635 réponses à ce sujet

[Addai]

Maverick827 wrote...

I disagree.  I mean no offense to Bathesda, but their games, and thus their DLC, are very plug and play.  Every mission uses essentially the same mechanics.  There are quest triggers, quest objectives, and that's about it.  Go to [Location], [Kill/Loot] an [Enemy/Item], and then return to the quest giver.  They have a small handful of voice actors and it doesn't sound like they have them do many takes.  

BioWare, by comparison, creates involved scenes and elaborate set pieces.  The Shadow Broker's ship and underwater in Leviathan are very different than anything in the main game.  Bathesda DLC, on the other hand, are mostly comprised of re-skins and some minor new models.  The level of voice acting between the two isn't even comparable.  Bathesda makes a lot of generic things, BioWare makes a few focused things.

Different strokes and everything, but if you really call Shivering Isles a plug and play remix of the base game then you're channeling Sheogorath.  Likewise Solstheim in Dragonborn offers a very different play experience than Skyrim.  And you can play those DLCs for hours and hours.  I still haven't found all the content in either Skyrim expac.

Basically, you get value for money and consistently so.  And Bethesda has disavowed "horse armor" many times over and pokes fun at itself.  People using it as a comparison are reaching.  They've released quite a bit of Skyrim post-release content for free- high res pack, mounted combat, etc.  And then there is the Creation Kit.  Basically, you're talking value for money vs. trying to monetize every scrap of everything.

Modifié par Addai67, 13 avril 2013 - 05:20 .

[Allan Schumacher]

slimgrin wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Shadow Broker is probably our best one (which is funny as I haven't played it >.>).

Jesus man..really? Because it really is the best one.

I rarely play DLC.  Unfortunately, for me, when I've moved on past a game it's very unlikely for me to pick up DLC.

[Allan Schumacher]

LTD wrote...

New slice to main game created post-release, during seperate development push should have been part of main game because ..? No sense in this.

I've seen people state that they felt Leviathan was vital to the story of ME3 and should have found a way to be included in the base game.

[Allan Schumacher]

Besides, what you're talking about is completely irrelevant. There is no benefit to forcing a digital distribution system on gamers--outside of company exposure, outside of enticing them to spend more--there isn't any software benefit. There's little, if any, user benefit. The analogy is poor.

There's huge benefits for the developer. Digital distribution is pretty much the primary reason why independent games can become so prolific. As a gamer, if we were restricted purely to boxed goods, our selection in games would be more limited. Things like Project Eternity, Wasteland 2, and Torment would probably not exist. We'd certainly have less influences from various game styles that even make their way up and into the "AAA" titles.

Digital distribution is a huge risk mitigation, and stating that those smaller developers shouldn't force their customers to accept that digital is the avenue for delivery is too restrictive towards them, in my opinion. Many of them would never have been able to realistically deliver their games without incurring significant amounts of additional debt in order to finance manufacturing and distribution.

[Il Divo]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

LTD wrote...

New slice to main game created post-release, during seperate development push should have been part of main game because ..? No sense in this.

I've seen people state that they felt Leviathan was vital to the story of ME3 and should have found a way to be included in the base game.

At best, it provides a minor hint to the nature of the antagonist and has a slight tidbit of info on Harbinger. I guess it helps a bit with foreshadowing, but it's not likely to convert someone from hating the ME3 endings to loving them.

[TuringPoint]

 They need to pollute, exploit, maim or murder to be anywhere near the worst.  

And then the reasons given for EA being the worst are even more frivolous and opinionated than they need to be.  

Way to keep things in perspective, gamers.  Way to prove to the world that we're not a bunch of losers who have nothing better to think about.

Yeah, right.

On the subject of the endings/plot for ME3, I have a hunch that if you liked the ending OK in the first place, you're more inclined to see Leviathan as a valuable part of the plot.  As I did.  Although I recognize the ending has issues, and is not exactly what the dev's suggested we'd get, it's good enough for what it is.

Modifié par Alocormin, 13 avril 2013 - 07:27 .

[ottifant64]

[Image of fake letter removed.]

Modifié par Ninja Stan, 14 avril 2013 - 05:24 .

[Angrywolves]

sigh.Here I am again. I must be a glutton for punishment. But someone needs to put paid to this thread once and for all . It has tbe me of course. smiles. Is EA the worst company ? Of course not. Think multinationals like BP and EXXON. EXXON Valdez. The oil rig explosion in the gulf. People died. Think Halliburton and their war profiteering during the Iraq wars. Think about the security companies that profitted by sending mercenaries to Iraq and Afghanistan. Think about the banks that kicked people out of their homes during the recent recession here in the US. So no one, to the best of my knowledge has died due to poor management decisions by EA. Some people have lost their jobs but that's the nature of the gaming business nowadays There's nothing we fans can do to change EA other than not buy their games. They lose enough money they will have to change or go out of business. shrugs. As far as this thread goes I believe it was started to control the conversation so complaints about EA

[Angrywolves]

didn't get of hand. That's pretty slick of Schumaker, as was my 48 hour ban But it's also disingenuous imo.shrugs. Just my opinion. I won't post in this thread again as I feel it lacks legitimacy.

[Surf28]

No matter how many Golden poo awards they win ........nothing is gonna change i hope they stop being greedy/Day one DLC/Franchise killers/Bad servers/cheap/bad Games/buys and ruin devs/overpriced games .................................................

[Ravensword]

Surf28 wrote...

No matter how many Golden poo awards they win ........nothing is gonna change i hope they stop being greedy/Day one DLC/Franchise killers/Bad servers/cheap/bad Games/buys and ruin devs/overpriced games .................................................

Yeah. It's just some Internet contest that EA gave a bit credibility to by responding to it. Despite promising to do better, they haven't and they won't.

Modifié par Ravensword, 15 avril 2013 - 03:41 .

[Homebound]

EA's under the impression that videogames are like TV shows and they should charge us for access. When they say they'll do better, they probably mean they'll drive their agenda ever harder down our throats until their fist comes out our asses.

[Ravensword]

Homebound wrote...

EA's under the impression that videogames are like TV shows and they should charge us for access. When they say they'll do better, they probably mean they'll drive their agenda ever harder down our throats until their fist comes out our asses.

When EA said that they would do better, they were addressing their shareholders.

[Degs29]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
DLC in general is a form of risk mitigation in leveraging an existing title for additional revenues with lesser overall costs compared to a full game.

If DLC has less overall costs compared to the base game, why is it so damn expensive?  It's usually between 2 or 3 times more expensive then base game content on a per hour basis. 

I'll give you my own example.  I beat ME3 in slightly shy of 40 hours and paid $60 for it.  That's $1.50/hour.  I bought the Leviathan DLC for $12 (pretty sure) and beat it in 3 hours.  That's $4.00/hour.  It was almost the exact same numbers for LotSB in ME2 (if I had paid $60 for the base game).  In fact, I only paid $5 more for the entire base game than I did for that one particular DLC.

It just seems to me the value of DLC is way out to lunch, relatively.

[Lunch Box1912]

Wow this thread chugs on over 20 pages. There is no stopping the angry consumer.


541 replies and 2710 page views I think were the numbers I was looking for.

Modifié par Lunch Box1912, 16 avril 2013 - 03:05 .

[Allan Schumacher]

If DLC has less overall costs compared to the base game, why is it so damn expensive? It's usually between 2 or 3 times more expensive then base game content on a per hour basis.

I don't know what specifically motivates that specific price point, but in the end prices are set because it's what companies feel will get them maximum return on investment.

Ideally its set right at a point of perfect price inelasticity. That is, if they raise or lower the price, ultimately the get less total revenue.

As for why it can be $10 or $15, part of the advantage of it is simply because that price point is not very high.

I remember running an adult computer literacy course at a local school in 2000. My original price point was a mere $2 for an hour long sesson. The Principal said "People aren't going to split hairs over $2 compared to $5. Just charge $5 and in the end it'll be easier for you to deal with as you won't have to deal with as much change and whatnot." class enrollment rates didn't change despite the 150% increase in price. I probably could have gone higher, but it wasn't really a venture to raise money. (It was part of a government initiative to help provide basic training and access to computers and the internet to the community).

[Ninja Stan]

Keep in mind that the number of people who buy the base game and those who buy DLC are very different numbers. It's not like DLC of any kind has a 100% retention rate. So, even though the development costs are considerably lower, the adoption rates are also comparatively low.

[KingJason13]

EA is the 'worst company' because the sheeple haven't been brainwashed into believing only "crazy" conspiracy theorists would talk bad about them.

[Degs29]

Allan Schumacher wrote...
I remember running an adult computer literacy course at a local school in 2000. My original price point was a mere $2 for an hour long sesson. The Principal said "People aren't going to split hairs over $2 compared to $5. Just charge $5 and in the end it'll be easier for you to deal with as you won't have to deal with as much change and whatnot." class enrollment rates didn't change despite the 150% increase in price. I probably could have gone higher, but it wasn't really a venture to raise money. (It was part of a government initiative to help provide basic training and access to computers and the internet to the community).

What if you offered this computer literacy course at $2 per hour.  Once completed, you then decided to offer a short extended course.  This course offers more of the same for those who want to cover more ground.  You priced this course at $5 per hour.  Your don't think people would question that?

[Degs29]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Keep in mind that the number of people who buy the base game and those who buy DLC are very different numbers. It's not like DLC of any kind has a 100% retention rate. So, even though the development costs are considerably lower, the adoption rates are also comparatively low.

Yeah, I figured that would play a part.  I'd really like to know what the adoption rate is for each DLC....

[karushna5]

I feel considering how many companies in America really do make the world unlivable for some and profit off of misery for a great number, that the vote of EA as the worst company is insulting. They may not be the best video game company, that is immaterial. The fact is that we are barely bothered really by a company while those who have real grievances somehow are lesser in our having to pay slightly more.

I would say that this vote says a great deal about our society, as gamers, as Americans, and it says very little about our quality.

[Wulfram]

I do split hairs on that sort of money, which is why Bioware should put some of it's older DLC on sale one of these days.