512 réponses à ce sujet

[SP2219]

Bioware, I hate to break this to you, but your business model, as it stands, is just plain wrong.

Let me start with a quote from an article you and your friends at IGN recently put together, then I can explain to you WHY you are wrong.

"While Electronic Arts and BioWare were a little slow in taking up the free-to-play model in Star Wars: The Old Republic, BioWare has been experimenting with distribution models for its single-player role-playing games for a while. BioWare has used online passes, day one DLC and significant story additions to build revenue outside of the traditional one-time purchase price. According to Fernando Melo, director of online development at BioWare, having a post-ship plan is “absolutely fundamental to what your team needs to be doing.”
He directly answers questions about why BioWare offers day one DLC at a talk at GDC Europe, showing how despite the displeasure for such an offering, the sales numbers justify the business practice."

What worries me the most is the final paragraph, where the words "displeasure" and "justify" appear in the same sentence.  Though this is somewhat an inferal on Charles Onyett's part, it doesn't matter.  The two words are there in the same sentence.  This is not good.

Bioware, in business, there is no justification for causing your customers any degree of displeasure.  In business, you should be pursuing the opposite.  Displeasing your customers is something you should avoid at all costs.  When 90% of your customers are practically screaming at you NOT to engage in the day 1 DLC practice, it's a good idea to do exactly that.  Why?  Because they are your customers.  They are your sole source of income.  It doesn't matter what YOU think.  If your customers are not happy, you lose.  It really is that simple.

You seem to think this is justified because your sales numbers are low in relation to your production cost.  That's because your games are not of sufficient quality to boost sales numbers to where you want them to be.  The solution is to make your games better, and not release them when they are full of programming bugs, writing inconsistencies and lack of depth.  It is definitely NOT the solution to charge the customers more money for an already below par product.

It really is so simple.  If your game is good, people will buy it.  If your game is bad, people won't buy it.  The game is a single product.  Not a product that's purposefully broken into lots of little bits you have to buy seperately.  Just a single game, on a single disc.  That is all you should be concerned about.

Take a look at games like Zelda, the Metroid Prime series, the Half Life series.  Did they rely on this business practice?  The answer is a resounding no.  This is because the development teams took the time to ensure their games were of the highest quality.  Thus more people bought the game, these games produced greater profits, the money they made on sales eclipsed their production costs.

Take a look at your previous games.  Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1.  These games did not have day 1 DLC.  The first two had no DLC at all, and they were better games for it.

There is writing on the wall here.  Your customers don't care about sales numbers, profit margins, or any other reason you might have for participating in the day 1 DLC practice.  Your customers simply do not want it.  Threfore you should not give it to them.

For the millionth time, it is that simple.

 

 

[Maias227]

I don't agree with there is something inherently wrong with DLC. You mention Knights of the Old Republic and postulate its better because its without DLC. Why? I enjoy getting to see more the universe for a fraction of the game original cost. Its something that's developed after the main game which explore some extra elements, I appriciate having the chance to see more. If you do not think its fair nobody is forcing you to buy it.

With day one DLC its a bit more iffy, I don't really like if heavy story content is developed alongside the game but to be sold seperately. But as far as I understand from anouncements Javik was created after the finished game was sent into mass production. Then I don't really mind, again he's not really something that's crucial to the story and my Me3 experience wouldn't have suffered much without him.

[Sanunes]

Hmm... I thought Knights of the Old Republic was mediocre, Jade Empire felt unfinished after the first half, and Mass Effect 1 had massive flaws. In fact to me their latest offerings are on par with the games you mentioned, just without the baggage of being sequels.

Just with posts like this try to keep from speaking for everyone, for I believe there is different reasons for Day 1 DLC then you do so I have no problem with the idea and the games that have Day 1 DLC and I don't want it I simply don't buy it to tell the publisher/developer that.

[ZombieGambit]

Let's say the actual development cycle for a game is 1 year and 10 months, but it has another 2-3 months before release, which is mostly bug testing etc. Instead of sending all those programmers home, they are instead tasked with creating extra content that will not be on the disc, because the game is already finished, it's just not "golden" yet.

That is how Day 1 DLC is created and instead of waiting 1 or 2 months before releasing it to keep up appearances, they released is as soon as possible, as both a show of continued game support to the fans and to the fans and it makes good business sense because release is when the game is most hyped up and popular.

It's not a perfect system, but it's also not an evil money grubbing one that most ignorant people think it is either.

[Haldameer]

So many game nowadays comes with day one patches or "dlc", not really to bothered by it personally. But, I have internets and buy digital versions of all my games so downloading a little something something on release day doesn't bug me to much. As long as it isn't a game breaking perk or kit, like the the Crysis 2 weapon pack which basically destroyed multiplayer balance.

[Lokiwithrope]

Uh. Yeah, they can. A huge amount of money for DAO came from Day 1 DLC and no one seemed to have a problem there.

[samurai crusade]

You cannot justify this thread.

Bioware can do whatever they want. They have every right to make From Ashes a dlc the same way Zaeed and Kasumi were. The game is just fine without Javik, it was just a fan service to those wanting a prothean.

You are in the wrong era of video gaming if you want to preach about day 1 dlcs.
Personally, I hate day 1 updates and patches

[AnthonyDraft]

ZombieGambit wrote...

Let's say the actual development cycle for a game is 1 year and 10 months, but it has another 2-3 months before release, which is mostly bug testing etc. Instead of sending all those programmers home, they are instead tasked with creating extra content that will not be on the disc, because the game is already finished, it's just not "golden" yet.

That is how Day 1 DLC is created and instead of waiting 1 or 2 months before releasing it to keep up appearances, they released is as soon as possible, as both a show of continued game support to the fans and to the fans and it makes good business sense because release is when the game is most hyped up and popular.

It's not a perfect system, but it's also not an evil money grubbing one that most ignorant people think it is either.

And if the content is created before the game is released, then it should be part of the game, not at the additional price.

[MKGDX]

You do know that they send the game to MS and Sony for certification before it can be sold , right? They start developing new DLC at that point.

Namco and Capcom have done worse: On disc DLC, content that is ON THE PHYSICAL MEDIA YOU JUST BOUGHT BUT MUST PAY EXTRA FOR A CODE TO UNLOCK IT. Like Soul Calibur 5's "pre-order bonus character".

[Sanunes]

AnthonyDraft wrote...

ZombieGambit wrote...

Let's say the actual development cycle for a game is 1 year and 10 months, but it has another 2-3 months before release, which is mostly bug testing etc. Instead of sending all those programmers home, they are instead tasked with creating extra content that will not be on the disc, because the game is already finished, it's just not "golden" yet.

That is how Day 1 DLC is created and instead of waiting 1 or 2 months before releasing it to keep up appearances, they released is as soon as possible, as both a show of continued game support to the fans and to the fans and it makes good business sense because release is when the game is most hyped up and popular.

It's not a perfect system, but it's also not an evil money grubbing one that most ignorant people think it is either.

And if the content is created before the game is released, then it should be part of the game, not at the additional price.

I would agree with that if Microsoft and Sony didn't have their certification process, but I have read from multiple developers they have to have the finished game to Microsoft and Sony at least two to three months before release and Microsoft really doesn't like free content on xBox Live.  Metro 2033, they wanted to put a free patch out that added a new game type and two new weapons, but they had to release it for 240 points and released it free on the PC.

[breyant]

While I certainly agree with the OP, pissing off customers and not caring as long as the profit is good is an awful business strategy but the numbers don't lie. Most people are willing to give up their money for Day 1 DLC and most of them probably don't come to forums to complain about it. Since they want to charge extra for the content, I'd rather them release it on Day 1 when I'm still playing the game instead of weeks later when I'm already finished.

I read a quote recently that interviewed the producers of FFXIII-2 about their questionable DLC with that game and they simply responded with something along the lines of " well people are buying it, and the star rating is high!! So people must really like it!" so... yeah lol.

The business isn't going to change. It's run by a bunch of people wearing suits that only see Excel spreadsheets showing budgets and net profits, they don't care about the individual player's personal feelings and probably never play video games.

Look at this picture, it cracks me up, you can practically see the dollar signs reflected in the eyes of the guys wearing suits

[Mysten]

AnthonyDraft wrote...
And if the content is created before the game is released, then it should be part of the game, not at the additional price.

No it shouldn't.

There is a long period before any game is released when all content is completely locked down - nothing gets added. At that point it's set in stone - that is what you're getting when you purchase the game at launch. If the developers use the time between content complete and release to pick up a side project - whether that be something brand new, something that was scrapped before it could ever begin or adding the finishing touches to something that had to be cut from the main game at a late stage - then they have every right to charge an additonal fee for that content because it is additional - you were never going to get it at all.

[Felis Menari]

ZombieGambit wrote...

Let's say the actual development cycle for a game is 1 year and 10 months, but it has another 2-3 months before release, which is mostly bug testing etc. Instead of sending all those programmers home, they are instead tasked with creating extra content that will not be on the disc, because the game is already finished, it's just not "golden" yet.

That is how Day 1 DLC is created and instead of waiting 1 or 2 months before releasing it to keep up appearances, they released is as soon as possible, as both a show of continued game support to the fans and to the fans and it makes good business sense because release is when the game is most hyped up and popular.

It's not a perfect system, but it's also not an evil money grubbing one that most ignorant people think it is either.

How so many people don't understand this is astounding.

[loungeshep]

Yay arm chair economists/businessmen!

[BDelacroix]

The customers may not care about sales profits and margins but the accountants sure do.

They can justify day 1 DLC. Its the wave of the future especially if you can create that wave.

It is the game equivelant to extended cut DVDs and then super tiger version DVDs. I never bought the day 1 dlc. I don't plan to. I don't think I missed anything of significance for it. The choice is still yours. If you do not agree with the direction a supplier is going, find another supplier or in this case don't fund their activity. Thus don't buy the day 1 dlc unless your money is not where your mouth is.

[Chris Priestly]

Perhaps you should read this.

[BDelacroix]

MKGDX wrote...

You do know that they send the game to MS and Sony for certification before it can be sold , right? They start developing new DLC at that point.

Namco and Capcom have done worse: On disc DLC, content that is ON THE PHYSICAL MEDIA YOU JUST BOUGHT BUT MUST PAY EXTRA FOR A CODE TO UNLOCK IT. Like Soul Calibur 5's "pre-order bonus character".

EA did it, too with Alice Returns but then didn't actually give out any codes for the "dlc".  So its a sort of grey area at that point.  You can "unlock" the content but it amounts to about nothing anyway.

[Cashmoney007]

I don't care about there being day one dlcs. But I don't want to buy a game and then get the dlc to finish that game.  The dlc should add more to the game.  I would personally look at reviews and gameplay before buying any dlcs.

Modifié par Cashmoney007, 14 août 2012 - 04:01 .

[Xarathox]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Perhaps you should read this.

Ok, the OP just got trolled by Priestly.

[Little Princess Peach]

Xarathox wrote...

Chris Priestly wrote...

Perhaps you should read this.

Ok, the OP just got trolled by Priestly.

Way to troll chris

[Atakuma]

I had no problem when day one DLC was a deterrent for used games and was free for anyone who purchased a new copy. However, it has since devolved into a blatant cash grab and Mr. Melo's assertion that this is something players want is quite irritating.

[dirty console peasant]

I do not get why everyone is so pissed about the day 1 DLC I mean it was mentioned that the collectors edition would come with an extra squad mate, that is part of the reason I bought it. I feel a little ripped off that everything in game (except for the N7 weapons) that I bought the collectors edition for. Was immediately released to the public for cheaper than what I spent to get the collectors edition. Now before the arguments of "you got the dog" or "there was physical content as well" the dog does nothing and is pointless, and the physical content was not the main reason that I purchased the Collectors Edition.

[iSousek]

And they will probably continue in the future.

Developers have us fans at disatvantage here. They know that we will absolutely want another piece of our favourite franchise and we will do anything to get it. Thus day one DLC is probably the best business move ever. Sure, fans will complain and go 'oh no you didn't', but at the end of the day they will buy it and they will enjoy it. And it won't stop the fanbase praising the franchise on the internet which in turn may bring more customers to the developer.

The Cycle must continue.

End of line.

[Joryn01]

Never had a problem with Day 1 DLC. I'd still buy it every time day 1 for a game that i know i am going to like.