76 réponses à ce sujet

[ladydesire]

Coldcall01 wrote...

Lets not forget that Bioware have created a powerful editor for DLCs, and while its apparently hard to use because its complex, one would assume Bioware can knock  together DLCs very quickly using their own editor. The main costbase for the game would have come from the first 1-2 years development, building the editor etc....

So DLCs should be inexpensive compared to the original game, not the other way around.

If they were reusing a lot of areas and other content from the base game, or content that was cut for whatever reason that was already made, this would be true; however, if they are building new areas from scratch, it takes time to get them to look right, no matter how well you know the toolset. Trust me on this, or you can ask folks like Sunjammer, Challseus or nedblin; these folks have worked on content for Neverwinter Nights and Neverwinter Nights 2 so they know how much efferot needs to go into making a quality product.

But hell when EA/Bioware have people like you arguing that they should make it more expensive then us consumers are doomed to poor value. Cheers.

Actually, he's arguing the same line as you, without realizing that, as I keep pointing out, the cost of an item in whatever currency you chose is not the same as the value of the item; we may have paid around $40-50 USD for Dragon Age, but its overall value (at least in my opinion) is far above that. EA is trying to charge something for the DLCs that enables them to make something from the sales and still be able to pay the team what they are worth.

[traversc]

Griefer wrote...
They're not overpriced. They're just more expensive.

Yes they are more expensive. Thank you for finally admitting that point. As far as whether they are "overpriced" it depends on context of how uyou use the word, I suppose. Looking strictly at the definition:
Overpriced - "to price excessively high; set too high a price on."
Would you believe $600-700 dollars to be "excessive" for DA:O? If so, then you can understand the reasoning that DLCs are overpriced.

Lady Desire wrote...
Stop trying to say that cost = value; they are not and never will be the same thing.

I never said cost = value, in fact, cost > value is the entire point.

*bangs head against desk* It's not "similar", it's exactly the same, since there is a seamless transition between game locations no matter if it's a game location that is in the base game or a location added in a DLC (Bioware produced or player-created).

You do realize "same" is a subset of "similar" right?
At any rate, I'm simply saying the gameplay is "similar" (or "the same" if you like) in the same way that the gameplay in Brecillian Forest is "similar" to the gameplay in Orzammar. This is such a minor point that from my perspective, we actually agree on. I have no idea why you're banging your head or making such a big deal about it. If you want to make an argument, do so, but stop nitpicking on terminology.

The developers don't make less money developing DLC than they do the main game or an expansion, so why should Bioware lose money when trying to sell a DLC?

If they don't make less money developing expansions, they shoud stick their resources to making expansions. So if what you say is true, why shortchange their fans with overpriced DLCs if they wouldn't lose anything by just doing expansions? The answer that I can think of is that you're wrong, and they do have a greater percent profit margine profit with DLCs.

Modifié par traversc, 28 janvier 2010 - 12:02 .