203 réponses à ce sujet

[tangalin]

FlamingBoy wrote...

tangalin wrote...


I guess that really depends on whether you regard the pursuit of profit at the expense of all else to be evil or not.

You have no idea how long it took to find this quote, but its a good one


There
is one rule for the industrialist and that is: Make the best quality of
goods possible at the lowest cost possible, paying the highest wages
possible.  
Henry Ford

Where as EA works on the inverse. Making the lowest quality possible charging the highest amount possible and paying the lowest wages possible.

I find it insane that people believe that a product sellling really well has ANY bearing whatsoever on the wages of the people who were in the trenches making it. It doesn't. If a game flops, the individual devs get paid the exact same amount as if it sells millions.

[Midz]

FlamingBoy wrote...

Midz wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

Midz wrote...

Basic Math is it cost the same as a take out Pizza here.

You have a choice dont buy it I did and was better value than a pizza so happy.

Simply whatever Bioware do or EA a vociferous group will claim the sky is falling unfairness evil intent etc etc ad nauseum.

The DLC was good you dont like the price fine dont buy it or wait till on sale .

But all you are doing is whining like a petulant child.

No i could buy pizza at the nearest competitor for a cheaper price, in the case of mass effect I have to buy it from bioware (aka EA) they hold the keys to this fort and quite frankly its quite disgraceful

goading me in then charging more in unknown, unpredictable costs

 No is the same  you can buy a different Pizza  not that Brands Pizza .You cant  buy that brand pizza from a competitor.

 You can buy a different game  not the EA brand one .

Or  if prefer where I live was the same a 3 Starbuck expressos ....yes  can buy coffee from a competitor ..but not the same coffee.

Bioware make the product they can set the price  .You can accept it or reject it  buy a different game.

But the price is  not overpriced disgracefull evil or anything  its  just a price .

We are just consumers there are many things from games  to cars that many think are too expensive  and probably are .But it is  not disgracefull  , and without knowing  the production costs  sales and  profit  per unit imposible to even  claim  greedy .

All you can say is  I dont like the price   that is a valid opinion  but to  claim evil bad intent  has no logic and borders on puerile.



 

not the same, its extrodinary that you think that a "brand" is the same as buying a product I want
I mean comparing starbucks to "other coffee maker" (both make coffee) and bioware to bethesda (both make video games) is a valid comparison

Comparing mass effect to pizza business has no validation because when I want pizza I can buy pizza (from other compeitors), but when i want mass effect i have to buy another video game is not mass effect.

Can you see why its not the same


Edit: also it would be nice if you used an example or a company that has a similiar reputation of "overpriced" as bioware, starbucks is not known for it

If you say so ,but it was your comparison not mine.I started by  price comparison you introduced buy a pizza elsewhere,read above.

It is there product there price .If I or you dont like we have the choice to buy a different   game.

So let me see 2 different brand  pizzas taste  the same , think not , if you argue a pizza is a pizza is a pizza ,the same  logic must hold  for a game  is a game is a game.

Personally I do think Starbucks  is overpriced , so I dont  buy and go to Doutor.

[FlamingBoy]

Ninja Stan wrote...

 You've paid for tons of products from thousands of companies, yet no one ever accuses Colgate of "milking their customers" or Frito-Lay of "just being in it for the money." It's only the creative industries, as if creators can pay their rent with fan adoration and buy food with respect.

Note that I am speaking only to the idea of "DLC price tag ridiculousness and basic math." Consumers are, as always, free to buy or not buy any product they wish for whatever reason they wish. 

Are you seriously  suggesting that DLC is essential to the profitability of a company that it has reached the stage where they are no longer able to pay for food and rent (this will require a cetain level of proof).

Your comparison to colgate is a weird one especially considering that colgate is important to tooth care, I am personally not aware of current dlc like practices run by either colgate or frito-lay, usually what you buy is what you buy, be it a bag of chips or a toothbrush.

Mass effect 3 is different because there is always the implication that people missed out on something. Dividing the fans into the first class experience and secound (and in the case of video companies 3rd, 4th, 5th......) all based on how much we pay. Its almost a literal cookie cutter of the experience. its not just dlc but its the books, comics, the much despised twitter feed, all cutting out pretty core pieces of a plot (kai leng, vega, shadow broker, arrival, omega takeover, shepard body recovery, omega retake, many many others) to entice people who are already hooked to an experience to buy more. Honestly a better example to compare bioware (or "creative industries") would not be colegate but this

http://en.wikipedia....tion_technology

There are some obvious differences any the example is not entirely fair but the concept of intellectual monopoly is the same

[FlamingBoy]

Midz wrote...



If you say so ,but it was your comparison not mine.I started by  price comparison you introduced buy a pizza elsewhere,read above.

It is there product there price .If I or you dont like we have the choice to buy a different   game.

So let me see 2 different brand  pizzas taste  the same , think not , if you argue a pizza is a pizza is a pizza ,the same  logic must hold  for a game  is a game is a game.

Personally I do think Starbucks  is overpriced , so I dont  buy and go to Doutor.

well I guess you should be grateful starbucks did not patent coffee:P

[Wulfram]

While what Ninja Stan says is true from the companies point of view, from the players point of view it's still obviously and blatantly true that DLC offers far worse value for money than an equivalent full game.

So as consumers, they should consider whether it's worth paying these inflated prices. If enough of them did, then maybe those prices might actually come down.

[FlamingBoy]

Rosstoration wrote...


Go watch Modern Times (1936) for the horrific utopia of Fordism.

seen it, its pretty good, despite the fill being ancient

however the relevance of the film and the industrial revolution has changed significantly since the the 1930's (however there are some significant issues in 2nd and 3rd world countries still)

The ideal of the quote is still the same

[XqctaX]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Game product pricing is not based on playtime or game length, just as the admission price for movies is not variable based on how long the movie is or what kind of budget it had. Not to mention that expecting product pricing to be based on how much time you played it is a little ridiculous. There is no way for a publisher to know how long it will take you, specifically, to finish a game product, let alone set their prices accordingly.

DLC pricing is also not based on its size compared to the size of the main game, nor on how long it takes a player to finish is compared to how long it took that same player to finish the main game. Keep in mind that the number of players who purchase DLC remains but a small fraction of the number who purchase the main game.

DLC is, of course, completely optional and is not required to enjoy and complete the main game.

in other words 15$ is the new DLC standard price?
becouse if so i will make the choice to never buy DLC from your studio again. ever.

perhaps i should buy a new computer for the money i save on DLC
 and start playing on that instead of consoles aswell. 

Modifié par XqctaX, 28 novembre 2012 - 11:56 .

[XqctaX]

Ninja Stan wrote...

known_hero wrote...

So, what IS it based on? What exactly makes this DLC $15?

Probably the same as any other product: some kind of profit projection based on production + marketing costs, estimated number of sales, and assumptions of audience buy-in based on previous purchasing behaviour, modified by historical data of similar products, similar release date, and/or similar product type.
* snippage*

sounds like the pricetag is an indication of bioware not expecting it to sell well

[Morty Smith]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Game product pricing is not based on playtime or game length, just as the admission price for movies is not variable based on how long the movie is or what kind of budget it had. Not to mention that expecting product pricing to be based on how much time you played it is a little ridiculous. There is no way for a publisher to know how long it will take you, specifically, to finish a game product, let alone set their prices accordingly.

DLC pricing is also not based on its size compared to the size of the main game, nor on how long it takes a player to finish is compared to how long it took that same player to finish the main game. Keep in mind that the number of players who purchase DLC remains but a small fraction of the number who purchase the main game.

DLC is, of course, completely optional and is not required to enjoy and complete the main game.

Then again a movie can also justify an additional fee with it´s overlength (content).

[gisle]

I liked the DLC as it didn't try to be epic, like Leviathan and didn't subtly favor humanity like the entire game. The Reapers is the least interesting part of the ME universe, if you ask me.

[Axialbloom]

Insanely overpriced on the xbox.

[Alraiis]

If five extra dollars was the price I had to pay for Carrie-Anne Moss instead of a replacement VA for Aria, I consider it money well spent. I can see how that wouldn't be the same for everyone, but that's my opinion.

[terdferguson123]

Just a quick comment before work, I see people constantly comparing DLC price to other things in a completely different market (pizza, movies, concerts etc.). You have to know that these comparisons fail because they cannot be compared. Those items are price effective relative to other items in that market. In other words, if I buy a bag of chips that costs $7 instead of usual $4.50, and it's the same size as the other bag, I better be getting a chip that is that much higher quality to warrant that extra $2.50. This is the same scenario as this DLC, we can only compare it to other DLC, and this DLC is 50% greater price but not making up for it in quality or size.

I understand that profitability is the bottom line for companies, but a smart business knows that decisions like this hurt future bottom lines by alienating customers (exactly what we see happening in this thread).

Modifié par terdferguson123, 28 novembre 2012 - 03:59 .

[AlanC9]

Wulfram wrote...

While what Ninja Stan says is true from the companies point of view, from the players point of view it's still obviously and blatantly true that DLC offers far worse value for money than an equivalent full game.

So as consumers, they should consider whether it's worth paying these inflated prices. If enough of them did, then maybe those prices might actually come down.

Maybe. Or maybe there wouldn't be any DLCs made anymore. Or maybe the lowered profits from DLCs mean that companies have to make the main games more profitable, so DLCs stay the same size  and get cheaper but the full games get smaller.

[AlanC9]

XqctaX wrote...

in other words 15$ is the new DLC standard price?
becouse if so i will make the choice to never buy DLC from your studio again. ever.

perhaps i should buy a new computer for the money i save on DLC
 and start playing on that instead of consoles aswell. 

You should play on PC anyway.

[spirosz]

XqctaX wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

known_hero wrote...

So, what IS it based on? What exactly makes this DLC $15?

Probably the same as any other product: some kind of profit projection based on production + marketing costs, estimated number of sales, and assumptions of audience buy-in based on previous purchasing behaviour, modified by historical data of similar products, similar release date, and/or similar product type.
* snippage*

sounds like the pricetag is an indication of bioware not expecting it to sell well

^ahahah. 

[wrdnshprd]

the problem is not with bioware/EA.. the problem is with us (myself included). they continue to "price gouge" DLC as people say, and we as consumers continue to buy it.

if you were the owner of a business and customers continued to purchase your products even if the prices were repeatedly being reported as "unfair".. would you lower them? i would wager not.

in the end, if this was really that much of an issue, people wouldnt buy the DLC. its really that simple.

just my 2 cents.

[Lenimph]

Zuzu Mumu wrote...



Just because they rethinked an entire game ending for they;re fanbase doesn't give you any right to constantly nag and continue with this negative attitude at eveything they do ok? the company does not need to take a step back and they do not need to rethink anything for you. Or have you forgotten how it is to play a game and have fun doing it? I think mass effect gave you so much freedom of choice in game that you somehow think that you have the right or you are entitled to have a say in what Bioware does. Well you are dead wrong about it. You do not have any say in what's going on and you might as well stop nagging.
I agree ME3 ending wasnt what i expected or what i would have wanted in any of the 9 hells. BUT it is not my choice or my position to go constanly open my mouth about the game as if i would be in any way shape or form related to the game or creating any of it. That being said  ,you are just a fanbase , not the creators of ME , your thoughts as well as mine mean little to nothing.

Oh come on even I liked the ending and have supported this 3rd game since it came out but I have to admit that this dlc is a RIPOFF.

Leviathan was a more satisfying experience story wise.  Omega really fell flat story wise and is glitchy as hell. 

[known_hero]

Ninja Stan wrote...


Probably the same as any other product: some kind of profit projection based on production + marketing costs, estimated number of sales, and assumptions of audience buy-in based on previous purchasing behaviour, modified by historical data of similar products, similar release date, and/or similar product type.

So, bioware increased the price of the DLC because they don't think it's going to sell well? How it that fair for the consumer?

Ninja Stan wrote...


It's not a terrible thing to kinda know how economics works. Basic economics concepts was high school social studies for me. The rest was not assuming the worst or buying into knee-jerk internet hyperbole, and having worked in both retail and game development for the last 15 years.

So, you automatically assume I'm just another ignorant rabid fan because I'm not instantly throwing my money at this DLC. Because I want a explanation for the price hike?

Even with all that vast knowledge, you still can't give me a straight answer?

Ninja Stan wrote...

People who think that a company is "just in it for the money now" is both absolutely right and completely wrong. They are wrong because they see the pursuit of profit as a bad thing. Or, at the very least, that pursuit of profit over some nebulous idea of "artistic integrity" (the actual use of the term, not the more recent ME3 meme) is somehow bad or a betrayal of consumer confidence or fandom. They are right because profit is the only pursuit of a company. That's why they're companies in the first place rather than artistic collectives, and even a collective has to pay their rent somehow. You've paid for tons of products from thousands of companies, yet no one ever accuses Colgate of "milking their customers" or Frito-Lay of "just being in it for the money." It's only the creative industries, as if creators can pay their rent with fan adoration and buy food with respect.

Doesn't pertain to me. I never said any of these things.

Ninja Stan wrote...


Note that I am speaking only to the idea of "DLC price tag ridiculousness and basic math." Consumers are, as always, free to buy or not buy any product they wish for whatever reason they wish. 

This seems to be the standard answer to my question. Instead of providing a legitimate explanation for the price increase, Bioware's response is to simply "deal with it". Ok, now I understand.

I'm done here.

Modifié par known_hero, 28 novembre 2012 - 05:29 .

[BlacJAC74]

When you consider how many hours play you get from Dawnguard and probably the upcoming Dragonborn in the future, this piece of dlc is vastly overpriced.

4 hours is a joke.  Well, unless you have more money than you can shake a stick at, then it's the best thing since sliced bread.

Modifié par BlacJAC74, 28 novembre 2012 - 06:22 .

[p.W]

TweedleDee66 wrote...

p.W wrote...

TweedleDee66 wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Game product pricing is not based on playtime or game length, just as the admission price for movies is not variable based on how long the movie is or what kind of budget it had. Not to mention that expecting product pricing to be based on how much time you played it is a little ridiculous. There is no way for a publisher to know how long it will take you, specifically, to finish a game product, let alone set their prices accordingly.

DLC pricing is also not based on its size compared to the size of the main game, nor on how long it takes a player to finish is compared to how long it took that same player to finish the main game. Keep in mind that the number of players who purchase DLC remains but a small fraction of the number who purchase the main game.

DLC is, of course, completely optional and is not required to enjoy and complete the main game.

I see a lot of what its not based on but nothing about what it is based on.

The market. That simple. No other explanations required. When was the last time you went out of your way to **** out a gas station for raising the price on fuel? AFAIK fuel hasn't really gotten better over the years, but the price keeps going up. Should we boycott?

Producing games isn't getting cheaper, it's getting more expensive. Voice actors get paid more now than they used to. And bringing a voice actor back for DLC is inefficient, because they're unlikely to have enough lines to maximize full working days.

A ticket to a movie that lasts anywhere between eighty minutes and two and a half hours in Vancouver costs $12. I can't rewatch the movie. A minimum of three hours of entertainment that can be endlessly replayed being priced at $15 is competitive, and it is reasonable. It's not ideal, but it is close enough.

And for the guy who said that he doesn't buy popcorn at movies on principle... I laugh. Honestly. I have nothing against your distaste for the workings of Capitalism, but your naivete at attempting to change the system from the bottom up by "sticking it to the man" would be endearing if it wasn't adding fuel to this tediously "controversial" fire. Western Capitalism is much more screwed than DLCs being overpriced by a couple of dollars, and if you're genuinely concerned, I suggest political activism.

Got to love people like you and your comparing downloads to video games with non related things. Great logic system.

-If a gas station has higher priced gas, I don’t need to complain to them about it, I go to their competition with the lower price and buy the gas there. You cant buy downloads for a game from someone besides the people who make the game. So there is no shopping around for the better price, big difference here.

You're conveniently ignoring the fact that gas prices have universally gone up 250% over the last 15 years. So you're going to skip out on Chevron and go to Shell for a 5 cent difference on the gallon? Doesn't really matter, does it? Unless you can point me to a forum post you made on some Shell website 3 years ago complaining about the prices and saying it's not fair to the consumer, you're a hypocrite.

-If you enjoy the movie then buy the DVD and then you can re-watch the film as often as you want or just skip to your favorite parts. After a while you can get them cheaper than this download. Personally I go to the early shows where the movie is cheaper and the theater is a lot less crowded. Again, movies are not game downloads, not even remotely close. Downloads for a game are only replayable IF they actually have replay value. By that I don’t mean replayng the same mission with another Shepard and doing the same thing each time. It has options to affect the course of the mission like kill or save this person, or the seemingly forgotten Paragon/Renegade choices and interrupt system. $15 for this download for what sounds like an average of a little over 3 hours of gameplay and very few extras IS NOT worth the price of admission.

Buying DVDs... OK. So I'm sure you're aware how much TV show DVDs cost, right? That there is no standard price? A full season of Lost - 23 episodes - might cost you $40. You know how much season 4, which only had 15 episodes, will cost you? That's right! $40! Battlestar Galactica season 3 costs $40. The first half of season 4 costs $40. The second half also costs $40. No difference in size. No difference in quality of storytelling.

Brand new LOTR DVD when it came out would have cost $30, and it would have had like 20 hours of bonus features. Do you want me to go through the list of movies that I bought, brand new, for $30, that didn't have 20 hours of bonus features? Because it's going to be a long list. Few manage 1.

So I guess you must be on the record sticking it to the man about unfair DVD prices, right? Fighting the good fight wherever it needs to be fought? Not cherry-picking your battles to the places where you KNOW people won't call you an idiot, because you KNOW popular Interdumb opinion happens to be on your side (read: anti-Bioware, doesn't matter what your actual point is)? Because you wouldn't do that... right?

Yea, it must have been that naiveté that got all of the pissed off ME3 gamers to get the Extended Cut ending content made right?

Apples and oranges. I was right here ****ing about the ending of ME3 along with everyone else, because it wasn't up to par. It probably never will be, but they made a gesture of goodwill that I was willing to accept.

That was about quality. And if you want to say that the Omega DLC isn't high enough quality, go right ahead. But that has nothing to do with its price. Nothing. Leviathan costs $10. Three new armor skins for the game cost $3. They did back in ME2's time, too. You really think recycled armor skins take 1/3 development time of a DLC like Leviathan? And yet everyone clamors for more armor skins over and over, knowing that they're being gouged. Why? Because their expectations are being met - or, if not, they just won't spend their dollars. So let's call things what they are. Some people are disappointed that their expectations weren't met with Omega. That's the only thing this is about. 

If the thing had cost $30... if it had even cost $20... I could see the point of making a case, less the self-righteousness present here. But the difference here is smaller than one Big Mac meal. Perspective's not a bad thing.

[AlanC9]

known_hero wrote...

So, bioware increased the price of the DLC because they don't think it's going to sell well? How it that fair for the consumer?

How is it unfair? Here's the product, this is the price. Feel free to not buy it.

This seems to be the standard answer to my question. Instead of providing a legitimate explanation for the price increase, Bioware's response is to simply "deal with it". Ok, now I understand.

I'm done here.

And what counts as a "legitimate" explanation? One you like?

[jackygates]

I guess I am one of those fans that will pay for DLC if it adds more to single player I am one for adding stuff to games. Do I think 15 bucks is a bit much for DLC sure, but as the OP asked a question on what is the method or reason on the price for this DLC I want to know just to get some insight on why but I fear but understand that cuz we got MP DLC free it means they need to gain more profit from SP DLC to make up for the MP DLC! Either way Bioware games has the best DLC for any game i've ever played. DA:O's DLC was the best imo! ok my 2 cents said!

[Mad Cassidy]

Personally I think this is a bad sign. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that between selling at a higher price to fewer customers and selling at a reduced price to more customers (assuming your profit margin is equal for the two), the latter is a more sound business strategy in the long run because it maintains your consumer base. The more people who buy DLC, the longer the lifespan of your game and the better your sales forecast for your next DLC. Upping the pice of a DLC by 50% is something that will lose you customers, so I would imagine the tactic would be better left until late in the DLC cycle when you don't care about possible future returns and there's a higher chance of a profit spike.

[Fraq Hound]

You watched those crap-tacular endings and are now surprised that the DLC didn't live up to your expectations given the price tag.

I'm not gonna say much on this subject because it's likely to get me into trouble.

So I'll merely say that as a huge Bioware Fan that still feels extremely slighted by those endings, I haven't, nor will I ever, touch another piece of Mass Effect content until they fix what they have broken.

I find it hard to sympathize with those of you who continue to buy their products and then complain about being disappointed.