Has he paid attention to the news lately? With all the industry flubs, people are a bit wary.Robb did say that he didn't "quite understand the knee-jerk negative reaction to DLC.
Evolve Devs: Go look up Ubisoft and Unity real quick. We'll wait.
Has he paid attention to the news lately? With all the industry flubs, people are a bit wary.Robb did say that he didn't "quite understand the knee-jerk negative reaction to DLC.
They won't do that, and even if they wanted to, corporate wouldn't let them.Zhukov said:But I just wish they'd include an Absolutely Everything Pack. They can price it at whatever they think it's worth.
Irony.Jadak said:Honestly, people are too whiny.
While I agree that "vote with your wallet" must come first, consumer feedback is useful for other consumers; yet, nobody is forcing you to read them nor do you need to read them to vote with your wallet.*snip*
If that is not happening, then shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.If that is not happening, then shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.
This is a place where we talk about what's good and bad about games. We are perfectly capable of both not buying a game and communicating why. And there's nothing wrong with that.Jadak said:...Don't like the value for the price? Don't fucking buy it.
...shut the fuck up, voice your opinion on the value of their offerings with your wallet.
Too true. But there's also something else to consider, that being the "Tone at the Top" of these companies and shareholders.Atmos Duality said:They won't do that, and even if they wanted to, corporate wouldn't let them.Zhukov said:But I just wish they'd include an Absolutely Everything Pack. They can price it at whatever they think it's worth.
Why?
Because then they lose out on all of that extra nickle and diming cash.
DLC works because like any financial transaction, it's easier or SEEMS cheaper (in the moment) to buy little bits piecemeal, even if it turns out to be some absurd sum in the end.
If you were to show people the true full price of most of these new games, I'd wager they would shy away entirely.
To be fair, everything worth getting in HotS can be obtained by playing the game. If one does their dailies fairly diligently, you can unlock all characters and even a bunch of bonus skins and mounts. Unless you really MUST have Blood Elf Tyrande, then you never have to drop a cent into that game to get all of the content.Steven Bogos said:I completely agree. I just want to pay for a game ONCE and get all of its content. You know, back in the good old days where you bought a game, and any future content was free, released in patches, or bundled with a major, MAJOR amount of content in an expansion pack.Zhukov said:I don't find it dirty or underhanded. I think the automatic hysteria over DLC is a bit dumb.
I do however find it rather tiresome. I don't want to have to look at a fucking flowchart when buying a game.
Just give me everything and put a fucking price tag on it. I shall then decide whether or not I want to pay that price. Bam. Done. Sold. Simple.
I would have said Blizzard is one of the last devs to still do this, but the pricing structure for Heroes of the Storm is fucking awful.
I'm quite aware of that.Ishal said:Too true. But there's also something else to consider, that being the "Tone at the Top" of these companies and shareholders.
Yeah, the business culture is extremely "hit-based" now.There are people who work in marketing for these big publishers who's sole job is to make hype, and sustain it. They live and breathe pre-order culture. They have insane bonuses when a game makes money from pre-orders and breaks a certain number of day one sales. How do they achieve this? They want their game to be the next big hit. For whatever genre they are developing, they want their game to be the next big one. For MMO's it's WoW, for FPS it's CoD, etc etc.
First, I MOSTLY agree with your points, and definitely agree with the general attitude or "take".They don't want this to be a successful game. They don't want this to be a game that makes net money for a return. They don't want this to be a game that has lasting impact and will be played ten years from now. They want a game that is the #1 best seller so they can slap that on the box and add to the hype. This is Watch Dogs. This is Destiny. This is what these people sell to their shareholders at meetings. This why there is already a Destiny 2 in the works. This has a large effect on the game development because at these big publishers, these individuals are positioned at a place in corporate hierarchy where they can dictate policy.
While there is certainly no shortage of short-sighted idiocy in game design these days, I think these companies DO want a successful game that has lasting impact, but a different sort of impact from the kind we want. Mainly, because I think they're defining "success" differently than we do and to show why, we need to look at the most "successful" games on the market.They don't want this to be a successful game. They don't want this to be a game that makes net money for a return. They don't want this to be a game that has lasting impact and will be played ten years from now. They want a game that is the #1 best seller so they can slap that on the box and add to the hype.
You filthy sneaky ninja you, I came here to say that!AntiChri5 said:Then stop doing dirty, underhanded shit.