72 réponses à ce sujet

[Wolvens5k]

Obtusifolius wrote...

Wolvens5k wrote...


Yeah, just like going with your wife to a movie that lasts 90 minutes, but costs $25 LOL...

If $15 is such a stretch for you maybe it's time to get a job, or maybe stop drinking that $5 cup of coffee in the morning.

Puh. I hate comments like this. It isn't a matter of being able to afford it, surely you can see that if you possess normal powers of understanding.

The price versus content is well worth it for me,  If it's not for you then thats ok to.  Don't buy it.

[jellmoo32]

To the OP: When you purchase a game second hand, whether from an individual, an online distributor or a brick and mortar store, the people that made that game do not see any of that money. To put it bluntly, they don't have any reason to cater to you.



To Others: The value of a dollar is completely subjective. The value you place on DLC equally so. Feel free not to purchase any of the DLC Bioware provides, that is completely your decision. Feel free to complain about the pricing as well (however do be mindful of the limits that Bioware outs in place on their forums). I personally find the value vs the dollar amount to be excellent, but that's just my opinion. Do I wish the quests were longer and/or more involved? Of course! Do I think that Bioware ripped me off? Not in the least.



Speak with your money. Pay for what you feel is a good purchase, do not purchase what you do not feel is a fair deal. All I would ask is that you keep your dissatisfaction civil.

[kalniel]

Smoof Smoofy wrote...

The problem is that the world is filled with a lot of younger gamers, who don't have any real responsibilities then to have their parents pay for all their stuff, including games.  Half of the people on this forum fit this exact description

I don't agree - everyone who posts on this forum is a full adult aged 18 or over, and should be old enough to make sensible decisions about purchasing games. A game is only a luxury product after all, so if you can't afford it (or even just the DLC) it's not going to have any affect on your quality of life.

[Dr Bawbag]

Wolvens5k wrote...

F-C wrote...

no you arnt missing anything. the DLC is ridiculously overpriced. they are targetting the people who have more money than sense and will buy anything for any price just because they want it.

sadly it seems we live in the age of stupidity so they are going to be quite successful targetting that section of the audience. all you can do is just not buy it and move on to another game.

Yeah, just like going with your wife to a movie that lasts 90 minutes, but costs $25 LOL...

If $15 is such a stretch for you maybe it's time to get a job, or maybe stop drinking that $5 cup of coffee in the morning.

IMO, you are missing alot if you don't have the $5-$15 DLC's.  It adds additional stories, voices and different gameplay as well as opening up new areas.  I think DLC's are awesome, and will continue to support it.  The amount of man hours is huge for creating games, DLC's and expansions  and I believe they should be profitable so that they can continue to make more great games.

Your 'going to the pictures with your wife' analogy is rubbish. Two completely different things.  People go to the cinema for the same reason others go out to bars/pubs/clubs, sporting events, musicevents, restaurants etc etc etc.  It's called being social and like most social gatherings/outings it costs money. 

Even if i were to entertain your analogy, i think it's safe to say that watching a film at the cinema is a tad different from watching the same film in your house.  Why go to a music concert when you can buy the same songs on a CD?  Why eat out when you can buy food and prepare it yourself for a lot less money?

Modifié par Dr Bawbag, 10 janvier 2010 - 09:42 .

[fanman72]

There's a lot more content then just the quest in that village. It doesn't take into account the added value for having a fully integrated companion, not to mention a quest in the deep roads that later comes up

[Sidney]

Some people get it, a lot of folks don't. There are a lot of other "values" in the WK and SP that are not merely the time to complete a quest and most folks have pegged those already.



No one on the "it is a rip off side" have been able to give a price point they would like - mostly because any price point would be too much for some of the "I'll pirate it" types. A song on RB2 is what, $2.00 and that is roughly 5 minutes of fun? The DLC for ACII is targeted to be about 1 hour long as well.



Plenty of full games take 15 hours (Bioshock, Arkham Asylum, AC II, Dead Space) to play @ $60 or $4 per hour so $5/hour of straight gameplay, let alone any other perks, isn't an out of whack model.

[aries1001]

It might well ve that the Stone Prisoner (shale) and the quest for shale only takes about 1-½ hour. You have to remember, though, that Shale is a companion which can be used all the way through the game, all 60-80 or even 100+ hours, depending on your individual playstyle.

[Elessara]

Actually I think the movie comparison can be a pretty good one. I view it as cost vs. time vs. enjoyment. Oh btw not everyone goes to a movie as a social event. I don't socialize while the movie is playing, that tends to make other people in the theatre a bit upset.



At any rate, say I go to the movies alone. The price is roughly the same for the Stone Prisoner DLC depending on where you get your ticket or if you get movie food. The sheer time it takes to do the quests is probably about the same time it takes to watch the movie. I get a lot more reuse out of the DLC though as I tend to play multiple characters. I don't have to buy the DLC again to play it again as I would if I wanted to see the movie again. I would also have to say that I'd enjoy playing the game more (DLC included) than going to the movies. But that's just me.



Now if a movie is in the theatres then it's probably not on DVD. But let's say it's not a new movie and you could buy and watch the DVD in your own home. The price of the DVD is roughly the same as the DLC. You get the same reusability out of it. As for enjoyment, well it all depends on how much I like the movie doesn't it? And that's pretty subjective.

[DarthRic]

Dr Bawbag wrote...

I fully appreciate that The Stone Prisoner initially comes free with every new DA game, but why has it been obscenely priced for those people that decide to buy the game second hand?  Or maybe it's as obvious as heavily penalising those people that decide to buy the game 2nd hand, i dunno.

If purchased 2nd hand, anyone who decides to fork out the 1200 pts required for such a small DLC needs their head eximaned.  Hell, it's not even worth 800pts!

The only thing I have to say is if 10 million people are willing to pay £8.99 a month for world of warcraft then you can be sure there will be people that will pay a one time fee for some extra content for a game

[Dr Bawbag]

Elessara wrote...

Actually I think the movie comparison can be a pretty good one. I view it as cost vs. time vs. enjoyment. Oh btw not everyone goes to a movie as a social event. I don't socialize while the movie is playing, that tends to make other people in the theatre a bit upset.

At any rate, say I go to the movies alone. The price is roughly the same for the Stone Prisoner DLC depending on where you get your ticket or if you get movie food. The sheer time it takes to do the quests is probably about the same time it takes to watch the movie. I get a lot more reuse out of the DLC though as I tend to play multiple characters. I don't have to buy the DLC again to play it again as I would if I wanted to see the movie again. I would also have to say that I'd enjoy playing the game more (DLC included) than going to the movies. But that's just me.

Now if a movie is in the theatres then it's probably not on DVD. But let's say it's not a new movie and you could buy and watch the DVD in your own home. The price of the DVD is roughly the same as the DLC. You get the same reusability out of it. As for enjoyment, well it all depends on how much I like the movie doesn't it? And that's pretty subjective.

Yeah, it is a rubbish.  Going to the movies, going to a gig or eating out is a form of social activity and involves experiancing something different to what you'd experiance if you stayed in your house.  Whether you go on your own or with someone else is neither here nor there - you'd be experiancing an ambiance you couldn't possibly recreate in your own house, on your own and to a lesser extent, you'd still have to interact with other people.  Unless of course you grunt, then well... fair play to you. Going by your logic, going to watch a live gig should give you the same experiance had you simply listened to the music sitting in your room.

Similar to why car - game analogies make no sense.  it's like trying to compare an apple to a lamp post.

Modifié par Dr Bawbag, 10 janvier 2010 - 03:55 .

[hero 2]

I assume (since there are no new updates) that shale is still bugged, too? ... anyway, if it makes you feel any better, here is the Fix and DLC page (I recommend you download all of those DLC thingies, even though some won't work).

http://social.biowar...e=utf-8&oe=utf-

Modifié par hero 2, 11 janvier 2010 - 08:19 .

[Elessara]

*grunt*



But you ignore the whole time vs. cost vs. enjoyment. If I look at a game (or DLC) and feel that my possible enjoyment and usage/time is not worth the price they are asking then I don't buy it and I do something else.



Personally I find going to the movies alone has very minimal social interaction.



Me: I'd like to buy a ticket to see Harry Potter #512 at 6:30pm

Clerk: That will be $X

Me: *hands over the money*

Clerk: Here's your ticket. Enjoy the show.

Me: Thank you!



Amazingly enough, I usually even smile at the ticket clerk.



Is seeing that there are other people in the theatre enough to be considered interaction? Maybe to you. I don't consider that to be a significant amount of social interaction or at least not enough to define going to the movies (yes by myself) to be a social event.



Besides, I never said the experiences were the same. The key term here is "analogy". Which discusses similarities in features of two different things. Games are a form entertainment that cost money. People enjoy them. Movies are a form of entertainment that cost money. People enjoy them. Concerts are a form of entertainment that cost money. People enjoy them. Personally I see no similarities between a game and a car but then I don't view cars as a form of entertainment. Maybe some people do and for them the analogy would be apt.

[JosephShrike]

I seem to remember a very similar discussion when game prices shifted from my 20 dollar copy of The Rocketeer on NES (I was six so go to hell) to the current $60 dollar range we're in now. Whether or not you think DLC is priced fairly or not, the really fact of it comes down to production costs and profit. It costs more money to do just about everything these days, so what might have been a $5 dollar DLC three years ago could easily become a $7 dollar DLC today. DLC prices are going to continue to go up, just like game prices, so we'd best get used to it, especially since we're moving towards that horrific 'digital age' everyone seems to be excited about.

Also, and here's a noval concept, if you don't like something, don't pay for it. This is America. You have that option. And if you don't live in America, I'm assuming you do to since you're able to access web pages that don't belong to a Ministry. DLC prices won't change. What they charge is what they have to charge to cover costs and make profit, which they're entitled to. But that's not really the point because the DLC you dislike comes free in new version of the game.

As for the OP, I took time out of my busy work day (that was sarcasm) to read all the posts in this thread, and since I had been paying attention to the RtO thread before it was closed, my eyes were not fully healed and started to bleed again. After that stopped though, I came to the conclusion that you still didn't seem to quite grasp the main point the SP DLC is more expensive then others. Not that I think you're not intelligent, because thats to the contrary, but I think you just want to argue, which is perfectly fine because, let's face it, if I didn't feel the same way I wouldn't be posting.

Point is, developers don't see anything for used games, except through DLC. To be perfectly honest with you, I think places like GameStop are almost solely to blame for game price costs, and I'm actually pretty happy people who buy used copies have to shell out extra cash to get the same stuff I paid full price for. You might not think the pricing is right, but if you want to talk about whats fair, then that's pretty damn fair if you ask me.

Please. Support your local Bioware. Some employees, like Chris Priestly, never get enough to eat. Your simple donation of $60 will ensure Chris can continue to live the life we all deserve. Buy now and you'll get a copy of Dragon 'Game of the F&*king Year' Age, as well as a completely free copy of the Stone Prisoner. Thank you.

Modifié par JosephShrike, 10 janvier 2010 - 05:45 .

[Dr Bawbag]

@ Elessara

No, for an analogy to sound plausible, the contending examples should still be at least relevant to one another. For example, an analogy that would make sense would be a filter and your kidneys as both do exactly the same job. A couple going to the cinema (which btw was what i was responding too) and the cost of DLC don't exactly tie in with one another. So aye, what the hell does the price of DLC have to do with the admittance fee at your local cinema? It's akin to people saying a broken car is similar to a poorly coded game. You know... Well, if i bought a new car that didn't function...

It's hilarious what people try to pass off as analogies nowadays. It's lazy and more often than not makes no sense.

Modifié par Dr Bawbag, 10 janvier 2010 - 06:10 .

[Elessara]

But to me a comparison between a movie and a game IS relevant. They are both forms of entertainment. Yes? Unless you don't view a game in the same way or a movie in the same way (i.e. forms of entertainment) then no the analogy won't make sense to you. Let's just agree to disagree. Obviously we're not going to change each others mind.

[Dr Bawbag]

JosephShrike wrote...

I seem to remember a very similar discussion when game prices shifted from my 20 dollar copy of The Rocketeer on NES (I was six so go to hell) to the current $60 dollar range we're in now. Whether or not you think DLC is priced fairly or not, the really fact of it comes down to production costs and profit. It costs more money to do just about everything these days, so what might have been a $5 dollar DLC three years ago could easily become a $7 dollar DLC today. DLC prices are going to continue to go up, just like game prices, so we'd best get used to it, especially since we're moving towards that horrific 'digital age' everyone seems to be excited about.

Also, and here's a noval concept, if you don't like something, don't pay for it. This is America. You have that option. And if you don't live in America, I'm assuming you do to since you're able to access web pages that don't belong to a Ministry. DLC prices won't change. What they charge is what they have to charge to cover costs and make profit, which they're entitled to. But that's not really the point because the DLC you dislike comes free in new version of the game.

As for the OP, I took time out of my busy work day (that was sarcasm) to read all the posts in this thread, and since I had been paying attention to the RtO thread before it was closed, my eyes were not fully healed and started to bleed again. After that stopped though, I came to the conclusion that you still didn't seem to quite grasp the main point the SP DLC is more expensive then others. Not that I think you're not intelligent, because thats to the contrary, but I think you just want to argue, which is perfectly fine because, let's face it, if I didn't feel the same way I wouldn't be posting.

Point is, developers don't see anything for used games, except through DLC. To be perfectly honest with you, I think places like GameStop are almost solely to blame for game price costs, and I'm actually pretty happy people who buy used copies have to shell out extra cash to get the same stuff I paid full price for. You might not think the pricing is right, but if you want to talk about whats fair, then that's pretty damn fair if you ask me.

Please. Support your local Bioware. Some employees, like Chris Priestly, never get enough to eat. Your simple donation of $60 will ensure Chris can continue to live the life we all deserve. Buy now and you'll get a copy of Dragon 'Game of the F&*king Year' Age, as well as a completely free copy of the Stone Prisoner. Thank you.

Don't agree with most of  that.

Lots of devs have actually began to drop their DLC prices.  The fact most devs are now releasing DLC under the 600 pt bracket says something is changing and changing for the good.  Lionhead being one of them.  Of course at the other end of the spectrum you have the likes of capcom that think nothing of releasing costume changes (Street Fighter), extra play modes (playmodes that used to be a given) etc, which to be fair, they've come under some heavy criticism for.  As have beth for charging their customers more if they want the privilege of having an open ended game, which again, was a given with Beth titles.



Oh lets not forget Dead space - weapons and armour anyone?

Your " if you don't like it, don't buy it" coment is a little niave too.  The advertisment industry isn't a multi billion dollar industry for no reason. Whilst most adults with common sense will agree with your idealogy,  the fact is there's millions of kids that are exposed to this advertisment too. Kids that really aren't in a position to rationalise the "if you don't like it, don't buy it" mentality you mentioned.

Modifié par Dr Bawbag, 10 janvier 2010 - 06:38 .

[Dr Bawbag]

Elessara wrote...

But to me a comparison between a movie and a game IS relevant. They are both forms of entertainment. Yes? Unless you don't view a game in the same way or a movie in the same way (i.e. forms of entertainment) then no the analogy won't make sense to you. Let's just agree to disagree. Obviously we're not going to change each others mind.

No problem

[JosephShrike]

I'll conceed that if I had to pay 800 points for weapons and armor, I'd probably be pissed off too. Most fully integrated DLC is about 800 points (Fallout expansions for example) and I'm also happy to agree that the Fable 2 additions were mostly worth 600 points. That said, Stone Prisoner does something that neither of those do, meaning that it comes free with a new version of the game. Maybe Warden's Keep is overpriced like people say, and maybe RtO is the same, but you're arguing that you don't want to pay more then everyone else. It's not that the DLC is overpriced, because when you pay for a new version of the game, it's part of the package. It's that you feel you should be able to pay less for something and be entitled over all others to continuing paying less.

I hate DLC, because I think it makes people lazy, but I grew up when expansions were the only thing that happened. At the same time, though, that's what we're moving to. Eventually, the vast majority of content, maybe even most full games, will be downloaded. So I'm not really trying to justify them, because even though I can on some level, it makes me feel like I need a shower.

Bottom line is that if you want to complain about DLC pricing as a whole, then there are plenty of threads and plenty of people here willing to agree with you. However, you started this over Stone Prisoner, and with that in mind, your comments are veiled in either a haze of selfishness (rightfully so perhaps) or some weird notion of being the voice for all the used game buyers out there. If you don't want to pay the 'outrageous' price for Stone Prisoner, buy the full game. Otherwise, recognize, at the very least, that you want to pay less over all then people who actually support the developement of this IP. Really, that's all I want, because its been something you've ignored from numerous posts. I can live with you not liking the price, and I honestly hope that discord will prevent DLC prices from being overinflated in the future as publishers make the cash cow dance for them. My point is, really, that if you buy the game used, then the price you pay for new content should be similar to what people who buy the new copy pay. People who buy the game used don't support the developers (which I do purely for the selfish reason of wanting more Dragon Age) and yet still expect to pay the same amount as everyone else for new content. That's what is really obscene.

Edit: I'd also like to point out that none of the example either of us cited has nearly the level of fully voiced dialogue, or the full intergration into the game in general. I mean, you could play all the Oblivion/Fable/Fallout expansions, and nothing within the core game would really change. Unlike in Dragon Age when it actually impacts how a certain plot NPC in the main game reacts. I think Fable 2 came closest, but only because I needed luxury end tables for my houses.

Modifié par JosephShrike, 10 janvier 2010 - 06:57 .

[Sidney]

Elessara wrote...

But to me a comparison between a movie and a game IS relevant. They are both forms of entertainment. Yes? Unless you don't view a game in the same way or a movie in the same way (i.e. forms of entertainment) then no the analogy won't make sense to you. Let's just agree to disagree. Obviously we're not going to change each others mind.

There is no other way to see it. This is simple opportunity cost, I have $X for entertainment. I can spend it on DLC, or on a movie or on dinner out or on concert tickets. The question becomes how much value do i get for X time/quality of entertainment with each choice. Sometimes for a concert I'm not interested in bang for the buck because it is a unique experience but one reason I game is that in addition to fun view it as one of my highest bang for the buck forms of entertainment.