Oh come on EA what happened, you were cool again for a bit. Now you're planning on doing things wrong again.
EA Considering Paid DLC Before Game Release
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Hmm... extra content that is a prequel. I would buy afterwards IF I liked the game enough.
If it is just the first chunk of the game and I get it when I buy the full version, I'd rather go to Blockbuster (or whatever place rents games) rent it for a third of that and play the full version.
If it is just the first chunk of the game and I get it when I buy the full version, I'd rather go to Blockbuster (or whatever place rents games) rent it for a third of that and play the full version.
I don't understand where so many people are getting this "prequel" business from. This is buying a piece of a game, then buying the rest of the game later. It's the same content (according to the article anyway).FoolKiller said:
I actually read the article that is The Escapist's source, it does say something about it being like a demo but it would more likely be a prequel. He - that is the monster known as Pachter - can't say for sure though...
Either way the plan sounds solid, I have no real fault with it if it's actually a prequel. If it's an actual part of the game, we deserve a discount if we bought it. And if it is a paid BETA... well, that's been done before and EA isn't to blame for its success and want to do so [footnote] That's Atari's fault.[/footnote] as they wish to keep the men that makes their company as powerful as it is. Otherwise Activision would buy them out and I for one don't wish to see that. We don't want Activision to become stronger.
As for myself... I'm on the fence about the plan and need to see it for myself. Mainly because the source article is very vague.
Either way the plan sounds solid, I have no real fault with it if it's actually a prequel. If it's an actual part of the game, we deserve a discount if we bought it. And if it is a paid BETA... well, that's been done before and EA isn't to blame for its success and want to do so [footnote] That's Atari's fault.[/footnote] as they wish to keep the men that makes their company as powerful as it is. Otherwise Activision would buy them out and I for one don't wish to see that. We don't want Activision to become stronger.
As for myself... I'm on the fence about the plan and need to see it for myself. Mainly because the source article is very vague.
Cool. More crap I won't buy.
So far, the industry has disappointed me greatly. If you're going to sell me a bunch of crap, make it priced like crap. $10-15 better get me a fifth of game content.
And $60 better get me 20+ hours of single player action in an FPS.
This entire industry is becoming absurd.
So far, the industry has disappointed me greatly. If you're going to sell me a bunch of crap, make it priced like crap. $10-15 better get me a fifth of game content.
And $60 better get me 20+ hours of single player action in an FPS.
This entire industry is becoming absurd.
The $60 + dlc cost games of today don't provide the same value to the gamer as the $30-40 games of 15-25 years ago did. Now the publishers want to effectively raise the price by transferring the risk the game sucks to the buyer rather than themselves.
I'm glad I'm old enough that I don't care about getting new releases, I see no reason to ever get anything new, when you can get the exact same thing for 1/4 the price a year or two later.
The entire public corporation system is utterly broken but that is a discussion for another day.
Get off my lawn.
I'm glad I'm old enough that I don't care about getting new releases, I see no reason to ever get anything new, when you can get the exact same thing for 1/4 the price a year or two later.
The entire public corporation system is utterly broken but that is a discussion for another day.
Get off my lawn.
just spitballing here but why don't they just release a DLC network early (by DLC network I mean something like mass effect 2) so you pay for the network and get the DLC but you also get other DLC if you buy the full game.
Well, that's the next step from people participating in the beta for free: making people pay for the beta.Snowalker said:
I can't say I'm surprised. Gamers have proven over the past few years that they are willing to pay anything for cheap crap. So the crap is just going to get cheaper while the prices get higher.
Sorry I think these games are expensive enough and if the rest of you suckers are going to keep paying whatever they ask, it's going to get a lot worse.
I like how companies are always coming up with new ways to prevent me from spending my money on their products.
OK, that is it. Seriously, stop with all the DLC. If you want to add more content to a game, spend a few more months developing it. Stop making us pay for codes to unlock things that were already on the disc. Stop releasing DLC in smaller parts for more money. Just stop with DLC all together. I am not paying for whatever this shit is, whether it's an extended demo or some sort of prequel I don't care. If you really want to continue with this then I'm not even going to buy the games since they cost the same price despite only having half the content. Go to hell EA.
So we can get to the end of one of our favorite games, and then some mind-blowing twist happens, but you have no idea what is going on, because you didn't play the "prequel"? Nah man, just nah. And I'm not paying money to test their games. Do it yourselves, you have the money, especially after jacking all of ours.
