What exactly is the basis for people thinking they automatically deserve any content the developer is finished with before release for the release price?
I'm curious.
In my case, tradition.
I can undertand that times change though, so that's why I'm not entirely oposed to it. But it takes time to adapt.
That's a wise and self-aware answer. You sound to be a cut above most of the crowd here.
I'll agree it's not fair, but the Capitalist in me would need to examine how sales work in Europe and Australia. Do the games still actually typically sell well, in high volume, at those particular higher prices?
Depends on the classification on high volume. If you are comparing to a larger population base then no the volume is incredibly low, however if you compare as a percentage of the population, then yes sales in Australia would be considered pretty high from that perspective. However the high prices here are more a result of the retail monopolies (and their subsequent whining over the undercutting by digital sales) than from any other pressure. For EA to get prime position with EBGames they have to conform to the price gouging that the stores have gotten used to when the AUD was weak, so the prices for then were probably comparable (when the dollar was around 0.6 to the USD) but as is typical when the AUD rose again they kept their prices as their profit margins went sky high. Since then Aussie customers have gotten far more savvy and the sales for the games industry have plummeted with the ease of availability of purchasing online from offshore resellers.
This in turn has caused a flip-side in that because they've been scammed out of a lot of money for the past decade they are angry and out for revenge, rather than thinking rationally, so any exploit in the system (proxying IP's from Guatamala or Brazil for instance to buy at their prices online) is now fair game as any thought of honour or respect has been lost as a result of the lack of respect shown for the customers, whether by the retail crowd or the Publisher's that still pander to their selfish whims. The bigger companies in Australia are only getting bigger as they demolish their competition, which creates an odd and very unbalanced economy, where food is now more expensive than a lot of luxuries and cost of living per dollar earned is one of the highest in any Commonwealth/European/USA style country.
It's definitely got something wrong when price comparison's from less than 5 years ago result in price rises of 300-700%.
However that dynamic isn't unique to Australia, it's just far more pronounced.
It's not a matter of "deserving". If you make a game then sell parts of it piecemeal with a higher price/content ratio than for a full game, that's perceived as profiteering. Then there's the question of whether the full game was deliberately cut in order to make more profit, which amounts to the same perception.What exactly is the basis for people thinking they automatically deserve any content the developer is finished with before release for the release price?
I'm curious.
It's not a matter of "deserving". If you make a game then sell parts of it piecemeal with a higher price/content ratio than for a full game, that's perceived as profiteering. Then there's the question of whether the full game was deliberately cut in order to make more profit, which amounts to the same perception.
It's hard to figure how the latter case actually makes sense after the first time a company does day 1 DLC. It's not like there was ever a production plan for ME2, ME3, or DA2 that didn't have something penciled in there, even if it was a big fat TBD. But I suppose this isn't really about sense, is it?
Retour en haut