945 réponses à ce sujet

[Parker Kincaid]

The way critics are going on about the cost of the DA:O DLC one would think that BioWare was charging $100 per DLC installment rather than a mere $5 or $7. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, of course, but I'm really stunned at all this over such a small amount of money. I fully expect a person who doesn't like the price to immediately mention that the price will be like mosquito bites where the cost of each DLC adds up to a greater sum but, again, I'm still stunned.

[Magic Zarim]

but I'm really stunned at all this over such a small amount of money

It is not the ABSOLUTE amount of money, it's the RELATIVE amount of money.

If I were to tell you that 500 picoseconds signal delay would make or break your latest graphicscard design then would you be like "5/10,000,000" of a second, now WHO is going to notice that time!?

Modifié par Magic Zarim, 18 janvier 2010 - 05:35 .

[Parker Kincaid]

Magic Zarim wrote...

but I'm really stunned at all this over such a small amount of money

It is not the ABSOLUTE amount of money, it's the RELATIVE amount of money.

If I were to tell you that 500 picoseconds signal delay would make or break your latest graphicscard design then would you be like "5/10,000,000" of a second, now WHO is going to notice that time!?

That delay with the graphics card... is it in inherent design flaw with the card design or is it a problem that merely exists with one specific game due to how the game was designed? One would be possibly worthy of a class action lawsuit against the hardware manufacturer while the other may merely be an issue with a specific game that may be fixable by the developer even if, in the end, the fault wasn't necessarily their fault. One may be an actual previously unknown problem while the BioWare release of DLC was known ahead of time as was the fact that it would be charged for as well as my knowing the price being in the $5 to $7 area before there was even DLC to purchase. I can't even provide a source for that info because at the time I didn't figure I'd ever have to use it as a source for a discussion on DLC. All I can say is that it was a game/tech site.

As for as it being the relative amount of money. Yeah, I get that. That point has been hammered away at for awhile now and it still stuns me. Personally, I disagree, and I'm not alone. I get that people feel that the relative amount of money isn't worth it. Really. I get it. Would people have preferred if BioWare initially sold DA:O at a higher price and offered DLC for free with the reasoning being that since it would make use of DLC at a later time that development costs would need to be covered? Actually, if BioWare did that they could have made money off every single DA:O owner regardless of whether a person ever downloaded or even wanted to play the DLC. I'd rather pay for DLC on a per DLC installment basis.

In the end, not owning DLC for a game doesn't break gameplay for the original game. The original full game that was sold on release day isn't somehow hobbled or castrated or sabotaged. It is what it is and people are entirely free to extend their playing experience if they so wish. Which brings me back to my initial statement. The fact is it stuns me that all this is over a $5 DLC.

Btw, I'm not meaning to belittle your opinion on the subject. I just cannot view the situation in the manner you described.

[Magic Zarim]

LOL I see you assumed my analogy to be in relation to the RtO delay because of using a delay as an example. No buddy, wrong assumption there. The sole point was pointing out relativation.

By no means I'm saying DLC should be free (as stated in my first post in this thread). No, DLC should be priced in proportion the product the DLC is meant for. Which it is not. If I wanted to I could buy all the DLC for all the people living in my urb for free. But I grew up in a family where we had to turn every little dime to make sure we had our basic life essentials. I've grown up with the worth of money and these days, I make loads of it. But I will never forget a dime's worth. That's why it makes me sick in the stomach when people refer to the absolute value of the DLC and go like "that's nuthin shut up and buy already cheapskate".

Modifié par Magic Zarim, 18 janvier 2010 - 06:59 .

[krisd2]

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.

Maybe my definition is more broad than your stalkerish definition. He is effing with someone on a forum to get a response. Just becuase he is doing it by purposely using illogical fallacies instead of calling you a **** got doesnt mean he ain't trollin.

Modifié par krisd2, 18 janvier 2010 - 07:47 .

[Parker Kincaid]

Magic Zarim wrote...

LOL I see you assumed my analogy to be in relation to the RtO delay because of using a delay as an example. No buddy, wrong assumption there. The sole point was pointing out relativation.

Actually, no, I didn't make an assumption. I took what you suggested as a purely hypothetical situation and replied generally with no connection to any actual game. RtO or it's delay were not in any way part of my reply. 

Magic Zarim wrote...

By no means I'm saying DLC should be free (as stated in my first post in this thread). No, DLC should be priced in proportion the product the DLC is meant for. Which it is not. If I wanted to I could buy all the DLC for all the people living in my urb for free. But I grew up in a family where we had to turn every little dime to make sure we had our basic life essentials. I've grown up with the worth of money and these days, I make loads of it. But I will never forget a dime's worth. That's why it makes me sick in the stomach when people refer to the absolute value of the DLC and go like "that's nuthin shut up and buy already cheapskate".

You aren't alone in how you were raised. Your opinion is valid. I'd say that 98% of the opinions concerning this topic are valid regardless of what side of the fence the people are on.

I won't be one of the people making a statement that people should shut up and that they are cheapskates. That's simply wrong. On both sides of this issue there are people who have approached the discussion well while others have most definitely not and those people have done nothing to benefit anyone.

[Valmy]

They say the best things in life are free...are you saying the DLC is the best thing in your life?

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...
Maybe my definition is

Inaccurate?

Let me say this one time - and then I think I'm done responding to you.

If there is anyone in this thread who is trolling me, it's the one whom I was not holding a discussion with but continued to try and bait me with such "innocuous" comments like -

krisd2 wrote...
Are you trying to bait people into trolling you so you can post another wall of text?

And pretty much every other time you've posted about me making "walls of text" and "being trolled" and such.

If I am being trolled (including the being reported part for something that someone could be proud of "provoking" from me), it isn't by traversc.

*ahem*

End of line.

[Teseract]

Personally i think the DLC is great fun.



I really am insanley hooked on this game and im not afraid of hiding it. while the price isnt insane, i must admit some of the content does seem a little bit lacking in story, which personally is what i play a game such as this for.



which is the exact reason i stopped with mmorpgs (that shall remain nameless, tho im sure u can guess) slowly things turn more into who can get the better gear and less about the story the game was trying to sell.



Dont get me wrong tho, shiney things are always nice, but imo the dlcs should have a story that should lead up to the expansion rather than something relativley unrelated that l;eads to getting a new character, or lets you get storage or even some shiney gold armour that probably resides ont he project list as wel speak.



I know this may seem like a terribly conflicted post, but all in all, i like the dlc, obviously i have my issues with it, but then for $5 no one should expect another full content release. (unless this was something bio were planning ofc )



Anyway, just figured id put my point in, so to sum up. dlc shouldnt be free, but id like more story, this is a great world tats been created, show me more of it!

[Sloth Of Doom]

krisd2 wrote...

Maybe my definition is more broad than your stalkerish definition. He is effing with someone on a forum to get a response.

Oh THAT kind of troll!  The type that says 'lol trolled'  and 'you got trolled' and 'haha trobait rofllol' over and over to the same person in an attempt to upset them?

Yeah those trolls are lame, man.

[addiction21]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

krisd2 wrote...

Maybe my definition is more broad than your stalkerish definition. He is effing with someone on a forum to get a response.

Oh THAT kind of troll!  The type that says 'lol trolled'  and 'you got trolled' and 'haha trobait rofllol' over and over to the same person in an attempt to upset them?

Yeah those trolls are lame, man.

Who let you are of your cage?

[Sloth Of Doom]

addiction21 wrote...

Who let you are of your cage?

Your sentances are starting to make less sense than mine.

[wildamishrose]

What is more lame than any trolling, is how bioware trolls US for money, in exchange for possibly the most underwhelming DLC ever.



I won't be spending a penny on any of the DLC until bioware gives me a reason to forget the absolute garbage they passed off as mass effect DLC.



It's funny that apologists posting in this thread actually believe they aren't being taken for a bit of a ride in the price / entertainment time department.



DLC should be QCG, quick cash grab.



Output minimum effort for maximum price is obviously the mindset being followed here, and the burden is on bioware to prove me wrong. Thus far, in both of the games they have released and offered QCGs for, they have utterly failed to do so.

[addiction21]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

addiction21 wrote...

Who let you out of your cage?

Your sentances are starting to make less sense than mine.

I have this horrible habit. If I am typing I will routinely place words I hear instead of what I wanted too. I have gone as far as to put "ring ring" in when a phone rings.

[Girchou]

if bioware gave these away they would no longer be a company they would go bankrupt.

[ladydesire]

Magic Zarim wrote...

By no means I'm saying DLC should be free (as stated in my first post in this thread). No, DLC should be priced in proportion the product the DLC is meant for. Which it is not.

By the same token, we could say that Bioware/EA undercharged us for Dragon Age, since I'm not familiar with too many RPGs that contain upwards of 100+ hours of gameplay for what we paid for it; if that is the case, what is a fair price for DLC for DA? Should we insist that Bioware spend more money to produce something that is optional than what they will take in in sales?

[Gorthaur the Cruel]

Girchou wrote...

if bioware gave these away they would no longer be a company they would go bankrupt.

For giving away away dlc that cost less than 20 dollars? no way, they make so much money off of their big games it would never happen with the success mass effect has had and dragon age. And if a company goes bankrupt they remain a company just so you know.

[Whisa]

Solostran85 wrote...

For giving away away dlc that cost less than 20 dollars? no way, they make so much money off of their big games it would never happen with the success mass effect has had and dragon age. And if a company goes bankrupt they remain a company just so you know.

$20?  What game are YOU playing?

Voice acting ALONE makes it into the hundreds or thousands, I believe (not 100% on how expensive, but it *is* expensive).  Then you pay the animators.  The writers.  The programmers.  The testers.  Certification fees.  What, are you going to tell them "sorry, you get .02$ for working on this project, $20 budge sorry...".  Hell no.  There's a lot more work put into these "little dlcs" then most people think.

Also, most of the profit from ME/ DA are probably covering games that aren't doing so well, or future projects.  It's not "free" money floating around; despite the success of a few games, a gaming company can very well go bankrupt or lose a serious amount of money should the next project not be as strong as the money put into it.

And when a company goes bankrupt, it's usually sold, dropped (in the case of EA eating companies), or simply disappears.  You can float for a while, but eventually, if things odn't turn, you're gone.

[krisd2]

Whisa wrote...

Solostran85 wrote...

For giving away away dlc that cost less than 20 dollars? no way, they make so much money off of their big games it would never happen with the success mass effect has had and dragon age. And if a company goes bankrupt they remain a company just so you know.

$20?  What game are YOU playing?

Voice acting ALONE makes it into the hundreds or thousands, I believe (not 100% on how expensive, but it *is* expensive).  Then you pay the animators.  The writers.  The programmers.  The testers.  Certification fees.  What, are you going to tell them "sorry, you get .02$ for working on this project, $20 budge sorry...".  Hell no.  There's a lot more work put into these "little dlcs" then most people think.

Also, most of the profit from ME/ DA are probably covering games that aren't doing so well, or future projects.  It's not "free" money floating around; despite the success of a few games, a gaming company can very well go bankrupt or lose a serious amount of money should the next project not be as strong as the money put into it.

And when a company goes bankrupt, it's usually sold, dropped (in the case of EA eating companies), or simply disappears.  You can float for a while, but eventually, if things odn't turn, you're gone.

not a $20 budget but they sell it for less than $20 to the consumer is what he is saying....

[Whisa]

krisd2 wrote...

not a $20 budget but they sell it for less than $20 to the consumer is what he is saying....

Hm, read that as "$20 to make".  Interesting.

Posting when I've just woken up is obviously bad o_O

Modifié par Whisa, 18 janvier 2010 - 10:17 .

[Magic Zarim]

If 10 people buy the DLC then that would not cover the cost of voice acting yada yada etc etc. This software is not made for 10 people. If 10 million people buy that $5 DLC, that is $50 mil raw income. Subtract resource cost and from what's left DLCs could be made to let you play DA for another 80 hours.

Resource cost has little bearing on whether DLC should cost $1 or $5 when sales targets are set properly. What Bioware/EA is doing right now is the good old fashioned price gauging. The extra 4 dollars go straight to EA. Profit without effort. Especially due to the low price when looked at it absolutely they take the cake and eat it too.

Heck there's no way you can tell me $10 mil ( 10mil $1 DLC sales) wouldn't be enough to create a 60-minute addon in two months. WTF do those voice actors need the cash to wipe their butts or what?

What most forget is that we're talking software. Make once, DULPLICATE unlimited. Push sales, get profit. That's how it works.

More hypothetical calculations. If $10 mil was needed for 1 hour of DLC created in two months.. wouldn't that put DA at a remarkable $300mil creation budget for the 5 years it's been in development? I'm betting it doesn't even come close to 1/3rd of that.

And an additional note, I am not saying those fine people creating this game and its content shouldn't be rewarded by solid wages because they should. But trust me, they are, whether DLC would be $1 or $5.

Modifié par Magic Zarim, 18 janvier 2010 - 10:29 .

[grieferbastard]

Magic Zarim wrote...
I will never forget a dime's worth. That's why it makes me sick in the stomach when people refer to the absolute value of the DLC and go like "that's nuthin shut up and buy already cheapskate".

Here's the thing. I'm saying don't buy it. I'm saying drop $40-$50 for a 120+ hours of quality RP game. Don't buy any DLC. In fact I hope you never spend a penny in the whole of your life that doesn't feel absolutely well spent.

What is a waste of time though is all the speculation on value of DLC vs cost. Nobody here, myself or anyone else, can accurately say what the cost of making RtO or any other DLC or DA:O itself is. Just guesses, all of them tilted towards our own personal opinions. I can say that profit margins on games are incredibly slim. I can say that because if you go to www.google.com and put in 'computer game profit margins' you'll find articles in a swath of business magazines and game industry magazines that go into it with far more detail than anyone here. Hence, saying that DLC are somehow gouging the customers for charging $5 for RtO as an example is not only baseless but absolutely contrary to every single piece of available information about game design and the game industry provided by any official or even professional source.

So. Again. Unless someone can find me an article, quote or other piece of supportable data that shows, contrary to all the other articles, press releases, interviews, Wall Street stock value analyses and investment opportunity reviews, projected earnings forcasts for EA (who owns BioWare)... something, anything anywhere other than an opinion from someone who is 100% ignorant of the actual profit margin on DLC....

Well, then all personal opinions on value and such aside all the opinions and beliefs that DLC are over-priced at baseless and unless can be supported by an educated source (by which I don't mean personal level of education but by a source of information with access to the raw profit/expense data if not the raw data itself) are in fact untrue.

If you don't like something, be it a DLC, a pair of shoes or a cup of coffee, don't buy it. Trying to somehow convince other people to share your opinion or somehow justify why I should adopt your (factually unsupportable) belief system is a bit silly. Are DLC likely more profitable than game production itself? I would go so far as 'probably'. Does that make it, what, unethical? When game developers are making profits like, say, business software developers or cell phone companies we'll talk.

[SheffSteel]

Quick mental arithmetic quiz.



Say you buy a film on DVD for $20.

One month later, you see the "Director's cut" of the same film, with additional scenes, for $25.



How money have you been screwed out of?

(a) $25

( $5

© $0

(d) It depends on whether you buy the director's cut edition





I believe that how people answer this will have a very strong correlation to their views on DLC (and will also provide an indication of their position on the Hawking-Trailertrash Reasoning Scale).

[Tirigon]

The problem with the DLC is that there are mods for other games - and it will be the same with DAO soon - that are a 100 times more useful to improve the game, better made and add more content etc.. AND are totally free.

I mean - 15 Euro for Shale, or 0,0 Euro for a total of 10 Gigabyte (probably more) Oblivion-mods, which add more content than the original game together.

What wins?

(And even if you say "Shale, because Oblivion sucks", keep in mind that with DAO-mods it will probably be the same soon.)

[SheffSteel]

grieferbastard wrote...

What is a waste of time though is all the speculation on value of DLC vs cost. Nobody here, myself or anyone else, can accurately say what the cost of making RtO or any other DLC or DA:O itself is. Just guesses, all of them tilted towards our own personal opinions.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not opposed to your central point at all, and I have to say that it's a pleasure to read such a well-thought-out post. But I do disagree on one point.

It is quite possible to say certain things about RtO vs DAO. For example, we can be sure that RtO will sell significantly fewer units than DAO. We also know, as a general principle, that
1. there are certain fixed expenses involved in software development costs, which means that short content is more expensive to develop than long content, on a dollars per gameplay hour basis;
2. compared with most other games, DAO has been in development for a long time and hence was more expensive;
3. DAO provides very good value for money compared with other games; and
4. DAO sales are not as high compared to those of competing products as one might naively expect considering the higher gameplay value offered by this product.

In other words, DLC is more expensive to make than the original game, which in itself is not as profitable as it ought to be, and DLC must also sell fewer copies. In order to make this intellectual property into a competitive and profitable product compared with other IPs, EA must make DLC more profitable than the original game. Hence, higher prices per gameplay hour, or whatever measure you prefer.

Modifié par SheffSteel, 19 janvier 2010 - 02:36 .