BioShock Infinite Launch Date Moved to 2013

[ThePenguinKnight]

Yes, that is a reason to have a day-one patch, but not PREMIUM DLC!

Continue working on that extra finishing touch, that final bug-fix, but have that as a patch. This is what Valve does, they don't charge another $10-15 for the HDR-rendering that they added for Half Life 2, they just rolled it out in a free update.

If it was SUPPOSED to be in the original full price game but "didn't quite make it" that is NO EXCUSE to charge for it. I mean if you are LATE with your work that doesn't mean I should have to pay extra!!! Free patches that add great content to the game are GREAT marketing, it gets column space on websites like this and boosts sales, keeps it relevant.

Now clearly there are cases were DLC is a true expansion pack, it was never considered for the launch release and is totally tangential to the game they were making, it was made as a result of left over assets and bridging to the next instalment, it only makes sense as a low price expansion pack. Like a whole new adventure clearly taking place AFTER the game has concluded or is of a completely different side story. So it's a case that it wasn't what they really wanted to include in the game because it comes either after the narrative conclusion or happens outside the main narrative; seen respectively with Half Life Opposing Force and Half Life Episodes.

But not for a mid story element, like that premium DLC for DX:HR, that was clearly in-line with the narrative and was supposed to have been part of the game, if you paid for DX:HR you should have gotten that portion with a free-update. And it would have been good press, it would have reminded people how great the game is.

SO whenever there is DLC (which is a very broad term) I ask: is this a Patch or is this an Expansion pack. I am NOT paying for the former, I may pay something for the latter.

Maps are the exception to this. Maps in multiplayer games can clearly be churned out at a steady rate after the fact but it's a bad idea to charge for them as they horribly fracture your online community; You can't have a regular map rotation without losing 50% of the players each time as they didn't happen to buy that particular map. You need to get people IN the game and playing. Also you should open the game up to custom maps that must be free and you can't really be competitive with those. Once you got them in the game, then you can start selling them stuff.

Wow, that's certainly a mouthful. When they're waiting for the finalization they don't really have the time to make something of an expansion. Depending on how long they have they'll either release it as a pre-order bonus or if it takes especially long they'll have to opt for day 1 DLC to make up for their losses. I never thought I'd defend day 1 DLC but when you take the time to think about it, it only makes sense. I do believe however there are a few ways to make this a lot less like a kick in the balls to gamers.

1: Lower the price of Day 1 DLC and Disc Locked DLC. There is no excuse for them to cost upwards of $10 and it only makes the company look greedy and uncaring.
2: Delay for about a week, the game will still be relevant and fans of the game would have likely completed it and would be willing to pay for more.
3: Stop Disc Locked DLC, just stop.

 

[War Penguin]

Good. Take your time. Make it good. Make it complete. Put all of your attention into this. Because I really have a shit ton of faith in this game. I really hope that this proves that putting lots of time and effort, rather than putting out a game early, will sell just as well on release.

 

[Treblaine]

Yes, that is a reason to have a day-one patch, but not PREMIUM DLC!

Continue working on that extra finishing touch, that final bug-fix, but have that as a patch. This is what Valve does, they don't charge another $10-15 for the HDR-rendering that they added for Half Life 2, they just rolled it out in a free update.

If it was SUPPOSED to be in the original full price game but "didn't quite make it" that is NO EXCUSE to charge for it. I mean if you are LATE with your work that doesn't mean I should have to pay extra!!! Free patches that add great content to the game are GREAT marketing, it gets column space on websites like this and boosts sales, keeps it relevant.

Now clearly there are cases were DLC is a true expansion pack, it was never considered for the launch release and is totally tangential to the game they were making, it was made as a result of left over assets and bridging to the next instalment, it only makes sense as a low price expansion pack. Like a whole new adventure clearly taking place AFTER the game has concluded or is of a completely different side story. So it's a case that it wasn't what they really wanted to include in the game because it comes either after the narrative conclusion or happens outside the main narrative; seen respectively with Half Life Opposing Force and Half Life Episodes.

But not for a mid story element, like that premium DLC for DX:HR, that was clearly in-line with the narrative and was supposed to have been part of the game, if you paid for DX:HR you should have gotten that portion with a free-update. And it would have been good press, it would have reminded people how great the game is.

SO whenever there is DLC (which is a very broad term) I ask: is this a Patch or is this an Expansion pack. I am NOT paying for the former, I may pay something for the latter.

Maps are the exception to this. Maps in multiplayer games can clearly be churned out at a steady rate after the fact but it's a bad idea to charge for them as they horribly fracture your online community; You can't have a regular map rotation without losing 50% of the players each time as they didn't happen to buy that particular map. You need to get people IN the game and playing. Also you should open the game up to custom maps that must be free and you can't really be competitive with those. Once you got them in the game, then you can start selling them stuff.

Wow, that's certainly a mouthful. When they're waiting for the finalization they don't really have the time to make something of an expansion. Depending on how long they have they'll either release it as a pre-order bonus or if it takes especially long they'll have to opt for day 1 DLC to make up for their losses. I never thought I'd defend day 1 DLC but when you take the time to think about it, it only makes sense. I do believe however there are a few ways to make this a lot less like a kick in the balls to gamers.

1: Lower the price of Day 1 DLC and Disc Locked DLC. There is no excuse for them to cost upwards of $10 and it only makes the company look greedy and uncaring.
2: Delay for about a week, the game will still be relevant and fans of the game would have likely completed it and would be willing to pay for more.
3: Stop Disc Locked DLC, just stop.

Just make it free. No pre-order "bonus" or any payscales or any other BS. It was SUPPOSED to be in the games so just add it in.

THIS IS WHAT VALVE DOES! Valve has a good reputation for this. You look at the most loved developers, they do NOT pulls shit like charging money out the game for essential portions of the game. Not customisable extras, but whole portions like weapons, levels, quests and maps.

Premium DLC does NOT get positive press, free updates do. OK, the bare minimum you can get away with is have this extra content be for people who bought the game new which is reasonable as you haven't actually given the $60 for YOUR turn with the game, you paid $35-40 to gamestop or whoever. Moot on PC where re-sales are almost non-existent.

Disc-locked content is most definitely NOT a case of developers work in the down time from going gold to release. The game's final version - I mean 100% FINAL version - is sent off for approval months before release to all the censorship boards and EVERYTHING must be on disc must be the same, not a single byte may be changed. This has been so since the infamous Hot Coffee content in GTA San Andreas.

So if the content is on disc, they had it ready WELL before the "down time" and the ONLY reason to charge for it is to rip you off. They DELIBERATELY withhold content that is READY TO GO! They just demand more money. There is no excuse for it. They should just charge $70 for the WHOLE game (rather than $60) without any content arbitrarily removed or walled off.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

This game better be the second coming of Jesus, otherwise Levine will have fireworks up his arse.

After this much time, and this much hype, a mediocre game will just kill all his fans faith.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Just make it free. No pre-order "bonus" or any payscales or any other BS.
They should just charge and extra $10 for the game and include the disc-locked content

Well which is it? Do you want it free or do you want to pay $10 for it?
Disc Locked DLC is bullshit but typical day one DLC cannot be added to the disc so paying an additional $10 for it to be on the disc is simply impossible. Also, what difference does it make whether it's on the disc or downloaded? You get the same content for the same price and it'd actually be something the company could achieve.

 

[Treblaine]

Just make it free. No pre-order "bonus" or any payscales or any other BS.
They should just charge and extra $10 for the game and include the disc-locked content

Well which is it? Do you want it free or do you want to pay $10 for it?
Disc Locked DLC is bullshit but typical day one DLC cannot be added to the disc so paying an additional $10 for it to be on the disc is simply impossible. Also, what difference does it make whether it's on the disc or downloaded? You get the same content for the same price and it'd actually be something the company could achieve.

What I am saying is, if publishers think $60 is not enough to sell their game for, don't bullshit us around cutting out content and selling it back to us, just charge $70. That's what I mean by "an extra $10". Literally sell games at $69.99.

It's like selling a car, the car-makers want to sell it for $12'000 but the going rate is $10'000, so they remove essential features to making it a full car, they remove the windscreen wipers, rear seats and carpets, it's still technically a car and you can still drive it... but it's been gutted and they are charging a further $2'000 to get it all.

It's Bullshit as they are acting like it's a good deal, get everything they worked on for $10'000 (or $60 for game) but really they've been pulling stuff out.

At the moment they are charging $60 + then trying to get another $10 surreptitiously for content of questionable quality, just give it to us as one package for one price.

EXTRA payments should be for EXTRA content.

I've decided to go back and edit for clarity so this:

"They should just charge and extra $10 for the game and include the disc-locked content"

becomes

"They should just charge $70 for the WHOLE game (rather than $60) without any content arbitrarily removed or walled off."

Then people can decide if the WHOLE game is worth $70 or if they should just skip it.

 

[ThePenguinKnight]

Well which is it? Do you want it free or do you want to pay $10 for it?
Disc Locked DLC is bullshit but typical day one DLC cannot be added to the disc so paying an additional $10 for it to be on the disc is simply impossible. Also, what difference does it make whether it's on the disc or downloaded? You get the same content for the same price and it'd actually be something the company could achieve.

What I am saying is, if publishers think $60 is not enough to sell their game for, don't bullshit us around cutting out content and selling it back to us, just charge $70. That's what I mean by "an extra $10". Literally sell games at $69.99.

It's like selling a car, the car-makers want to sell it for $12'000 but the going rate is $10'000, so they remove essential features to making it a full car, they remove the windscreen wipers, rear seats and carpets, it's still technically a car and you can still drive it... but it's been gutted and they are charging a further $2'000 to get it all.

It's Bullshit as they are acting like it's a good deal, get everything they worked on for $10'000 (or $60 for game) but really they've been pulling stuff out.

At the moment they are charging $60 + then trying to get another $10 surreptitiously for content of questionable quality, just give it to us as one package for one price.

EXTRA payments should be for EXTRA content.

I've decided to go back and edit for clarity so this:

"They should just charge and extra $10 for the game and include the disc-locked content"

becomes

"They should just charge $70 for the WHOLE game (rather than $60) without any content arbitrarily removed or walled off."

Then people can decide if the WHOLE game is worth $70 or if they should just skip it.

Well unless it's disc locked than it's not cut content, it's new. What if someone like myself doesn't want to spend an additional $10 for it? What about the games with no additional content? They'd just raise their prices as well to keep up with competition.

 

[Treblaine]

Then people can decide if the WHOLE game is worth $70 or if they should just skip it.

Well unless it's disc locked than it's not cut content, it's new. What if someone like myself doesn't want to spend an additional $10 for it? What about the games with no additional content? They'd just raise their prices as well to keep up with competition.

Not necessarily new content. If the content is on the disc, that moves it was ready months before release (so not new) and if it is locked off they are simply price gouging. But there is the possibility the content WAS ready but they deliberately removed it from on the disc. There is always the possibility a level of feature that was ready as they went to print was deliberately withheld and the publishers decide to charge for it to be sold separately.

The point of the $70 price is developers need to be HONEST about what the WHOLE game costs! The point is if everyone knew it REALLY cost $70 for the whole game then less people would buy it, so much less they would make less. Or maybe not.

It is NOT good to start DELIBERATELY BUTCHERING YOUR GAME, removing cool sections,

Do you remember Call of Duty 4? Imagine they cut out the Chernobyl level, that they called it an "optional extra" because it is a flashback? No. Bullshit. That was integral to the varying pace of the gameplay. Yet publishers are doing that now with games. They are cutting out entire levels and demanding extra.

And the worst part of all of this: you don't know if you are paying for something that was ripped out, or that is tacked on

The game needs to be a WHOLE, and make very clear what are tacked on extras and charge for them appropriately.

As for game pricing, the way forward is lower price, not higher. The market is no where near saturated, the problem is so many customers scared away by the high prices not to mention worry about games having their content butchered and thrown in amongst other tacked on crap.

You sell games at $40, they will sell at such a higher rate you'll have a higher revenue than when they sold at $60.

 

[TheSteeleStrap]

If they need an extra 5 months to make the game better, I won't fault them for that. It's one I'm looking forward to and I would like it to be worth looking forward to.

 

[Zen Toombs]

Ken Levine wants to make sure Columbia is ready for visitors.

Thank the Maker, game developers are starting to make some sense! Release the game at a reasonable time, but make sure the game is worthy of release first.

 

[Strain42]

Even if it's 100% horse shit (which I'm not saying this is) if a game gets delayed because they want to make sure it's good, I'm okay with that.

Plus this works for me, it knocks a game off my 2012 list lol

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

Well, that just leaves more time to play [insert game here].

For me, this means months more of Borderlands 2.

 

[IWCAS]

Aw.
But I will wait if the game will be as polished as I hope it will be.