945 réponses à ce sujet

[traversc]

 I don't understand what you are trying to prove. You have constantly been bringing up monetary value, all of a sudden it's of no importance? Essentially you are saying even if RtO is free it would be a bad value based on it's length and content within compared to DA:O because the money is not an important aspect is determining the value of a product. I'm trying to wrap my head around it but it's just complete stupidity and makes zero sense.

I'm not saying money is not important.  Im saying money is not important to this discussion. 

I said that it is not required to bring up money, not that I can't.  I do because its easy to talk about.  If you want, substitute "dimensionless relative units of utility" everywhere I mention dollars.  Even still, if you want to discuss money, I can say that $10 has twice the utility of $5.  At low values, money has essentially linear utility and is a safe assumption.  This is extremely tangential, and its not something I want to get into. 

[TheMadCat]

Again, looking at the argument you're making here essentially you're saying even if RtO was free you wouldn't download and would call it a "bad value" because of it's "comparative value" against DA:O. I don't see how you can sit there and make that argument. The reality is it has everything to do with money, the very definition of value is derived from worth and monetary equivalence.

[MerinTB]

I think all of our mistakes is that since traversc has moved from name-calling at the start to just shifting his argument and taking our responses out of context we think he is trying to be rational and actually have an honest discussion with us.



It is about time to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt and accept that he is not debating in good faith.

[Excorant]

Yes they should be free... the DLC Bioware presents us are way too small. I will gladly pay for add-on, but it needs to be some 15 hrs more of gameplay, not like Wardens Keep you complete in a hour.

[TheMadCat]

Meh, I just lost $250 on the game so I need to take my anger out on someone. It's either him or the Title Update thread. *shudders*

I could take it out on Bioware for not releasing RtO on time. Damn you Bioware, that would have been $5 less to bet.

[shorn_]

MerinTB, Remember..never argue with an idiot as they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience...also remember that when in doubt eat a waffle

[addiction21]

MerinTB wrote...

I think all of our mistakes is that since traversc has moved from name-calling at the start to just shifting his argument and taking our responses out of context we think he is trying to be rational and actually have an honest discussion with us.

It is about time to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt and accept that he is not debating in good faith.

Welcome to yesterday

[Jumbomarshmalow]

I relize this question is off topic, but what is with everyone's obbsesion's with waffle's? I mean there good, but I personally would much rather have pancakes or a muffin for breakfast...

[MerinTB]

addiction21 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

I think all of our mistakes is that since traversc has moved from name-calling at the start to just shifting his argument and taking our responses out of context we think he is trying to be rational and actually have an honest discussion with us.

It is about time to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt and accept that he is not debating in good faith.

Welcome to yesterday

I'm also extremely willing (perhaps overly so) to try and see the best in people.

It's often a disappointing exercise, but you can't say I don't try!

[addiction21]

Jumbomarshmalow wrote...

I relize this question is off topic, but what is with everyone's obbsesion's with waffle's? I mean there good, but I personally would much rather have pancakes or a muffin for breakfast...

Pancakes will give you the HIV. Just saying. Muffins are okay.

MerinTB wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

I think all of our mistakes is that since traversc has moved from name-calling at the start to just shifting his argument and taking our responses out of context we think he is trying to be rational and actually have an honest discussion with us.

It is about time to stop giving him the benefit of the doubt and accept that he is not debating in good faith.

Welcome to yesterday

I'm also extremely willing (perhaps overly so) to try and see the best in people.

It's often a disappointing exercise, but you can't say I don't try!

I would never say such a thing. I really do try also but I think I come to my conclusions somewhat faster then you

[grieferbastard]

....

Didn't we beat this subject until it coughed up its lunch money already?

Look. What are you attempting to accomplish? Convince other people to accept your personal opinions on valuation in an effort to change BioWare/EAs business model? 

Let me help you save some time. It will not happen.

I would pay $10 for RtO without batting an eye. The margin on computer games is one of the tightest of any entertainment industry. Compare what a computer game makes to what a movie makes in terms of profitability. The expense of creating them has gone up dramatically but the price has not. The complexity and expense of supporting them has gone up but the cost has not. If the method of making games profitable enough to draw the quality/quantity of investment I want made in my chosen form of entertainment is charging for optional DLC instead of raising the base price of games I think that's a brilliant option. I support it completely. I am pleased to have additional opportunities to help make top-quality games like DA:O more profitable.

All the arguments that you attempt to make are based on your own opinions and valuations. I don't share them. Neither do most consumers. Value is established in a free market, which this is, by the amount consumers will pay. Being an educated consumer with an appreciation in how the vote of where I spend my dollars impacts the long-term viability of products and services I want to enjoy (or don't want to enjoy) I do so knowingly and willingly.

If DLC becomes drastically inferior or in any way seems to impact product quality I'll change where and how I spend my money. Currently I strongly support the idea of 2 years of scheduled DLC at a professional quality - in addition to the free content available from the modding community.

Paying people for the work they do is never unreasonable. Knowing that you are paying enough to generate profit for a business that produces something you want to thrive isn't being foolish, it's promoting desired growth.

Going to say it again because it is 100% truth and a the core of the discussion.

If you don't want it, don't buy it.

When enough people agree with you to impact the market, the market will change. Right now, most people do not agree with you.

DLC should be more expensive. I'd vote for that.

[ladydesire]

traversc wrote...

My belief is based on the fact that DLCs have objectively far less content at a higher price than DA:O.

The time needed to make that content doesn't cost anything?

This is based on the assumption that the quality of gameplay in RtO is similar to DA:O.

Of course, since RtO is an add in to DA: O you would expect this to be the case.

This is a quite common technique used in science all the time.  You find an objective measure, and you compare relative values to get an idea of some other value.  It doesn't matter if the measure isn't completely accurate when the difference is orders of magnitude apart, because the sampling variation will never be large enough to explain the difference.  You'd need huge amounts of "froth" value to claim that DLCs are worth their price.

Again, what are you using as your "objective measure"? Length of play for a particular game segment (which is what Warden's Keep and Return to Ostagar are) of the overall time played in a particular playthrough? You cannot accurately use that, since those DLC packs do not stand alone as a playable module for DA; they require you to be playing the main campaign for them to be of any significant importance.

[tmelange]

grieferbastard wrote...

I would pay $10 for RtO without batting an eye. The margin on computer games is one of the tightest of any entertainment industry. Compare what a computer game makes to what a movie makes in terms of profitability. The expense of creating them has gone up dramatically but the price has not. The complexity and expense of supporting them has gone up but the cost has not. If the method of making games profitable enough to draw the quality/quantity of investment I want made in my chosen form of entertainment is charging for optional DLC instead of raising the base price of games I think that's a brilliant option. I support it completely. I am pleased to have additional opportunities to help make top-quality games like DA:O more profitable.

...

DLC should be more expensive. I'd vote for that.

I agree with you 1000%. If I had to choose just one form of entertainment out of TV, movies, music and video games, I'd pick games. I want the industry to be robust and profitable; I want the very best talent working on titles; I want to see creative artists in the industry making star level incomes. I want to see the production timeline shortened. I want the option to PAY to see all this happen.

[Bryy_Miller]

Traversc,



You're basically saying you want the entire DVD box set when an individual episode airs.

[Veex]

WarlordThor wrote...

While the poster may not have been serious and was just trying to troll, I believe there is some merit to the argument.

The content sadly is extremely quick for the price. I can get a movie ticket, sometimes 2 and a half hours of entertainment, for $9. $7 at a discount. What we have here is dlc that last anywhere between 20 minutes and an hour, depending on how much dialogue you sit through. And the charge is at least $5. Therefore you really are not getting what you pay for.

Uh, if you don't watch half a movie you're getting ripped too there chief. If you're choosing not to play half the content and then claim it is only twenty hours worth that is on you, not the developers.

[traversc]

TheMadCat wrote...

Again, looking at the argument you're making here essentially you're saying even if RtO was free you wouldn't download and would call it a "bad value" because of it's "comparative value" against DA:O. I don't see how you can sit there and make that argument. The reality is it has everything to do with money, the very definition of value is derived from worth and monetary equivalence.

That is seriously misrepresenting my argument.  If RtO were free compared to DA:O would be much greater than DA:O.  In fact, it would (theoretically) be infinitely greater. 

"Overpriced" by definition means the price is greater than the value.  I stated in post #1, that RtO was overpriced compared to DA:O.   If RtO were free, then it would be impossible for it to be overpriced.  I have no idea why you think I would argue such. 

Edit: Let me try to explain what I mean one more time (for you ). 

Suppose you have product A that has a value of a certain value, which can't quite be quantified.  You also have a product B, whose relative value is 10x product A.  Product B is being sold at $10 and product A is being sold at $5.  Thus, relative to B, A is overpriced.  Is product A were free, then relative to B, A would be underpriced. 

I'd also like you to notice that I essentially stated such in post #1. 

Again, what are you using as your "objective measure"?

Again, I already stated what an objective measures and listed a few.  You can choose whichever objective (and reliable) measure you like, it does not change the picture. 

If you are saying that it cannot be measured at all, than I disagree.  If you step back a bit, it is clear that RtO contains much less than DA:O. 

Modifié par traversc, 17 janvier 2010 - 03:00 .

[Bryy_Miller]

traversc wrote...

You say I have been shifting my argument, but the truth is, you have simply misunderstood it from the beginning. 

The sign of someone who has no idea what they are talking about.

[traversc]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

traversc wrote...

You say I have been shifting my argument, but the truth is, you have simply misunderstood it from the beginning. 

The sign of someone who has no idea what they are talking about.

Apparently, flaming me has become chic, and the mods don't care to do anything about it. 

Whether you care to believe it or not, there are quite a few people who agree with me.  (A sizable portion, if not a majority even.)  The difference being, most people who feel they are overpriced are not willing to sit here and flame away with zero relevance.  It takes a certain zealous, fanatical mindset to do so.   

Modifié par traversc, 17 janvier 2010 - 02:41 .

[Nightv1d]

traversc wrote...

blah blah block of text...

My distorted views towards paying for DLC's have been altered thanks to you. However shall I show gratitude for this marvelous miracle you have placed upon me? Don't worry about the nay sayers, your everlasting words will causally develop inside the nay saying puppets ...I mean DA:O community's tiny brains.
You are truly the four hundered and tenth coming, and as such, we are no longer worthy of your input, your work here is done.

[ladydesire]

traversc wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

traversc wrote...

You say I have been shifting my argument, but the truth is, you have simply misunderstood it from the beginning. 

The sign of someone who has no idea what they are talking about.

Apparently, flaming me has become chic, and the mods don't care to do anything about it. 

Whether you care to believe it or not, there are quite a few people who agree with me.  (A sizable portion, if not a majority even.)  The difference being, most people who feel they are overpriced are not willing to sit here and flame away with zero relevance.  It takes a certain zealous, fanatical mindset to do so.   

Whether we believe you or not about the number of players that agree with you isn't relevant, since there have been enough people that bought Warden's Keep and are willing to continue to buy DLC for this game that Bioware will continue to make it. Your claim that DLC is overpriced compared to the game itself may or may not be accurate, since the cost of DLC can change depending on multple factors; the complaints about the cost of WK resulted in the price reduction for RtO. The only way anyone is going to get free content is if they own the PC version of the game and chose to download community created content, which may or may not match the quality of the Bioware created DLC, even though you seem to believe that quality is measured in length of play and nothing else.

[jfrenchy]

well DLC shouldnt be free, its pro mods and stuff. but! xbox360 would be a lot more fun if we could install user mods:(

[traversc]

ladydesire wrote...
Whether we believe you or not about the number of players that agree with you isn't relevant, since there have been enough people that bought Warden's Keep and are willing to continue to buy DLC for this game that Bioware will continue to make it.

You're absolutely right.  It isn't relevant.  But a lot of people here seem to have mob rule mindset and bring torches and pitchforks to someone else when they have a popular opinion. 

Your claim that DLC is overpriced compared to the game itself may or may not be accurate, since the cost of DLC can change depending on multple factors; the complaints about the cost of WK resulted in the price reduction for RtO. The only way anyone is going to get free content is if they own the PC version of the game and chose to download community created content, which may or may not match the quality of the Bioware created DLC, even though you seem to believe that quality is measured in length of play and nothing else.

I am not asking for free content.  I am asking for content on the same pay scale as DA:O. 
I also do not believe "quality" is measured in length of play alone.  Length of play is a variable used to sample/predict/estimate the amount of content. 

[addiction21]

traversc wrote...

You're absolutely right.  It isn't relevant.  But a lot of people here seem to have mob rule mindset and bring torches and pitchforks to someone else when they have a popular opinion. 

You have not been paying attention have you? It is not about your opnion but the logical fallicies and bs arguements that you continue to change on the fly.
I enjoy very much of playing devils advocate and nothing will make you sharper then taking up the mantle of the side you yourself do not agree with but I will not do any such thing when it is nothing but assumptions, heresay, fallacies, moving the goal posts etc etc etc... No matter how eloquently it is put.
So put your ad homs away and actualy stick to your arguements.

[danien.grey]

traversc wrote...
You're absolutely right.  It isn't relevant.  But a lot of people here seem to have mob rule mindset and bring torches and pitchforks to someone else when they have a popular opinion. 

Let's not toss out red herrings to sent the discussion out on a tangent.  If someone is resorting to name-calling or ad hominem just ignore them don't join them.

traversc wrote...
I am not asking for free content.  I am asking for content on the same pay scale as DA:O. 
I also do not believe "quality" is measured in length of play alone.  Length of play is a variable used to sample/predict/estimate the amount of content. 

I'm having trouble understanding what "pay scale" you are referring to?  Could you please elaborate?
If the "quality" of a product is based on one's subjective opinion of the value of the received service, why are we still arguing about the "quality" of Bioware's DLC?

[ladydesire]

traversc wrote...


I am not asking for free content.  I am asking for content on the same pay scale as DA:O.

Ok, say Bioware did try releasing DLC "on the same pay scale". Since there is less apparent effort put into DLC compared to the base game, doesn't it seem logical that such content would end up being free, or at such low cost that posting it on PSN and XBL wouldn't be profitable?

I also do not believe "quality" is measured in length of play alone.

This is good to know.

Length of play is a variable used to sample/predict/estimate the amount of content. 

It doesn't take into account the amount of work that goes into everything in the DLC; the environments and such are content too, even if you don't think of them as such.