 to 100 hrs gameplay,while others give you 10 to 15 hrs gameplay,in the end it turns out that you owe them money.

Alright, by your logic:

I play a game called X3:  Terran Conflict, a space combat/trade simulator, cost me £20 ($32).  My current game, I've put over 300 hours into, and that has no end in sight.  In past games, I've probably got another 500 hours.  Ergo, I'm 700 hours down, and $11 short on my investment.  I demand a refund of £12 or 600 free DLC's (Based on each DLC taking one hour to complete by the current WK and the forthcoming RtO).



This is of course, nonsense.  I'm only slightly bitter at the cost ($12 for two hours content?  You're kidding...  Right)?  What bugs me is the vendor in camp trying to force you to buy, by screaming 'Look at me!  LOOK AT ME'!!!  The lack of bang-per-buck 'Weeeee!  I got a shiny new sword, weeeeee' so far.If Bioware release a fair-sized pack at a fair price, I'll be first in line.  But what we've seen/had announced thus far is NOT fair.

(Back on X3, a fairly recent patch, added a good 10 hours worth of free content (Well, a few hours playing, and more stations to build) for their loyal customers, and a forthcoming patch is offering at least another couple of hours - free).

By all means, release DLC, but make it worthwhile.  A two hour minimum first playthrough rule maybe.  Give us something to sink our teeth into and savour.

X3 lacks significantly in any real content, being horrendously repetitive, the travel times would make even an Eve Online player call it excessive, the storyline is barely there, the voice acting is terrible, and the price you're quoting was not the original retail cost of the game. Fail.

[Wickedjelly]

nothing3839 wrote...

Why do you insist they would be loosing money?  Adding additional content for "free", or in other words, increasing the value of the product, is a pretty common strategy in increase sales.  

Adding this content takes man hours just from a development perspective not to include other things such as QA, voice actor payments, etc.  You essentially want them to keep a steady inflow of content yet expect them to get no additional capital beyond the initial purchase of the game for the work.  No matter who you want to cut it at a certain point the cost for adding free content would trump the profits made from the sales of the game if you have no other capital coming in.

...and let's get real.  Do you really think anybody out there would go running to their nearest game store to buy the game itself if they came out right now and said, "Dragon Age now including Warden's Keep for freeeeeee!"  Wouldn't make a difference in the least to a consumer at this point.

Well, except for the ones that already purchased it.  They would probably be rather pissed heh

...and why do you have free in quotes?  That's what you want so why the play on the word?

The only thing that will happen if enough people refuse to purchase the dlc is they simply won't make any more dlc.  Now you could argue this would provide a jump start to them working on an expansion or the sequel.  That's all it will accomplish though.  Might not even do that because regardless how much people enjoy the product or how much the developers might want to continue working on the project if the bean counters don't think the profit potential will outweigh the cost then they will shut it down completely.

Never underestimate the power of bean counters.  They don't give a **** how much you enjoy their product or how much potential something has.  All they care about are the actual numbers and how many different ratios they can make out of those numbers.

I'm sorry but saying if you're not a fan of dlc then don't buy it doesn't make you a fanboy to me.  I point out flaws in this game at times.  Hell, I'm not a huge fan of the Warden's Keep dlc for reasons I'm not going into for the umpteenth time.  I'm not even a huge supporter of dlc altogether but the fact is that it's here least in the short term and judging by the momentum I see with it being used it's probably here to stay for quite some time. 

Whether companies will use it to finance even better long term material and extend the life of a game through using it in addition to other things such as expansions and sequels, or simply just use dlc to squeeze as much money as they can out of consumers remains to be seen.  Obviously I hope for the first scenario but I'll be the first to admit it could sadly be the latter.

Modifié par Wickedjelly, 22 novembre 2009 - 11:54 .

[Locain]

I agree with GoldenusG..



less frequent but more substansive Expansions (DLC's)

[nothing3839]

Pillslanger wrote...

Making DLC free is not going to increase sales, stop and think about it. When was the last time you bought a game because it had free DLC? It is not a selling point. If you don't like it then don't purchase the DLC, I have not and do not plan to.

They are a business, you are never going to be able to sell a product to everyone so it makes perfect business sense to engage in a little price discrimination. As a software developer in a perfectly competitive market they are not going to be able to set their price in the market, but with DLC they can try to make extra profit over "0" in the short-run. These trends will continue so long as people continue to pay for their DLC it is just how a competitive market works and eventually no one will make extra profits from DLC because it will be a typical practice. Bioware is just trying to keep up with the trend.

The DLC makes them extra money on a game in a market where people will typically purchase the product used once time has passed. Used products make more money for companies like Gamestop, but the developer does not see a dime of that money, that is why it is cheaper. This provides the company with a way to release new content and make more money on a stale product over a year from its release.

Bioware is also on record as saying that they love 3rd party developers to release add-ons, so if you don't want the DLC then you will have to wait for new content from other players.

I could actually go on about why paying for DLC sucks, but you shouldn't complain, but I won't I think I have made enough points here.

What makes you think that releasing free content post-release is a bad business strategy?  Do you have any idea how many gaming companies have done this.  Personally I would be motivated to buy a game from a company that keeps releasing additional content and increasing the game play time and thus value of the product.  Imagine yourself as an some one who likes RPG's and you run into a game that is $50 but on the back of the box it says that there is additional content released by the developer to be downloaded off their site for "free"...I would buy such a game.  

What is this about not being able to remain competitive by manipulating the price.  There are plenty of successful companies that release their games for below premium cost for the sole reason of remaining competitive (especially in this economy).  

[xcorps]

Throughout history, companies have thought to have found the ultimate idea to milk their customers, but often enough the customers have surprised them.

Or maybe Bioware just wants to continue to offer their services in fulfilling your entertainment needs.

Maybe they've determined that the microtransactions they offer need to be priced at X in order to be fiscally acceptable. Maybe they want to maintain their reputation as a high end content provider.



I seriously doubt they stand around in meetings asking each other how they can milk their customers.