Jimquisition: Downloadable Discontent

[Sgt Pepper]

One of the few companies imo that I think do DLC right is Bethesda, sure, they had a mis-step or two with Oblivion (Horse armour, I'm looking at you) but Fallout 3/NV and Skyrim got it generally right, though oddly I found more value in the Hearthfire DLC (Mainly due to gathering mats by mining myself and buying the odd bits of ore I could find from Vendors) than I did, say, Dragonborn.

One big point for Bethesda was ease. Add to cart in Steam, pay, it updates the game. I would actually probably have bought some of the DA DLC but too much messing around. Buying Bioware points to buy the DLC is just annoying. For this reason, I only bought one and couldn't be arsed again later when more was released.

Ditto for the DLC that was sold through GFWL, for such as Batman AA or AC (If you bought the boxed copy, not the Steam version) and the original Bioshock games.

Also, I've held off buying Borderlands 2 in a recent Steam sale because I clicked it and there was a list of 30+ DLC. This game isn't the only offender but it's one that does come to mind from recently. I'm not gonna sit there and try to figure out which is fluff and which is extra missions etc.

Lastly, keep it simple. Ubisoft and EA are bad for this, several different editions of the same game and later selling the bits as DLC. Trying to figure which DLC I had included from purchase of various AC and ME games and which I didn't meant doing quite a bit of research to ensure I didn't buy something I already had depending on where I'd purchased the game or which bundle it was in during a Steam sale. Have somewhere in the game that I can clearly check which DLC I have already.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

I stopped buying DLC back in '08/'09 when I got tired of Bungie forcing me to buy a $10 map pack so I could continue to play team swat and other fun playlists in Halo 2 and 3 with my friends. And, this is on Xbox "you gotta give us dough every month to play" Live. I'm already paying for this premium service and you want more money, screw you. Hell, the maps rarely even shown up for months even after forcing us to fork out the cash. They repeatedly pushed my buttons by locking me out of my playlists of choice, and I just stopped paying for DLC and live.

Another problem I have with DLC is, unless you find a trustworthy review of it, you have no idea if it is worth the money, and you can't return, exchange, or trade it in. If that's the game of hardball publishers want to play, then I'm with Jim. I will buy things on Steam, GOG, etc., but I won't spend $15 on a lame side mission or $5 on useless bling.

 

[hexFrank202]

Is it just me, or did Jim sound like a totally different person in this episode?

...I think that Dragon Dildo might have worked its way into his head and infected him.

 

[Abomination]

As the gaming market grows, so has supply and demand. (obviously, but there is a point here)

(DEMAND) With increased demand in a luxury market there is an increasing temptation to hike prices. Simple economics.
(SUPPLY) At the same time, we've seen AAA production budgets skyrocket exponentially; An obvious motivation for a price hike if you ask me.

Both of these forces are urging the market into making price hikes. Yet, the same market is wary of moving away from its stable 40-60 USD baseline price (for AAA/"premium" games).

To reconcile this publishers either have to increase the baseline price for games, or start selling additional post-purchase content at proportionately hiked prices.
One of these is easier to pitch to the consumer than the other.

Finally, there is additional perceived value in DLC simply due to increased interest in the game.
The people who are buying DLC already own and play the game. They have a greater investment into the game than a prospective buyer. (ASIDE: F2P games take this bit of psychology and run wild with it; which is why I'm always wary of F2P titles)

SUMMARY: (TL;DR) In the end, most DLC is just a price hike for what would be the full game.
There's nothing really "morally" wrong about it, though by no means does the consumer have to be happy about it either.

I look forward to seeing the episode on Season Passes.
I'm expecting a rant that condemns the blind front-loading of risk onto the consumer (or put more simply "Paying for promises, not products").

The problem with this though is that there's no extra cost for producing MORE of the same product. It actually throws the theory of supply and demand out the window.

In this case demand is still a diagonal line but supply is a VERTICAL one. Supply is infinite and producing more of the same product costs next to nothing. This very model encourages nothing but lower prices - or at least steadily lowering prices. The only cost is the initial design cost, which publishers have shown they are either unwilling or incapable of controlling in a restrained manner.

It's a relatively new industry that operates in an unexplored marketplace. There are growing pains and adjustments to be made before we have a price-value equilibrium... and at the moment publishers need to learn how to reign in spending and stop using such brute force marketing techniques that chew up development funding.

If the game is good the consumer will market it for them.

 

[Thanatos2k]

One of the worst parts is that over time the price of the main game will plummet, but the prices of these individual costume nonsense DLCs NEVER seems to go down. Some games have DLC that if you bought it all it would total several times the cost of the main game itself.

That is inexcusable.

 

[92Sierra]

I'm with you Jim, on the boycotting DLC costumes and other bits. Super Street Fighter 4 was my first exposure DLC costumes. I bought the game played through arcade mode and expected to unlock something like you do on all other fighters after you beat arcade mode. Nope. A little while later Capcom starts announcing all of the costume pack DLCs. Sorry, Capcom. You just lost some replayability to your fighter now that you gutted unlockable costumes to your game, what used to be a staple of every fighting game ever. I am not paying for that. In fact, you will be lucky if I buy your next game at all. Tekken has unlockable costumes and customization.

 

[Erttheking]

I have to agree with Jim for the most part, though then again I don't really see the big deal with season passes. Granted I can kinda understand the concept of putting money down before it's out, but I don't mind if it's from a company I know will make the DLC quality products. For example I bought the Metro Last Light season pass, and that's the only season pass I've bought in...forever...welp, I just sentenced myself to public stoning.

 

[Atmos Duality]

The problem with this though is that there's no extra cost for producing MORE of the same product. It actually throws the theory of supply and demand out the window.

In this case demand is still a diagonal line but supply is a VERTICAL one. Supply is infinite and producing more of the same product costs next to nothing. This very model encourages nothing but lower prices - or at least steadily lowering prices. The only cost is the initial design cost, which publishers have shown they are either unwilling or incapable of controlling in a restrained manner.

While rudimentary production and distribution has become cheaper as time has gone on, the price of production and development of new tools has grown with their need to compete. Their "only" cost might be an initial design cost, but that cost is positively enormous for any high caliber production.

The market forces remain the same; we still have supply and demand, and we still have caps and costs for both.
It's just that they follow the rules of a Natural Monopoly Good (or Information Good depending on your reference) instead of a Regular Good and you have to realistically account for that difference.

It's a relatively new industry that operates in an unexplored marketplace. There are growing pains and adjustments to be made before we have a price-value equilibrium... and at the moment publishers need to learn how to reign in spending and stop using such brute force marketing techniques that chew up development funding.

If the game is good the consumer will market it for them.

I agree there and I think most of AAA really need to find ways of competing within their market, rather than making all of these blatant attempts at power grabs. It almost seems that they behave like they own the whole market, when they don't (and when you call them out on it, someone responds with some tortured form of "entitled").

The market may have been slow to correct itself with some of these practices, but given the increasing rift in trust between gamers and the AAA publishers business practices, it is correcting itself.

At least, after the Xbone outrage and "M$ 180", I feel more confident in saying now.

I wouldn't have a problem with their marketing of DLC if publishers could stick to business models that require less "absolution" in corrective forces.

(like offering refunds for games that don't work, and legal requirements for them to fulfill their promises for services they mandated. In the United States, there are ways to waive liability for the failure of such services, meaning they legally don't have to provide shit after they get your money, as we saw with Sim City earlier this year)

Instead they're trying to "double-dip" into several models; borrowing the components that benefit them and eliminating the components that benefit the consumer.

Those immersion-killing DLC ads and out of place microtransactions popping up in single-player story driven games are just the latest results of that sort of double-dipping mentality.

 

[Something Amyss]

What, you wouldn't be upset if someone raved and ranted at you for something you've never done, treating as if you had done it? I know I would be. I know I find the concept of "guilt by association" reprehensible.

To be fair, wouldn't that apply to the Jimquisition on Hepler? Because I have watched it (and pretty much every Jimquisition) and I've never threatened Hepler or even Phil Fish. Clearly, it does not apply to me, yet I am not upset.

...Well, I'm upset that something as basic as "don't threaten people" needs to be said, but it does.

I'd also note we're talking about someone who didn't bother to watch what he claims to be offended by. That would be the equivalent of me seeing you responded, skipping reading it, quoting you, and being mad that you insulted me for my stance on Steam.

I know you didn't do that, because I read your post (even if I pared it down for the quote), but you take my point, I hope.

Okay steam is DRM there has always been DRM with games.

And now it's guaranteed to be on any game in your Steam library!

Seriously, "disk" is not DRM, though. It's a platform. An audio CD is not, by its nature, copy protected[footnote]in fact, by Blue Book standards a copy protected CD is not a CD[/footnote]. Disks were copyable. Copy protection has existed through most of the history, but it's never been standard. Valve made the biggest leap in this field.

I don't know why people feel the need to apologise for Steam and pretend everyone else has always been as bad.

Ironic, coming from you Amaranth, as you're quite adept at judging people. Oh, yes I remember your antics on these forums, and it does not surprise me to see that you leap to the defense of content creators with nary a consideration to the people they insult.

I think I speak for many when I type these words: go bother someone else.

See, it's not ironic because any judgment or condemnation I may offer comes after actually reading, watching, or listening to things that are said. It doesn't even look like you read my post, since I mention specifically the irony of judging someone without having even bothered to listen to what they had to say. You admitted this. You said you didn't bother with Sterling's "rant" and yet you claimed you knew exactly what he said. Believe it or not, that is not the same as "judging" someone after you have heard them speak.

And, for the record, I am not leaping to anyone's defense. You have an intellectually dishonest argument and have professed such with what seems like pride. I abhor dishonesty. I would also note your premise is false, because Jim gets enough responses from people to demonstrate the types of people he's addressing do watch the show. It's not a mutually exclusive pool. There's a lot of them. Go figure.

It's nice that you remember me. I wonder, however, if you remember things I actually said, or if you made similar presuppositions to the ones you made here, or the ones you made to the video you didn't actually watch.

By your own words, I must add.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Snip

If this comes off as me butting in then I apologize for that but guys I really think both of you need to take a step back and calm down. The discussion that the two of you have been having is only a few posts long, but the way I see it it isn't going to end well. Both of you have taken one or two shots at each other already and it feels like you aren't talking about Jim and his videos and seem to be going at each other instead.. As it stands, I don't see this discussion going anywhere well. It's not constructive, it's already hostile, and to be honest it feels like it's getting personal very fast.

Come on guys. Please don't do this.

 

[deadpool.forever]

Jim is my official new man crush.

 

[daxterx2005]

Imagine having to pay for DK mode in 007?
Freaking ridiculous.

 

[Lyvric]

Yep, I agree with all of this. I think what bothers me the most about DLC despite the core concept is nice, is that most mobile/tablet games have to have it. It just feels like 90%+ of cellular games now have DLC worse than console/computer. This especially with the free before now costly concept.

 

[Saltyk]

Actually, I only watched the first sixty seconds of it, because I knew what it was going to be in it's entirety

Even better, you didn't bother watching it but cast judgment on the contents.

I like the fact that you're condemning echo chamber mentality from within an echo chamber. I'd call it irony, but that's become bog standard since Fox News went big in the 90s.

It's not my fault people lack basic pattern recognition. Jim's gotten so fucking predictable, I can guess with 86% accuracy the words and statements coming out of his mouth.

Ironic, coming from you Amaranth, as you're quite adept at judging people. Oh, yes I remember your antics on these forums, and it does not surprise me to see that you leap to the defense of content creators with nary a consideration to the people they insult.

I think I speak for many when I type these words: go bother someone else.

Hey did you watch THIS video? So you remember that part where Jim said he didn't buy the costume? Maybe you could use that concept towards Jim and his vids. I mean if you don't like him, you can just not watch him. Then, at worst, you don't have to be offended by him. At best, Jim would get fired and you wouldn't have to hear him on this site anymore. See how that would work?

Oh, but doing that might be admitting that Jim is RIGHT about something. And that is unacceptable. Just like admitting that something he literally discussed two weeks ago isn't nearly as bad as you're making it out is unacceptable. Or admitting that, if you don't threaten the family of people in the gaming industry, he isn't talking about you, and you don't really have any good reason to get offended. Other than because you want to. Or you actually are guilty of some similar acts and Jim made you feel bad. Or you just want to complain.

You know what? I think I'll just ignore you. You obviously have nothing of actual value to say on any subject.

 

[Something Amyss]

calm down.

One way to ensure I am not calm is to dishonestly assert I am not calm or in need of being calm.

I will say this once and only once. Unless you are actually trying to rile me up, don't tell me to calm down, especially simply for dismissing someone else's dishonesty. Don't infer an emotional state that is not there. It's more irritating than the ad hominems that were already being slung at me.

Do this again--ever again--and you go on my ignore list and that's the end of any discourse.

Are we clear?

 

[JemJar]

Though its been around longer DLC first came to my attention in the days of The Elder Scrolls Oblivion. Anyone remember the horse armor DLC, and the uproar it inspired? Discussion waxed hot and furious among gamers on the forums at the time with naysayers, of which I was one, arguing how this was a terrible idea that companies would rampantly abuse. Others, such as the people at Bethesda, claimed it would usher in a new age of enlightenment where games could be living protean creations that would evolve and stay fresh as players would get tons of tiny updates rather than having to wait months or longer for expansions.

Pick your company. Gearbox's handling of Borderlands 2 DLC has been quite competent - yes, they've got some overpriced skins on DLC but given there are plenty of options offered for free in the game (and one bonus on with each DLC *content* pack too) it doesn't offend unless you get that collectathon urge.

Pokémon has a lot to answer for.

Otherwise the DLC has been pretty solid - the game was released in September last year, four DLC content packs (quality has been variable and the first couple were outsourced, which isn't quite "ideal") which have genuinely added a lot of content to the game, a lot of hours of fun and a lot (LOT) of endgame silliness for those in the community running around with all the shiniest loot.

They've released a couple of extra characters (the first may have just about sneaked in as on-disc sadly, though I think it was a pre-order only code & download situation) to send the roster from 4 to 6, they've boosted the level cap from 50 to 61 with another new-game-plus mode scaled to fit (though some people whine about the difficulty with varying degrees of justification) and today they release the next level cap increase to 72 and a little chunk of weird content to keep pushing the challenge onwards and upwards. It's been reasonably well handled.

Obviously there are good and bad examples, I just thought I'd write up a single experience of a game from a decent size developer getting it, by-and-large, right.

 

[Erttheking]

calm down.

One way to ensure I am not calm is to dishonestly assert I am not calm or in need of being calm.

I will say this once and only once. Unless you are actually trying to rile me up, don't tell me to calm down, especially simply for dismissing someone else's dishonesty. Don't infer an emotional state that is not there. It's more irritating than the ad hominems that were already being slung at me.

Do this again--ever again--and you go on my ignore list and that's the end of any discourse.

Are we clear?

I apologize. You have been very vocal about your political views all over this website and I was under the impression of someone of your political standings would consider comparing someone to Fox News to be a very deep insult. To be honest that was the post that I mainly had in mind when I replied to you, the post where you compared MachineMan to Fox News, a post that came off as very hostile and insulting. It was a simple misunderstanding. I apologize. There was no need for a reply that sounds like you're trying to threaten me.

I...no hard feelings right? I honestly was just trying to diffuse what I thought was a situation that was on the brink of spiraling out of control. I swear to GOD I wasn't trying to get you angry.

 

[Something Amyss]

the post where you compared MachineMan to Fox News

If you have to misrepresent what I said, perhaps you are the one who needs to calm down.

I called his echo chamber mentality "bog standard." I did not draw comparison to Fox News. The proximity of the words do not indicate comparison.

And as I don't want to be prodded into a situation where I might risk moderation in the heat of the moment, I'm going to walk away from this line of conversation. It would be nice if you just dropped it, but I don't hold out hope for that, so I'm simply going to remove myself from the equation here.