824 réponses à ce sujet

[VSpeck]

Ok there are two 360s in my house, mine and my younger brother's. Like with Dragon Age I plan on letting him have the DLC card. So if I want that Hammerhead tank DLC later I'm going to have to buy Cerberus Network access? Buy DLC so I can buy DLC? That doesn't seem right!

[Permutation]

I need your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle.

[izmirtheastarach]

HF100 wrote...

Yeah as i said its not seamless, but what i was trying to say was that any medium has to play to it's strengths, at its most basic, Films have two channels (cinema and DVD) of income both of which are huge. Gaming can't have the former, so they have to ensure that sales right off the bat will work or they can get even more profit from DLC that costs, these two mediums have become pretty convoluted in this discussion and i actually don't think it's helping us talk about it very well!

Well put. They are tring to create a new channel for revenue after the initial sale. MMOs have done very will with that, but that doesn't work with single player games. So Bioware has to offer real content instead of just offering continued access to the game.

[GnusmasTHX]

So... If I pre-order the Collector's with the Cerberus card, but don't get it on release, I'm still eligible for free content right?



Because it is a "new purchase" and it does come with the card... but it isn't on release day.

[Guaritor]

HF100 wrote...

TokkanRAM wrote...

I never got the whole polarising issue people have with DLC. It's like people think that the DLC is necessary for a fulfilling gameplay experience, when it isn't. Or that they feel that they have no right to charge us for what should already be in the game, even though that's not necessarily correct.

And I wouldn't go comparing used games to used DVDs/Blu-rays or used cars. They entirely different businesses with products that depreciate and/or appreciate in value at different rates. Besides, games are nowhere near comparable to movies since movies make most of their worthwhile profit from ticket sales and the DVDs/Blu-rays are only made for an extra buck, meanwhile games make all of their profit off of copies that are sold.

Yeah thats completely wrong, last year was the first time since 2002 that cinema had a higher revenue than DVD sales, to call it an "extra buck" is beyond naive. Obviously Games have to have a different model than both cinema and used cars but the theory is still sound. Games don't make any profit off of used sales which is obviously the main reason for this DLC addition, obviously people are going to feel a little ripped if day-one DLC was priced and i can kind of see the argument (not saying that i agree with it) but like every other medium, it has to use it's unique strengths to work the market.

I dunno if i'd call the theory still sound... as movies still see profit from dvd sales. As for the comparison to cars well... how would ferrari feel if it could only charge the same as ford for a car even though they made a much better product?  Mass Effect is the same $60 as Bomberman: Act Zero

[FFLB]

GnusmasTHX wrote...

So... If I pre-order the Collector's with the Cerberus card, but don't get it on release, I'm still eligible for free content right?

Because it is a "new purchase" and it does come with the card... but it isn't on release day.

Just as long as it's new, it should be good.

[Murmillos]

GnusmasTHX wrote...

So... If I pre-order the Collector's with the Cerberus card, but don't get it on release, I'm still eligible for free content right?

Because it is a "new purchase" and it does come with the card... but it isn't on release day.

All new purchases get the card.  Regardless if its pre-order or you get it a month down the road.

This is to encourage people to buy the game new - or if they buy used, fork out $10,$15,$25 or what have you if they want the DLC content.

[Guaritor]

adam_grif wrote...

You're right that new game editions won't sell as well, primarily because games are so damn expensive. The funny thing is, a summer blockbuster costs upwards of 50 million dollars to produce, and a video game costs far far less, but they charge far, far more per copy of the game.

They already get increased sales during the game's shelflife with price drops and so on.

Meh... 6 times more (don't get me started on movies costing 11 bucks these days)... but ill probably spend more then 6 times the time on the game then i did watching the movie... good investment on my part.

[HF100]

Guaritor wrote...

HF100 wrote...

TokkanRAM wrote...

I never got the whole polarising issue people have with DLC. It's like people think that the DLC is necessary for a fulfilling gameplay experience, when it isn't. Or that they feel that they have no right to charge us for what should already be in the game, even though that's not necessarily correct.

And I wouldn't go comparing used games to used DVDs/Blu-rays or used cars. They entirely different businesses with products that depreciate and/or appreciate in value at different rates. Besides, games are nowhere near comparable to movies since movies make most of their worthwhile profit from ticket sales and the DVDs/Blu-rays are only made for an extra buck, meanwhile games make all of their profit off of copies that are sold.

Yeah thats completely wrong, last year was the first time since 2002 that cinema had a higher revenue than DVD sales, to call it an "extra buck" is beyond naive. Obviously Games have to have a different model than both cinema and used cars but the theory is still sound. Games don't make any profit off of used sales which is obviously the main reason for this DLC addition, obviously people are going to feel a little ripped if day-one DLC was priced and i can kind of see the argument (not saying that i agree with it) but like every other medium, it has to use it's unique strengths to work the market.

I dunno if i'd call the theory still sound... as movies still see profit from dvd sales. As for the comparison to cars well... how would ferrari feel if it could only charge the same as ford for a car even though they made a much better product?  Mass Effect is the same $60 as Bomberman: Act Zero

Well the initial pricing of games hadn’t really been coveredin that conversation and I agree I think it’s pretty silly that all games basically have the same pricing structure. DVD sales have the same problem as games, if it’s second-hand the company don’t see a penny, and if games can have a way to generate cash and first time sales then they should obviously do that, especially as you pointed out that the equivalent to Cinema sales doesn’t exist.

 

I do think the used car analogy is a bit of a stretch though, there’s too many variables to make it really work.

Modifié par HF100, 20 janvier 2010 - 04:21 .

[adam_grif]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

The 20 mil estimate seems extremely low, especially when you take marketing into account.

Avatar is such a great example. It has made almost 50 mil every weekend for 5 weeks in a row. An average game would be lucky to make 50 mil in it's first week, and sales fall off sharply after that.

Yes, that's the reason why they charge more in the first place. Although comparing "average game" to "the box office success story of the 2000's" isn't exactly what you'd call a fair comparison, eh ?



Compare CoD4, 13 million sales and still at more than half it's original retail price. Assuming 25 dollars per copy sold (more in reality), that's 325 million dollars in revenue, which makes it an enormous success. Not every game sells nearly that well, but not every game needs to, because not every game costs that much to produce.


Assuming your 20 million dollar budget being average, a game selling 25 dollars per copy (60 at launch, reducing afterwards) needs to sell 800,000 copies to make it break even.

Modifié par adam_grif, 20 janvier 2010 - 04:22 .

[izmirtheastarach]

adam_grif wrote...


Yes, that's the reason why they charge more in the first place. Although comparing "average game" to "the box office success story of the 2000's" isn't exactly what you'd call a fair comparison, eh ?



Compare CoD4, 13 million sales and still at more than half it's original retail price. Assuming 25 dollars per copy sold (more in reality), that's 325 million dollars in revenue, which makes it an enormous success. Not every game sells nearly that well, but not every game needs to, because not every game costs that much to produce.


Assuming your 20 million dollar budget being average, a game selling 25 dollars per copy (60 at launch, reducing afterwards) needs to sell 800,000 copies to make it break even.

That is the exact comparison you have to make, yeah. lol. Avatar is going to be the highest grossing film ever, so I guess the comparison needs to be with the highest grossing game.

[Rip504]

So you can beat the game without the Hammerhead?

If so why DL it,what use does it have???

If we have to have it,it's gonna be free.

I'm saying if someone buys the game late and doesn't want to pay for the Hammerhead???It won't be needed???So what purpose does it serve????

If it's part of the game I think it will deff be free???

[Bigeyez]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

While it was a believable story for Shale to have been cut from DA:O and added to the game by the DLC team: Having their very next game have the exact same DLC format with a bonus party member pretty much proves that they just took something out of the game and labeled it DLC to prevent used game sales.

And thats bad how? Bioware gets no money from used game sales. They definitely deserve to get paid for the work the put into the game, so if this gets more people to buy new copies instead of used, and doesn't take anything away from us players who support Bioware already by buying new copies, then I'm all for it.

Anyways about time. Now all the whiners and doomsayers can shutup now that it's a known fact the DLC will be free.

[GnusmasTHX]

Rip504 wrote...

So you can beat the game without the Hammerhead?
If so why DL it,what use does it have???
If we have to have it,it's gonna be free.
I'm saying if someone buys the game late and doesn't want to pay for the Hammerhead???It won't be needed???So what purpose does it serve????
If it's part of the game I think it will deff be free???

I imagine enjoyment. 

Btw - Thanks for the others answering my Q.

Modifié par GnusmasTHX, 20 janvier 2010 - 04:57 .

[Cmdr.SpaceCowboy]

I don't have the capabilities to get the DLC, so all this extra stuff kinda makes me mad. I feel like I'm only buying part of the game, but for full price. An extra mission or two isn't bad, but with ME2 I feel like I'm getting ripped off a bit.

[-Skorpious-]

Although a tad off-topic; I would like to say that I will be disappointed f Zaeed's helmet doesn't look similar to Boba Fett's in appearance.

[Permutation]

Epic.

[Phoenixblight]

Rip504 wrote...

1) So you can beat the game without the Hammerhead?
2)If so why DL it,what use does it have???
3)If we have to have it,it's gonna be free.
4)I'm saying if someone buys the game late and doesn't want to pay for the Hammerhead???It won't be needed???So what purpose does it serve????
5)If it's part of the game I think it will deff be free???

1)Yes the reviews that have been mentioned say that you will land where its revelant for the mission so no exploring neccessary like ME 1

2) I assume since you don't need the Hammerhead for the main game, they will make a few missions that will require the use of the Hammerhead

3) GO back to 1. Hammerhead is not needed for the core game. DOn't be dense

4) GO back and read 1 and 2. We are not sure if its free or not it hasn't been confirmed one way or another so chill out.  THe hammerhead is not Day1 DLC, the DLC for the Hammerhead and missions will come later as stated on the IGN article.

5) You like to repeat the same questions atleast 3 times don't you?

[monika26]

I just hope this doesn't turn into a nickle and dime type thing in which we have to pay for every little weapon, armor, etc.. I also hope the Hammerhead is free.



In no way am I against DLC, I just like DLC that's worth it. Like how Bethesda did it for Fallout 3. I bought all of the DLC for that game. I loved how they expanded and extended the game. Especially Broken Steel. That's the type of DLC I hope Bioware does for ME2.



As for piracy. ummm... No, this won't have any effect on piracy. DLC is pirated just as easily as the original game.

[Rip504]

Phoenixblight and you know this after 1 post???

[jakl201]

Fredvdp wrote...

Celrath wrote...

jakl201 wrote...

Now, I know so few people remember back on the old forums, how I said that I doubted the Hammerhead would be in vanilla ME:2, and that it would be introduced through DLC. This can be aimed towards Javier, if you'd like.

HAH. HAH HAH HAH. HAHAHAHA. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. HAH.

Don't act so smug.  

He won't look so smug with a hole in his head.

I would if you put a beret on me after I'm shot. Then I'd be Super Smug. *nods*

[Phoenixblight]

Rip504 wrote...

Phoenixblight and you know this after 1 post???

No I have read the articles and reviews. Brain + Science = Truth.  Read the reviews all of them state the hammerhead is non existant and there is no planet exploring just like ME 1. 

2nd DLC pack states:

Pack two will include new in-game vehicle the Hammerhead. This pack also contains new missions and in-game items, plus the Cerberus armour and M-22 Eviscerator Shotgun.


See new missions with the Hammerhead on the 2nd DLC. SInce there is no Planet exploring in vanilla ME 2 and suddenly there is the release of DLC with Hammerhead AND missions. Its not that hard to figure out.

Source:

www.vg247.com/2010/01/19/bioware-announces-mass-effect-2-dlc-launch-plans/

Modifié par Phoenixblight, 20 janvier 2010 - 05:29 .

[izmirtheastarach]

Rip504 wrote...

So you can beat the game without the Hammerhead?
If so why DL it,what use does it have???
If we have to have it,it's gonna be free.
I'm saying if someone buys the game late and doesn't want to pay for the Hammerhead???It won't be needed???So what purpose does it serve????
If it's part of the game I think it will deff be free???

The N7 missions that are in the game at launch do not require the Hammerhead. The DLC will come with new N7 missions specifically designed for the vehicle.

[Guaritor]

Cmdr.SpaceCowboy wrote...

I don't have the capabilities to get the DLC, so all this extra stuff kinda makes me mad. I feel like I'm only buying part of the game, but for full price. An extra mission or two isn't bad, but with ME2 I feel like I'm getting ripped off a bit.

You're still buying the full game that reviewers gave amazing scores to... your missing out on some free bonuses, but none of which are necessary for the enjoyment of a complete game.