158 réponses à ce sujet

[Icinix]

Navasha - its not the argument about the $10 - its the argument about ethically if it should be there.

The market claims everyone wants day 1 DLC and that many people hating it is wrong, but people don't want to miss out on content. That don't want a less rich experience when they pick up their game on release than the other guy because of Day 1 DLC.

The price doesn't make a crap of difference, the argument is from an ethics point of view.

Although if people do want to bring pricing into it, then if its only $10 now, whats to stop it from only being $20 or $50 later? I mean, its only $50, and it makes a richer experience, adds a few hours of playtime right?

[Dutchess]

Lord Aesir wrote...

ScarMK wrote...

I'll just throw my two cents into the fountain.

Any in game content, that was already made before the game was released, should be included with the game, that includes day 1 DLC that's obviously been cut out to squeeze a few more coins outta people. DLC that is released a few weeks or months later is a different story.

<_<

You do realize that the game content on the disk has to be finalized weeks if not months before the actual game is released, right?  Much of the DLC you claim should be on the disk at release is completed within that window.

Shocking news: the From Ashes Day One DLC was already on the disc when ME3 shipped. You only had to pay to unlock it.

I also think Bioware's DLC is really overpriced. €10 or more for an extra companion, while the entire game costs €60 is a price that's not in blance with what's being offered, especially if that extra companion is less well implemented in the game (like Sebastian with his "romance") than the original characters.

[Heidenreich]

http://penny-arcade....ss-effect-3-dlc

[ScotGaymer]

*sigh*

If the content is not already on the disk in its entirety and needs to be "downloaded" and paid for as DLC then it is NOT disk locked content. It is simply DLC.

Not quite sure why I need to explain that. lol.

EDIT:
That guy on PA is actually correct.

But as I said it really depends on the -type- of DLC that is released on day one. And how it is marketed to the audience - in the case of bioware, terribly.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 29 novembre 2012 - 09:16 .

[Novate]

The whole reason why Day 1 DLC is such a problem is not because they are still working on the game once it went off to be published. Its because they are charging us for the content that they are working on after the game went to publishing.

Think about it, Before the game goes to sale, we want all the contents that is involved with the game right?
So they can as easily make it an Free Download instead of charging us.
Why??
Because the game wasn't on sale when it went to be published, the game went on sale after the Day 1 DLC was completed. So what that they can't get it on the Disc, its part of the $60 that you paid for, we paid for everything that this games contains before the day of the Sale.

With the Technology of allowing Downloads, they can publish an Empty disc, and we can download everything the day we paid that $60

[AlanC9]

renjility wrote...
Shocking news: the From Ashes Day One DLC was already on the disc when ME3 shipped. You only had to pay to unlock it.

So the download was  .... 600 MB of nothing?

I think what you mean is that the character was present, but his mission was not.

[Redbelle]

In my view, paying for content on the day of release is a mask to the issue hiding beneath the specifics..

It's about confidence in the company to treat their customers fairly.

Let's say that there is software available as a DLC release on Day1. Ok great.

Why release it on Day1?

We have already seen a certain amount of backlash in this approach. Plus we have also got a BW employee on record as hyping the virtues of Day1 DLC as a way to expand their intial release profits by taking a £30 game and getting another £10 on top of the intial sale to generate a £40 sale profit.

This appears to be a planned strategy to boost their performance during release to boost profits so they can go to their stockholders and say 'we made more money than our competitor's so invest more in us'.

It's a sad truth, but as gamer's we are viewed as a captive audience that will pay out, even if they continue to use this strategy. The only thing I would suggest to them is take your Day1 DLC and shift it's release back a month to avoid giving offense to your customers............. but I've already highlighted the benefit to companies above in a business sense. So unless we get someone in charge of BW who values ethics over business. I'm afraid we can expect more companies to follow suit, if they haven't already.

Modifié par Redbelle, 29 novembre 2012 - 10:39 .

[Navasha]

Icinix wrote...

Navasha - its not the argument about the $10 - its the argument about ethically if it should be there.

The market claims everyone wants day 1 DLC and that many people hating it is wrong, but people don't want to miss out on content. That don't want a less rich experience when they pick up their game on release than the other guy because of Day 1 DLC.

The price doesn't make a crap of difference, the argument is from an ethics point of view.

Although if people do want to bring pricing into it, then if its only $10 now, whats to stop it from only being $20 or $50 later? I mean, its only $50, and it makes a richer experience, adds a few hours of playtime right?

So you are saying that they should just include the content in the game and charge an extra $10 bucks right from the start?    I am okay with that.  

The point is that games are having a hard time balancing their pricing models.   Too high a price and no one buys it.   Too low a price and you have to make a seriously diluted game on a lower budget.

DLC is a compromise.   People can buy the baseline game at a cheaper price, and people like myself can willingly pay more for the games for a tad bit more content.  

Its not ethics, but business.   If a company could guarantee that as many people would shell out $85 bucks for a high-budgeted game as they would if it was $60 bucks they would drop the whole idea of DLC altogether.  

With DLC at least you can buy the base model and then "upgrade" to the full version if you like the game.   If you don't like it then at least you saved yourself the $10-$15 bucks.  

Again, its OPTIONAL content.   Yes, even if its REALLY good content that adds a lot to a story...  its still OPTIONAL. 

[AlanC9]

Redbelle wrote...
It's a sad truth, but as gamer's we are viewed as a captive audience that will pay out, even if they continue to use this strategy. The only thing I would suggest to them is take your Day1 DLC and shift it's release back a month to avoid giving offense to your customers............. but I've already highlighted the benefit to companies above in a business sense. So unless we get someone in charge of BW who values ethics over business. I'm afraid we can expect more companies to follow suit, if they haven't already.

Wait..... the ethical thing is to make everyone wait for the DLC because some of us feel bad if it's available on day 1?

[AlanC9]

Novate wrote...

With the Technology of allowing Downloads, they can publish an Empty disc, and we can download everything the day we paid that $60

I give it maybe five years before all PC games come via download only. Consoles I'm not so sure about; publishers may want to preserve the stores for marketing purposes.

[Weskerr]

It may not come with day one DLC because of the backlash that the Javic DLC caused for ME3's release. Even if day one DLC is not a bad thing if you think about it carefully, losing the trust and confidence of your customers is never good for business.

[Sidney]

Are people mad that restaurants have appetizers? Or deserts? Simply put DLC are things that add to and expand a base experience just as those 2 things do. You might not want desert...don't buy it.

As long as the game is complete - and by that I mean you could play it end to end and if you didn't know the DLC was there not miss it - then there is no issue. Shale, Javik, Warden's Keep and so on all meet the "you'd never miss it if you didn't know it was there" criteria.

[Redbelle]

AlanC9 wrote...

Redbelle wrote...
It's a sad truth, but as gamer's we are viewed as a captive audience that will pay out, even if they continue to use this strategy. The only thing I would suggest to them is take your Day1 DLC and shift it's release back a month to avoid giving offense to your customers............. but I've already highlighted the benefit to companies above in a business sense. So unless we get someone in charge of BW who values ethics over business. I'm afraid we can expect more companies to follow suit, if they haven't already.

Wait..... the ethical thing is to make everyone wait for the DLC because some of us feel bad if it's available on day 1?

Perhaps that is the ethical thing. Or maybe we could put it another way.

Perhaps what we could say, is that a business model that takes into account a more humanastic apprach could be adopted that delays potential Day1 releases on account that it reduces the likelihood that fan's will see the approach as a money grabbing exercise.

The reason behind all this is an important economic one. Money is a indicator of consumer confidence.

Consumers purchase products and invest in companies who satisfy their expectations. Companies who can't satisfy expectations don't recieve consumer investment.

If you think that's rubish ask yourself this. Why did people return their product's when ME3's ending was revealed to them? And will those people who returned their product be willing to part with their money when ME4 comes out?

Consumers are going to be more cagey when it comes to ME4 because confidence in BW has been shaken. Sometimes to understand Economics it's better to take a psychology course as money comes out of people and understanding why part with their money is more important than devising demand/supply curves.

[Allan Schumacher]

Why did people return their product's when ME3's ending was revealed to them?

Just curious, do you know how the rates of return for ME3 compare to ME2 (or even the rest of BioWare's games?

I actually don't.

[Redbelle]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Why did people return their product's when ME3's ending was revealed to them?

Just curious, do you know how the rates of return for ME3 compare to ME2 (or even the rest of BioWare's games?

I actually don't.

Good question.

Unfortunately all I can base that above statement on is testimony from other consumers taken at face value here on BSN. Those testimonies indicated the way ME3 railroaded them into ending's to be a contributing factor. There may be other factors as well so the reate of return cannot be solely attributed to the ending. However a quantitative analysis on the reason why returnee's did so would soon clear that up and based on testimonies, I expect the rail road ending to be the highest contributing factor. After ME2's sliding scale of success ending where failure is everyone dies and total victory meant everyone lives, I can see why some people woulod feel that way.

The Amazon 5 star rating service in the co.uk site and the .com site also give strong indicators to give indicators of disatisfaction.

We also have the fact that this issue of quality hasn't gone away since ME3 was released. Now that's not unusual by itself, some people will always continue to gripe. But there seems to be a large base of consumers who are sympathetic to this view 8 months on. Simply put I did not expect to see so many threads with consumers dissecting the way gameplay and narrative are brought together in ME3. Consumers have scrutinised the ending and because they have developed this eye of scrunity they have inadvertently cast it over the rest of the game when it was primarily the ending that was the game breaker moment.

[Maria Caliban]

Redbelle wrote...

Good question.

Unfortunately all I can base that above statement on is testimony from other consumers taken at face value here on BSN.

Statistically speaking, people who post on the BSN are a minority. Their behavior isn't indicative of BioWare customers as a whole.

I doubt ME 3 has a higher return rate than other ME games. If anything, it probably has a slightly lower return rate because of the MP component.

[Redbelle]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Good question.

Unfortunately all I can base that above statement on is testimony from other consumers taken at face value here on BSN.

Statistically speaking, people who post on the BSN are a minority. Their behavior isn't indicative of BioWare customers as a whole.

I doubt ME 3 has a higher return rate than other ME games. If anything, it probably has a slightly lower return rate because of the MP component.

Without the raw data to process I can't tell if there behaviour is or is not indicative.

On one hand, BSN may be relfective of opinion's that, if taken as a whole of the ME consumer base, are an outlier. On the other hand. BSN may well be reflective of the wider fanbase. It's just not possible to know till you can assess your data set's for quality of acquisition and start the statistical analysis process.

Therefore we, the great unwashed, must use the qualitative testimonies of who we assume to be like minded fans. Always with the thought in mind, that the points we derive from each other's posts may change as yet more people throw their two cents in.

Anyway. I don't want this to go into another ME3 ending thread. This is about DA3.

And the point I'm making is this. If Day1 DLC has the potential to make customers wary through giving them the impression that the company is pulling content from disc to addon seperately...... not saying that's happending. Just that if that is the customer's impression....... then the company is opeing the door for the customer to start asking the question ' Am I as confident in the company now, as I was before'?

Companies simply can't afford to lose confidence as customer confidence = money as customers invest in the product. Having a strong product like ME1 led to more customer's becoming confident as thus, increasing the uptake of ME2 which mean's more moeny for BW. ME2 likewise was a strong product which gave people no reason to think that ME3 would not do likewise.

It would be interestig to hear if this model is supoorted by the profit generated from the 3 games without their DLC packs....... although the figure for ME3 would have to be corrected due to the fact that Day1 DLC sold alongside it's main product artifically raised the profit's of it's release and thus, needs the profits of the Day1 DLC removed to provide a like for like comparison.

[Novate]

AlanC9 wrote...

Novate wrote...

With the Technology of allowing Downloads, they can publish an Empty disc, and we can download everything the day we paid that $60

I give it maybe five years before all PC games come via download only. Consoles I'm not so sure about; publishers may want to preserve the stores for marketing purposes.

I am not sure if you knew, but with the XBox 360 Marketplace, and PS3 Market place, you can actually purchase games on the console in the comfort of your own home without having to purchase a actual disc. With the HD build into your console, you actually download games directly. 
And this is already been going on for many years. 

So yes, you can already download all Games directly
Not sure if you also know, but Steam downloads everything, Hitman absolution, Dishonored...etc are all on steam on the day of release. 

[Novate]

Redbelle wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Redbelle wrote...

Good question.

Unfortunately all I can base that above statement on is testimony from other consumers taken at face value here on BSN.

Statistically speaking, people who post on the BSN are a minority. Their behavior isn't indicative of BioWare customers as a whole.

I doubt ME 3 has a higher return rate than other ME games. If anything, it probably has a slightly lower return rate because of the MP component.

Without the raw data to process I can't tell if there behaviour is or is not indicative.

On one hand, BSN may be relfective of opinion's that, if taken as a whole of the ME consumer base, are an outlier. On the other hand. BSN may well be reflective of the wider fanbase. It's just not possible to know till you can assess your data set's for quality of acquisition and start the statistical analysis process.

Therefore we, the great unwashed, must use the qualitative testimonies of who we assume to be like minded fans. Always with the thought in mind, that the points we derive from each other's posts may change as yet more people throw their two cents in.

Anyway. I don't want this to go into another ME3 ending thread. This is about DA3.

And the point I'm making is this. If Day1 DLC has the potential to make customers wary through giving them the impression that the company is pulling content from disc to addon seperately...... not saying that's happending. Just that if that is the customer's impression....... then the company is opeing the door for the customer to start asking the question ' Am I as confident in the company now, as I was before'?

Companies simply can't afford to lose confidence as customer confidence = money as customers invest in the product. Having a strong product like ME1 led to more customer's becoming confident as thus, increasing the uptake of ME2 which mean's more moeny for BW. ME2 likewise was a strong product which gave people no reason to think that ME3 would not do likewise.

It would be interestig to hear if this model is supoorted by the profit generated from the 3 games without their DLC packs....... although the figure for ME3 would have to be corrected due to the fact that Day1 DLC sold alongside it's main product artifically raised the profit's of it's release and thus, needs the profits of the Day1 DLC removed to provide a like for like comparison.

Just read through all the posts on all three pages, you will see that even thought many hates Day 1 DLC, there are that many more that has already accepted it. 
Did we lose confidence in Bioware , sure, but the executives already can tell that even when their popularity is Zero, they will still make money off Gamers. 
Because we just won't ever learn our mistakes. Even if Bioware gives us an 10 minute game and 20 DLC each at 20 dollars, there will still be people that pay it, sure we will give them ****, but there will be just as many that stands in defense for their practices. 

So there is really nothing we can do except not buying DA3 when it releases, but really how many would do that?

[Fast Jimmy]

Redbelle wrote...

We also have the fact that this issue of quality hasn't gone away since ME3 was released. Now that's not unusual by itself, some people will always continue to gripe. But there seems to be a large base of consumers who are sympathetic to this view 8 months on. Simply put I did not expect to see so many threads with consumers dissecting the way gameplay and narrative are brought together in ME3. Consumers have scrutinised the ending and because they have developed this eye of scrunity they have inadvertently cast it over the rest of the game when it was primarily the ending that was the game breaker moment.

I'd like to point out and address this item.

This is exactly the case and is a pretty well-known phenomenon in psychology called the "Value-Account Model of Attitude Formation." 

Basically, attitudes are formed based on how much value the judge perceives they are receiving. One of the most crucial aspects of this, however, is that the judge is disproportionally slanted to base their entire viewpoint on the most recent (and, hence, last) aspect of the value they are judging. 

What does this mean for game design, and ME3 in particular?

It means that endings are important. Incredibly important. Perhaps the most important thing in a game, period. If your average consumer is going to weigh the value of the product based on primarily their most recent and final experience with it, then why would the ending be the portion of the game that is skimped out on? Yet, this is exactly what we see with game design more often than not. A moving target of a plot, last minute resources not materializing and design schedules crunching means the last part of the game the player plays is often the last part of the game that the designer makes... and the most likely to see hits to planned content.

Which, it turns out, is the exact OPPOSITE of how psychology will tell you to make a game. The ending experience should be a major focal point (if not THE main focal point) of a game developer's efforts. Because once people complete the game on a low note, they will have a bad opinion on the product. If, then, people are called on that fact (that the endings left them unsatisfied), they will get defensive and instead dissect nearly every single portion of the game to validate their opinion.

These might all be very valid complaints/analyses, but they are really simply justifications of an ending that does nothing for the player psychologically. Good, bad or indifferent - that doesn't matter. Closure and psycological catharsis is the primary point of endings. The original ME3 ending had ZERO closure or catharsis. The EC had more, but even then, it did not give any resolution other than vague slideshow pictures with no facts about how things in the galaxy played out. Again, that doesn't make it good/bad or indifferent - it just makes it psychologically unfulfilling.

Let's compare that, instead, to DA:O. The ending to DA:O, you were given a Big Bad you were pointed at the entire game. You were progressively shown how, through your efforts in game, you could eventually find and beat this Big Bad. You take this Big Bad down, using the alliances/resources of your efforts, in different gameplay mechanics. You were given a choice as to how the outcome of killing said Big Bad would affect your character (DR or not). You were then treated to a "Win" cinematic. And then a throne room scene, where you could converse with a number of NPCs as well as most of your companions about their plans and their desires now that the day was saved. You were then, at your own direction, allowed to start a slide show of text showing how your actions rippled out through the world. These inexpensive slides gave the player a huge sense of accomplishment and choice, as you can see how the actions taken may have had outcomes outside what they expected.

Couple that with the fact that upon seeing these endings AND having the option to start a new Origin with an entirely different opening sequence (comparable to the amount of gameplay seen in some DLCs) and you've got a recipe for a player to IMMEDIATELY start your game over again, with nothing but the best psychological reasons to say they loved it.

Despite players not liking the slow combat, or the rough artwork, or the generic fantasy "gather forces, fight evil" plot, or any number of complaints that people lob at DA:O. The endings themselves gave closure and a feeling of both accomplishment and choice that gave the player an insanely high level of psychological satisfaction. I though the DA:O ending was good, on its own merits. But regardless, no one can deny the psychological precision that was applied with making the endings, by their very format and placement, extremely rewarding to the human psyche.

I am not sure what Bioware has begun doing in their games recently, but their lack of attention to good endings is a little appaling. Not because of narrative consistency or players acting like consumers... those are all ancillary arguments. It seems like Bioware has forgotten what about gamer (and, in fact, human) psychology made their previous succeess... well, successful. 

I would like to hope they don't take queues from their previous games just because they worked, but rather tried to do a better job of UNDERSTANDING WHY THEY WORKED. You can change all the day long. But as long as you continue to replace the old features with new features that offer the same or better level of psychological satisfaction, then you can't go wrong. And Bioware, in this department, has been going wrong their last few releases.

[devSin]

Absolutely.

If you look at the attach rate for From Ashes, it's not even a question.

There will be first-day DLC.

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Not to kill this thread any further with my TL;DRs, but this argument can apply (a little more On Topicly) to Day One DLC. Bioware has repeatedly tried to explain this argument over and over again... but it's not an argument. Or, I should say, it is not a debate.

A debate is where people exchange facts and opinions and can, eventually, come to a logical consensus. But when the argument is emotionally charged, you can't debate. Because people will still FEEL a certain way about their experience. It's not a cerebral issue, it's a psychological one. People will FEEL slighted with D1DLC (even if they aren't), they will FEEL the content was cut (despite it not actually being the case) and they will FEEL the developers who do this are money grubbing into them wallets for their hard earned cash.

You can't give facts to a feeling. You can't appeal to emotions with logic. Statements saying it is an 'education' issue are, I'm sorry to say, wrong. Consumers cannot be instructed to suppress their emotions. People can, using operant conditioning, sure... but unless Bioware wants to start investing in subliminal ad campaigns here on the BSN, then they have to look at other options to package D1DLC so it results in less automatically negative reactions from fans. So far, this has ranged from making the DLCs worthless (weapon packs/skins) to making it seem extremely valuable (From Ashes), neither of which works. It's not a matter of value, it is a matter of presentation. And there is no way to sell a 'vanilla' story right next to a more expensive 'premium' story on the very first day and avoid people having a negative reaction. It may diminish over time if every developer starts doing it, but that will only stain the entire industry and jade the fans (like people continue to complain about paying $10 for a Coke and popcorn at the movie theaters). Having a cynical consumer base hasn't done wonders for the movie industry; I can't imagine it being much better with games.

[upsettingshorts]

Not that I disagree with your summary. But does that perception really matter if the people - not as numerous as they think they are - who feel slighted and robbed are simply very loud, and publishers can look at their financials and laugh at how much money DLC is making them, and thus continue to include DLC.

[Redbelle]

@Fast Jimmy.

I wish I'd paid more attention in my psych class at school. Cause this is exactly what I've been trying to express to the, 'Power That Be', who front line manage us on the forums to take with them back to the developers.

Also, it a joy to find someone who can articulate that sentiment so clearly.

[Redbelle]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Not that I disagree with your summary. But does that perception really matter if the people - not as numerous as they think they are - who feel slighted and robbed are simply very loud, and publishers can look at their financials and laugh at how much money DLC is making them, and thus continue to include DLC.

My head's nodding but my heart's rebelling.

And if you think gamers will just continue to buy products regardless....

I bought ME1 in a bargin bin and was so impressed that I went onto ME2 and 3.

I also bought DA:O..... but I didn't buy DA2. The reason? I saw Hawke.

At this point I should state that I've played the turn to page XXX adventure books, Played the D20 D&D system  and generally had a failrly varied experience in the world of swords and sorcery / story based adventuring. In this world I get to choose my character and make him into my hero.

When I saw Hawke my first thoguht was..... That's a Shepard clone in armour. Then I realised that my protaginist would talk and generally play more like ME..... And I didn't like that idea because ME and DA are two seperate  IP's. They should have seperate identities. Not borrow off of each other because something worked.

DA pays homage to D20 and adventure books. It has that heritage. It should therefore make it's own mark and improve on the systems of the original DA. Not borrow concepts out of another IP.

I want a dialogue tree because it's old school. I wouldn't want one in ME, but in DA it's fitting as it's what alot of dungeon and dragon gamers are used too.