36 réponses à ce sujet

[ShadowLordXII]

Is that necessarily a bad thing? Is the quality good? If they did it many times, I could see a problem, but one DLC that isn't finished before release?

 

If it's done rarely and the content is inconsequential (weapon, costume, useless junk), then it doesn't matter.

 

But Day One DLC and On-Disk DLC are ways that a company can wrangle more money out of their customers when said customers already paid for the main game. Day 1 DLC is borderline sketchy while on-disk DLC is technically a scam.

 

Take Street Fighter vs Tekken for instance. Hackers discovered that over 12 characters were disk locked to the console versions and yet Capcom was charging 20 dollars for them as dlc. How is it ethical or good to charge players for something that's already in the game?

 

Then you've got Javik from ME3 where hackers also discovered that he was already on the disk and yet he was charged as a 10 dollar day one dlc offering when he clearly should've been in the main game itself.

 

Situations like these render the quality of the dlc pointless if the content is either already on the disk or should clearly be in the main game, but was separated to gouge more money from it's customers. Worst yet, is that several companies have been pulling these stunts and others like them...looking at you Halo 4.

 

Fortunately, Inquisition apparently hasn't been involved in the above, so there's hope for BW in regards to learning from their past mistakes.

[Beren Von Ostwick]

Then you've got Javik from ME3 where hackers also discovered that he was already on the disk and yet he was charged as a 10 dollar day one dlc offering when he clearly should've been in the main game itself.

 

You know, when I got my Vista upgrade disc ages ago, I paid for the basic version.  I later decided I wanted Aero and a few other features.  All I had to do was pay for the upgraded key unlock because all of the data was already on the disc.  Yes, it was sitting right on the disc, but as I had not paid for those features, they were unavailable to me.  There is nothing wrong with that, it's just a convenient way to store data.

 

Did people who bought  the non-deluxe version of ME3 think they were paying for the Javik DLC as well?  They shouldn't have, because you're told exactly what you're getting if you bother to look at the item description.  Having the DLC on the disc and unlocking it only if you pay for the DLC is no different than having all versions of Vista on one disc with different unlock codes unlocking more and more content.

[DuskWanderer]

If it's done rarely and the content is inconsequential (weapon, costume, useless junk), then it doesn't matter.

 

But Day One DLC and On-Disk DLC are ways that a company can wrangle more money out of their customers when said customers already paid for the main game. Day 1 DLC is borderline sketchy while on-disk DLC is technically a scam.

 

Take Street Fighter vs Tekken for instance. Hackers discovered that over 12 characters were disk locked to the console versions and yet Capcom was charging 20 dollars for them as dlc. How is it ethical or good to charge players for something that's already in the game?

 

Then you've got Javik from ME3 where hackers also discovered that he was already on the disk and yet he was charged as a 10 dollar day one dlc offering when he clearly should've been in the main game itself.

 

Situations like these render the quality of the dlc pointless if the content is either already on the disk or should clearly be in the main game, but was separated to gouge more money from it's customers. Worst yet, is that several companies have been pulling these stunts and others like them...looking at you Halo 4.

 

Fortunately, Inquisition apparently hasn't been involved in the above, so there's hope for BW in regards to learning from their past mistakes.

 

The economist in me does not see a problem. Perhaps I simply cannot divest myself of that. The best way to change the ethical behaviors of economics is to cut off the gravy train and not make the purchase. 

[robertthebard]

It isn't a valid comparison because what it took to make this game is no where near what it takes to make a big budget movie. It takes all of a few seconds to realize this. Football is a terrible example because it is overpriced nonsense. Also again the price for a football team is much higher than the price for the budget of this game. Trust me on that.

This demonstrates two things to me:

1. You have absolutely no clue what goes into producing a AAA game.

2. You have absolutely no clue what goes into producing a major motion picture.

If you had a clue, you'd have refrained from posting this. You didn't. I'll be you're one of those people that sincerely believes that all a game dev has to do is think about something, and presto, it's in game. I can tell you, that's not the case. Did anyone here ever dabble with the NWN 2 toolset? Note, I'm starting with a fully developed set of tools, so the production time for that isn't included, but, it took me two weeks to paint one area roughly half the size of the Hinterlands. Yes, I was working by myself, and didn't understand all the tools at first, coming over from NWN. Now, if I extrapolate that, just creating the areas could have taken me up to about a year. This time can, of course be reduced by professionals, who have teams. However, my timeline here is just the area itself, with nothing but the terrain/textures/grass/water in it. No town, no people, no creatures, just painting in the area and getting it how I wanted it.

I didn't have to hire VAs for VOs, I didn't have to produce the cutscenes/write the dialog. All things that happen in a major game and a major motion picture. Both have the same kinds of people working: Art departments, writers, camera operators and actors. They both have directors for dialog, scripted actions for the actors, even though in the game we have animated actors and VAs as opposed to actors or stunt people doing the action. Those animations have to be made for the game. We're not playing with stick people. The world needs to be fleshed out, especially in a series like DA, where the world is a from the ground up IP, not something taken from someone else's books.

So really, how much difference is there?

[Darkly Tranquil]

If you are worried about price, don't pre-order and buy a couple of months after release. Most AAA games only stay full price for a few weeks (since most games sales occur around launch when the hype is at it's peak). Personally, I refuse to pre-order since it encourages the anti-consumer practices that are sadly becoming the norm in the gaming industry, and I mostly buy six to eight weeks after launch (unless I can get a discount Steam key from a key reseller). DAI was a rare exception, which I pre-ordered the Inquisitor's edition since it was a limited edition. If I had it to do over again, I probably wouldn't have bothered.

[Nashimura]

Maybe they should put less content into the main game to even this out... Or not. This is just whining, you had far more content than you would usually get for the price of a triple A. 

[BSpud]

This demonstrates two things to me:

1. You have absolutely no clue what goes into producing a AAA game.

 

 

They probably think this is how it works:

 

 

 

 

Also, a Dutch thread lol.

[Donk]

Hakkon spent $12     received 10 hours of gameplay

Descent spent $17    received 8 hours of gameplay

Trespasser spent $17       received 10 hours of gameplay

------------------------------------------------------------------

Total =    $46                 28hours 

 

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition Deluxe Edition Preorder spent $51         received 130 hours of gameplay on first play-through

 

 

Im posting this right now because Bioware is unfairly increasing the price of their dlcs, i regret the purchases because it made no sense. I wont be buying Bioware dlcs at full-price ever. The witcher 3 is selling DLC at a cheaper price and at a greater value. There is no excuse.

 

-Says that now

 

-Will pre-order ME:A and buy all DLCs as soon as they are released

 

-Will then whinge about it afterwards, while simultaneously comparing it to every other game that comes out

[Darvins]

If it's done rarely and the content is inconsequential (weapon, costume, useless junk), then it doesn't matter.

 

But Day One DLC and On-Disk DLC are ways that a company can wrangle more money out of their customers when said customers already paid for the main game. Day 1 DLC is borderline sketchy while on-disk DLC is technically a scam.

 

Take Street Fighter vs Tekken for instance. Hackers discovered that over 12 characters were disk locked to the console versions and yet Capcom was charging 20 dollars for them as dlc. How is it ethical or good to charge players for something that's already in the game?

 

Then you've got Javik from ME3 where hackers also discovered that he was already on the disk and yet he was charged as a 10 dollar day one dlc offering when he clearly should've been in the main game itself.

 

Situations like these render the quality of the dlc pointless if the content is either already on the disk or should clearly be in the main game, but was separated to gouge more money from it's customers. Worst yet, is that several companies have been pulling these stunts and others like them...looking at you Halo 4.

 

Fortunately, Inquisition apparently hasn't been involved in the above, so there's hope for BW in regards to learning from their past mistakes.

 

Javik was not on the disk, place holders where on the disk for Javik, to attach the final product to, but he was in no way a complete character. There are a lot of myths when it comes to Day One DLC, myths pushed as a narrative by YouTube personalities who really should know better at this point. I actually think they likely do know better, but actually coming out and saying it, risks angering their vocal viewers and thus hurting their viewership, so they don't.

 

Ask a Game Dev gives a better explanation of Day One DLC, and the whole development cycle, and how it all plays into it. During Game Dev now and forever, a lot of content is cut, before DLC this content had one of two fates as far as that game went. It either stayed on the cutting room floor or it got picked up and used in expansions, but with DLC a third option was added, it could be used as DLC. Day One DLC has another factor working for it, there is a period between a game going for Cert and game arriving on the shop shelves where, staff where not actually doing anything. During Cert they had to still come into work, to be ready in case the Cert process uncovered some glaring fault, so they could fix it, and resubmit to hopefully still make their release day, but if no problem arose, you had people with no work to do. 

 

Again from ask a Game Dev, he describes in the past epic Nerf Gun wars around a studio in this time, which sounds a lot of fun but, you can understand that the guys paying the bills where maybe not so much a fan of this period. Then along comes DLC, if you give these folks a smaller budget they can pick some stuff off the cutting room floor and work on it, instead of having Nerf Gun Wars, they can be producing content for sale, obviously to the publishers and money men this is a obvious choice. This DLC content is also a lot easier to get through Cert as it is smaller much smaller, and you don't have to produce anything for the stores, you can work on it pretty much up to the day of release. For the most part through if Day One DLC did not exist the stuff released as Day One DLC would not be in the game, it would still be on the cutting room floor never to see the light of day. 

 

As for pricing, others have said it, but prices are fixed by what the market is willing to pay. this is why in Real Terms Games are getting cheaper because people are unwilling to pay more even as inflation rises. DLC is priced at the point the market is willing to pay as well, and will likely stay around those price ranges for sometime to come, meaning that it will get cheaper in real terms, even as the production costs rise. This is fantastic value for money then. 

[Cobra's_back]

What's "unfair" about charging whatever people are willing to pay?

I agree. If people want the DLC and have the money to spend they should. Fifteen dollars doesn't buy much anymore. I bought all three and played the game several time. I played three different builds and that is a total of 84 hours just for the three DLCs per your calculations. 

 

The value of a game is also a function of its replay value.

[Aren]

Hakkon spent $12     received 10 hours of gameplay

Descent spent $17    received 8 hours of gameplay

Trespasser spent $17       received 10 hours of gameplay

------------------------------------------------------------------

Total =    $46                 28hours 

 

 

I'm quite unsure,DAA was something like 13 hours

(i'm slow i completed it in 40 hours)

but those addons for DAI really combined cannot be more than DAA in terms of time of completion.

[Almostfaceman]

Hakkon spent $12     received 10 hours of gameplay

Descent spent $17    received 8 hours of gameplay

Trespasser spent $17       received 10 hours of gameplay

------------------------------------------------------------------

Total =    $46                 28hours 

 

 

Dragon Age: Inquisition Deluxe Edition Preorder spent $51         received 130 hours of gameplay on first play-through

 

 

Im posting this right now because Bioware is unfairly increasing the price of their dlcs, i regret the purchases because it made no sense. I wont be buying Bioware dlcs at full-price ever. The witcher 3 is selling DLC at a cheaper price and at a greater value. There is no excuse.

 

DLC value isn't based solely on "hours of gameplay". There's also the fun factor and that's set by the individual - is arbitrary. 

 

So, good for you? Your argument is subjective and doesn't apply to me.