230 réponses à ce sujet

[David Gaider]

the_one_54321 wrote...
In point of fact, it isn't broken logic, despite your obvious sarcasm. It's not our fault that the industry has developed a really stupid way of pricing their games. I'm going to take the hit later down the road because they didn't charge enough for the innitial release. I would have been happy to pay $70 for DA:O. But they didn't charge that. Not my fault. I'm not going to stop expecting fair prices from them just because so many gamers are such completely thoughtless and foolish consumers.

Just to clarify: are you suggesting that if we did charge $70 for DA:O we would then be obligated to provide any new content created afterwards for free? Or that we should have charged more for DA:O to make any DLC created later seem more reasonably priced?

Modifié par David Gaider, 09 février 2010 - 06:04 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

I'm not going to stop expecting fair prices

There is no such thing as a fair price.  There are prices you are willing to pay and prices you are not.  The concept of fairness doesn't apply.  I am, however, willing to listen to counter-arguments.

David Gaider wrote...

Just to clarify: are you suggesting that if we did charge $70 for DA:O we would then be obligated to provide any new content created afterwards for free? Or that we should have charged more for DA:O to make any DLC created later seem more reasonably priced?

Only the latter would make any sense from a business perspective.  Once you've sold the game, you've created a market for the DLC and expansions (much like the sale of game consoles creates a market for those games).  Selling the game for more would only serve to create a more up-market clientele for your game, so then selling the expansions for less would be pointless.

[Monica21]

I really have no idea why people continue to argue about this. It's the same from game to game. If you don't want to pay for the content, then don't buy it. As it is, companies will charge what people are willing to pay, and a lot of people were willing to pay $2.50 for horse armor. *raises hand sheepishly* I have no idea if it still costs the same now, but the idea is the same. If BioWare can make a profit, then more power to them. I'll buy it because I enjoy their games, and if I didn't think it was worth it or didn't have the money then I wouldn't buy it.

[the_one_54321]

David Gaider wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
In point of fact, it isn't broken logic, despite your obvious sarcasm. It's not our fault that the industry has developed a really stupid way of pricing their games. I'm going to take the hit later down the road because they didn't charge enough for the innitial release. I would have been happy to pay $70 for DA:O. But they didn't charge that. Not my fault. I'm not going to stop expecting fair prices from them just because so many gamers are such completely thoughtless and foolish consumers.

Just to clarify: are you suggesting that if we did charge $70 for DA:O we would then be obligated to provide any new content created afterwards for free? Or that we should have charged more for DA:O to make any DLC created later seem more reasonably priced?

Free is perhaps going a bit too far, but it's along that line of reasoning. $5 for an hour or less is unreasonable and I'm not going to pay it. Essentially my thoughts are that you charged too little at the start and are now trying to make up profit margins with further sales. The results are painfully short bits of content for unreasonable prices.

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
There is no such thing as a fair price.  There are prices you are willing to pay and prices you are not.  The concept of fairness doesn't apply.  I am, however, willing to listen to counter-arguments.

I am not discussing this with you again. I have gone over very explicit definitions with you in the very recent past and you simply refuse to accept them. It's an impasse, and that is that.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 09 février 2010 - 06:32 .

[Killian Kalthorne]

So far I have gotten a load of free crap for the game. The Cerebus Network, all the pre-order DLCs, the new Cerebus Armor and shotgun, the Normandy crash site, and so on. Not a whole lot of substance there but I didn't pay any extra for it. When Bioware starts to charge money for the DLCs I expect substantial material being put into the game. I do hope they do better than what is being done with Dragon Age.



I want DLCs like Fallout 3's Point Lookout, Broken Steel, and the like, not some short piece like Return to Ostagar. I am also willing to pay more for it as well.

[Pinkleaf]

Wournos wrote...

Deiser wrote...

Pinkleaf wrote...

Ferret A Baudoin wrote...

Wait. We can force people to buy stuff at gunpoint? Why didn't anyone tell me that? Let me go grab a gun and check it out. I'm sure nothing bad can come out of that.

I am sure that you can't, it is against most laws and you may find yourself in very deep trouble.

...Learn to take a joke.

I am sure that person was being ironic...

I was indeed, thank you.  Maybe I need a little more practise.

[Mordaedil]

David Gaider wrote...

Just to clarify: are you suggesting that if we did charge $70 for DA:O we would then be obligated to provide any new content created afterwards for free? Or that we should have charged more for DA:O to make any DLC created later seem more reasonably priced?

Personally, I am of the belief that DAO was a very good offer. I get a lot of playing hours from a game I paid very little for and I enjoy it, far more than certain other projects I have paid more for.

Though not as much value as NWN gave me, if you get my drift. I *still* play NWN. I should owe you guys a couple of millions for all the enjoyment there by most logic.

I think the pricing as is, works. It's not like I own your work now.

[the_one_54321]

Mordaedil wrote...

David Gaider wrote...
Just to clarify: are you suggesting that if we did charge $70 for DA:O we would then be obligated to provide any new content created afterwards for free? Or that we should have charged more for DA:O to make any DLC created later seem more reasonably priced?

Personally, I am of the belief that DAO was a very good offer. I get a lot of playing hours from a game I paid very little for and I enjoy it, far more than certain other projects I have paid more for.
Though not as much value as NWN gave me, if you get my drift. I *still* play NWN. I should owe you guys a couple of millions for all the enjoyment there by most logic.
I think the pricing as is, works. It's not like I own your work now.

There's a difference between potential content and measurable content.

Strictly speaking, much what NWN offers is not the result of the developers offering it, but rather the gamers taking the game they bought and making more out of it.

Also, keep in mind that the cost vs benefit comparison in games is not a concrete hours vs price issue. It is a very subjective assignment of value. It's just that this subjective value assignment is made with regard to a number of very objective factors.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 09 février 2010 - 06:59 .

[Tottenham]

got mixed feelings on this subject myself and can see points from both sides

while extra content is fantastic and helps keep the game alive with new stuff to do, cuts the wait between expansions and compared to some things that have been mentioned already it is worth it, on the other hand, the game itself was such great value with many hours gameplay, that $5 for an hour gameplay is actually poor value compared to the original game

when you look at it in that way, $5 for 1 hour gameplay, that only equates to 10 hours gameplay over $50 worth of DLC ( the price on steam ), it just doesn't compare to the value of the game itself

guess that just highlights how good a value DA Origins was, DA Origins was fantastic bang for buck and it's no wonder when compared to that, DLC will seem a little short

while people buy it and the demand for DLC is great, I see np with Bioware making it, while I think the DLC content should last longer and give a bit better value, at the same time it gives you new stuff to do while cutting down the wait for expansions, the individual can decide if it is worth it to them

on the whole I have np with DLC, the pros outweight the cons

Modifié par Tottenham, 09 février 2010 - 07:35 .

[Wardka]

I was fairly disappointed with RtO - $5 did indeed seem steep for what essentially amount to a big fight through a familiar area with very few actual choices, and some decent gear tossed on at the end. In my not-so-unbiased opinion, I'd probably have valued it at $2, maybe $3?

[sonlockdon]

player haters, i only see two people who can see eye to eye .



you can count me as 3 i bought rto, and found absolutely no point in it besides getting cailans armour so when i got the armour i was like ok this cool, but that's basicly all you got out of it besides some common dark spawn.



answer this were was duncan along with his armour, and were was king cailan's two handed sword?



also i think in my own opinion that the dlc is over priced compared to what it should realy be worth $3-4 max . if im not mistaken fallout three had an expansion that was about 5-6 hours for me on first play through ,and costed like $6-10 if i recall correctly, and you guy's are selling somethis for 30min that cost $5.

[Jaymo147]

No one is forcing you to buy the content. I, for one, played and enjoyed the Stone Prisoner, Warden's Keep, and recently, Return to Ostagar.



To each his own my friend, some people want to buy it while others don't.

You don't obviously, so don't complain.

[the_one_54321]

Jaymo147 wrote...
You don't obviously, so don't complain.

This is such a garbage concept. It's fair to say not to buy it if you think it's not worth it. It's BS to say don't complain. We don't like it and so we complain. And we will continue to do so, and you'll just have to deal with that.

[grieferbastard]

It's like this sort of stuff comes in waves, often with the Wrex user icon strangely enough.

I liked DA:O more than BG2. As a 'classical RPGer' who's been playing RPGs since 1979. I'd say that qualifies as old school. Not only is it brilliantly done and the closest to a real table-top experience I've had on the computer but the game worlds approach to what are otherwise tired concepts have added a great flavor to what are otherwise some of my favorite old dishes. The social situation of magic in relation to the Chantry and the Templars? Awesome. The political nature of an inherited kingship with quasi-elected lower nobles allowing huge RP environment social mobility? Awesome. Grey Wardens; seriously, these guys are pure RP drama in a box. They can't catch a cold without angst, self-sacrifice and doing terrible things if need be for the greater good. Awesome.

Result? Awesome covered awesome with awesome filling.

I liked RtO more than Wardens Keep. Yes, Wardens Keep was a nice H&S romp with some good internal plot and nifty toys - even extra abilities but RtO was better character development.

If someone doesn't want to buy DLC they don't have to. They can just buy the full expansions or whatever. Me, I'll continue to pick it all up as soon as it comes out and have a gaming experience I enjoy better. Getting to watch someone else cry over it just makes it all the more glorious.

I shall quench my thirst with the tears of the self-important. It is delicious.

[sonlockdon]

im just saying it would be better off that way, so everyone is happy is all.

[grieferbastard]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Free is perhaps going a bit too far, but it's along that line of reasoning. $5 for an hour or less is unreasonable and I'm not going to pay it. Essentially my thoughts are that you charged too little at the start and are now trying to make up profit margins with further sales. The results are painfully short bits of content for unreasonable prices.

Unreasonable price. I find that term a bit funny I admit. Perhaps you should say 'more than I'm willing to pay'. Unreasonable implies that it lacks reason. $5 is nothing to me. It's a cup of coffee. I don't sip my coffee in the morning and get pissed because of how many sips it took me to get to the bottom. I don't have a stopwatch at my desk try to measure how long my caffinee buzz lasts and relate the productivity I get from that $5. If there was DLC for less than $5 I would feel silly taking the time to put my card number in to buy the points for it. I enjoy the game and it entertains me.

I'm somewhere over 200 hours of total entertainment for, what, Digital Delux (I accidentally bought the initial free DLC twice not realizing it came with the DD copy) plus all the DLC? $80-$100 dollars? That's better than $0.50/hour. I haven't gotten that sort of value in entertainment since I learned to dominate Contra at the arcade. I'll probably get close to 500 hours of entertainment out of DA:O by the time DA 2 comes out. That's literally a better value for my money per hour of entertainment than my digital TV subscription.

If it is important for you to attempt to seperate DLC from what they are intended for and attempt to identify their production costs vs relative profit margin and try to figure out if you're somehow 'overpaying' for a product that's fine. EA is a publically traded company and you can find everything from their operating expenses to EBITA online. Knock yourself out.

I will say you're inevitably paying a higher profit margin (especially if you look at marketing costs as non-essential to product development and distribution) on your cellphone, internet service, food and clothing. Yet if EA returning a full $0.25 to their bottom line for each $5 DLC makes you feel like a victim of the evil corprate system.... well, you're probably in for a lot of frustration and sense of disempowerment in your life.

Edited to add:

I wouldn't say don't complain. Feel free to complain all you want. Just accept that we get to not only not be swayed but more likely entertained by your doing so. That's what makes this sort of mentality a somewhat vicious circle. I'm curious to know, genuinely, what you actually want to achieve? 

Modifié par grieferbastard, 09 février 2010 - 09:01 .

[the_one_54321]

grieferbastard wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
Free is perhaps going a bit too far, but it's along that line of reasoning. $5 for an hour or less is unreasonable and I'm not going to pay it. Essentially my thoughts are that you charged too little at the start and are now trying to make up profit margins with further sales. The results are painfully short bits of content for unreasonable prices.

Unreasonable price. I find that term a bit funny I admit. Perhaps you should say 'more than I'm willing to pay'. Unreasonable implies that it lacks reason. $5 is nothing to me. It's a cup of coffee. I don't sip my coffee in the morning and get pissed because of how many sips it took me to get to the bottom. I don't have a stopwatch at my desk try to measure how long my caffinee buzz lasts and relate the productivity I get from that $5. If there was DLC for less than $5 I would feel silly taking the time to put my card number in to buy the points for it. I enjoy the game and it entertains me.

I'm somewhere over 200 hours of total entertainment for, what, Digital Delux (I accidentally bought the initial free DLC twice not realizing it came with the DD copy) plus all the DLC? $80-$100 dollars? That's better than $0.50/hour. I haven't gotten that sort of value in entertainment since I learned to dominate Contra at the arcade. I'll probably get close to 500 hours of entertainment out of DA:O by the time DA 2 comes out. That's literally a better value for my money per hour of entertainment than my digital TV subscription.

If it is important for you to attempt to seperate DLC from what they are intended for and attempt to identify their production costs vs relative profit margin and try to figure out if you're somehow 'overpaying' for a product that's fine. EA is a publically traded company and you can find everything from their operating expenses to EBITA online. Knock yourself out.

I will say you're inevitably paying a higher profit margin (especially if you look at marketing costs as non-essential to product development and distribution) on your cellphone, internet service, food and clothing. Yet if EA returning a full $0.25 to their bottom line for each $5 DLC makes you feel like a victim of the evil corprate system.... well, you're probably in for a lot of frustration and sense of disempowerment in your life.

Edited to add:

I wouldn't say don't complain. Feel free to complain all you want. Just accept that we get to not only not be swayed but more likely entertained by your doing so. That's what makes this sort of mentality a somewhat vicious circle. I'm curious to know, genuinely, what you actually want to achieve?

More examples of improper price comparison.

[Zugin]

I spend $12 atleast couple times a week for lunch, dont want it dont buy it simple

Modifié par Zugin, 09 février 2010 - 09:09 .

[the_one_54321]

Zugin wrote...
I spend $12 atleast couple times a week for lunch, dont want it dont buy it simple

Another exmaple of improper price comparison.

[the_one_54321]

Every time this DLC and price discussion comes up the phrase that keeps coming to my mind over and over and over is "you're doing it wrong." 75% of the people here don't seem to understand appropriate price comparison or analysis.

[Isavald]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Every time this DLC and price discussion comes up the phrase that keeps coming to my mind over and over and over is "you're doing it wrong." 75% of the people here don't seem to understand appropriate price comparison or analysis.

More examples of pseudo-intellectual flaunting on a subject that shouldn't even be looked at with such scrutiny.

Bottom line of the argument is sadly, many of us have no regrets and were fully entertained by our small investments.

[grieferbastard]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Every time this DLC and price
discussion comes up the phrase that keeps coming to my mind over and
over and over is "you're doing it wrong." 75% of the people here don't
seem to understand appropriate price comparison or analysis.

And
I still find this effort to somehow justfy why your opinion on
somethings relative value is in any way, shape or form other than just
your opinion. I'm pretty familiar with price comparison and analysis.
You seem to be trying to compare price between the DLC and the original
product - probably a more flawed relation than DLC vs
coffee. Given than it's an entertainment product and its value subject
to individual consumer perception just adds even more confusion to the
whole basis of your trying to say that it's 'overpriced'.

So, once again, you've got an opinion. And a bellybutton. Both of which have a very comperable impact on the value of DLC.

Tell you what. Show me a relative production, licensing, marketing and distribution cost analysis for an original game and its DLC as well as any returning support costs. Than we can discuss the relative merits of pricing on both products. Without that the only thing you've got is what it feels like its worth to you. Trying to pretend that the length of playtime or any other arbitrary relation is somehow a valid measure for relative worth is just you RPing. If you want to RP do it in game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

There is no such thing as a fair price.  There are prices you are willing to pay and prices you are not.  The concept of fairness doesn't apply.  I am, however, willing to listen to counter-arguments.

I am not discussing this with you again. I have gone over very explicit definitions with you in the very recent past and you simply refuse to accept them. It's an impasse, and that is that.

Here I think you're misusing the concept of fairness, and as such have rendered your complaints meaningless.

The results are painfully short bits of content for unreasonable prices.

I also think you're misusing "unreasonable".

[steelfire_dragon]

hahahahahahaha.



just finish reading the dev comments.



anyway I thought rto was worht the 5 books.



warden's peak, not so much unless it gets patch ed to open up the keep's insides after the fade is sealed.



come one, I wanted a strong hold there and use it instead of the camp...

[the_one_54321]

grieferbastard wrote...
Tell you what. Show me a relative production, licensing, marketing and distribution cost analysis for an original game and its DLC as well as any returning support costs. Than we can discuss the relative merits of pricing on both products. Without that the only thing you've got is what it feels like its worth to you.

All of that is the developer and publisher's issue to manage. I'm not talking about project cost analysis. I'm talking about market cost analysis. Comparing game prices to movies, coffee, lunch, or whatever you migh have lined up is inaccurate and produces skewed and misinformative results. You should only be comparing prices to other video game RPGs. You should be comparaing based on historical costs, inflation, what little you might know about production costs and the companies historical reported profits. There is no "play" in this. It boils down to creating yoru subjectve value judgment from a list of objective market factors.