Jimquisition: Downloadable Discontent
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Ok, you mention price as your main parameter, especially for things that don't change the gameplay. Then what about DotA 2 where they sell you skins and cosmetic items for up to $35 or more, but the game is free and the gains go to the community members that designed it?
1. Fans screaming about ancillary DLC like skin packs and weapons packs bother me, because they may be cash-ins but they aren't required to make the game fun. You really don't have to buy every DLC you know.
2. All I see in DLC is a new form of the old school expansion packs, which added new material that was comparably 1/3's worth of the original content size. And the DLC prices are less than the xpac content was (which if I remember correctly was anywhere from $19.99 to $29.99) or if you want to really bicker, voice acting content for Wing Commander games. Talk about features that should have been in the original.
Sure the Witcher dev's give out their DLC for free, big deal.
I really am sick of that excuse. I find it a convenience that I can get game content not too long after the game is released and am willing to pay for convenience. Hell these dev's aren't required to update the game even with patches and I feel DLC is a way of "voting with the wallet" for a game I like and want just a little more of.
Not that ALL DLC is good content.
Oh, I've also seen Oblivion's Shivering Isles being hailed as the pinnacle of good post-release content. BTW, it was $30 when it first came out, available in both digital and disc-based formats. Much higher than most DLC is now. And it wasn't a large map, nor a lot of content. Knights of the Nine was a bust for its price however.
So folks, how is DLC a bad thing when PC games have been doing it for a long time with a different delivery method? Remember ancillary DLC isn't worth an argument because its not extra playable content, just different skins or weapons which no one needs to buy to enjoy the game.
Here's another question for CCG players, if you feel DLC is bad and should be free, why pay for booster packs for card games every time they update the mechanics or release new cards? Physical merchandise shouldn't be held to a higher standard than digital. The content of games, however they are delivered is still digital.
Thats my view. I don't always like what dev's put out, but I also don't have to buy it.
2. All I see in DLC is a new form of the old school expansion packs, which added new material that was comparably 1/3's worth of the original content size. And the DLC prices are less than the xpac content was (which if I remember correctly was anywhere from $19.99 to $29.99) or if you want to really bicker, voice acting content for Wing Commander games. Talk about features that should have been in the original.
Sure the Witcher dev's give out their DLC for free, big deal.
I really am sick of that excuse. I find it a convenience that I can get game content not too long after the game is released and am willing to pay for convenience. Hell these dev's aren't required to update the game even with patches and I feel DLC is a way of "voting with the wallet" for a game I like and want just a little more of.
Not that ALL DLC is good content.
Oh, I've also seen Oblivion's Shivering Isles being hailed as the pinnacle of good post-release content. BTW, it was $30 when it first came out, available in both digital and disc-based formats. Much higher than most DLC is now. And it wasn't a large map, nor a lot of content. Knights of the Nine was a bust for its price however.
So folks, how is DLC a bad thing when PC games have been doing it for a long time with a different delivery method? Remember ancillary DLC isn't worth an argument because its not extra playable content, just different skins or weapons which no one needs to buy to enjoy the game.
Here's another question for CCG players, if you feel DLC is bad and should be free, why pay for booster packs for card games every time they update the mechanics or release new cards? Physical merchandise shouldn't be held to a higher standard than digital. The content of games, however they are delivered is still digital.
Thats my view. I don't always like what dev's put out, but I also don't have to buy it.
Genius.Jimothy Sterling said:
I agree completely with this video and would emphasise how absurb the idea of season passes is. Paying early for something that you've no idea the content or quality of. Voluntarily.
It isn't such a problem that it exists, but who would take that deal? It is buying a pig in a poke.
The data on a disc is digital, read by the computer the same exact way as a downloaded game is with the exception that one is on a disc and the other is on the internet. Owning a disc doesn't do much except perhaps feed your materialistic side, which is ridiculous. A product is a product, physical or digital and should be held to the same standard.bringer of illumination said:
Anyone knows what's shown at 4:15?
Weren't they charging for the Portal 2 cosmetic items, though? Or did I dream that?LosButcher said:
Yeesh, haven't you already done this topic to death, Jim? And you say there's yet another one coming up?
Can you find something new to talk about that we haven't already heard dozens of times?
Can you find something new to talk about that we haven't already heard dozens of times?
I agree with this.
Nintendo seems to have the right idea about it.
They had DLC for Fire Emblem: Awakening. Some of them long stories in and of themselves all for under $2.00 which is usually an impulsive buy for me.
Same can be said for their PMD series. Every dungeon DLC they offered was only a $1.00. $2.00 at most.
Nintendo seems to have the right idea about it.
They had DLC for Fire Emblem: Awakening. Some of them long stories in and of themselves all for under $2.00 which is usually an impulsive buy for me.
Same can be said for their PMD series. Every dungeon DLC they offered was only a $1.00. $2.00 at most.
On a personal note about topics Jim talks about, I was honestly kind of expecting you to talk about the 2DS.
A lot of controversy surrounding the fact that it's not meant to appeal to the "gamer" audience, but rather a niche market that is oft dismissed as unprofitable. Yet despite this news, people threw a shit fit anyway. I'm not saying to defend the thing, but perhaps bring in a discussion about things like this in general.
I would fit in nicely with with your "best pastas not best pasta" video you made a while back.
But you know...DLC. It's kind of becoming a dead horse imo. Kinda shake things up a bit yeah?
captcha: "spicy"
whoa captcha, I wasn't trying to be saucy here.
A lot of controversy surrounding the fact that it's not meant to appeal to the "gamer" audience, but rather a niche market that is oft dismissed as unprofitable. Yet despite this news, people threw a shit fit anyway. I'm not saying to defend the thing, but perhaps bring in a discussion about things like this in general.
I would fit in nicely with with your "best pastas not best pasta" video you made a while back.
But you know...DLC. It's kind of becoming a dead horse imo. Kinda shake things up a bit yeah?
captcha: "spicy"
whoa captcha, I wasn't trying to be saucy here.
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.
Several years on and we see the naysayers had the right of it. DLC is now being abused to the point that consumers get even less game than they used to, yet have to spend more money to get it. Why did it all go wrong?
While I'd like to just point my finger at greed-mongers such as EA Games and say its all their fault, I can't in good faith do that. I'm sorry to say the main culprit is gamers themselves. Yes you my gaming friends. You are the ones who sold us into bondage.
Every time a company released a game with less content than it should have rightfully contained and consumers bought it any way, every pointless piece of optional extra fluff DLC you paid for that should have been in the game to start with, every piece of convenience game play by-passing DLC you purchased because you were too lazy to just play the game as intended, is another nail in the coffin of our consumer rights. Congratulations. Hope you're proud of yourselves.
And Jim, you find that the show is a little short this week and need to find something to fill the time and this little bit of self exposition is all you could think of? If this wasn't the perfect opportunity for you to film yourself cavorting with sex toys then I just don't know what is. You let us all down man.
*Christian Bale Batman voice* [color="FF0033"] WHAT WERE YOU THINKING!!?? [/color]
Several years on and we see the naysayers had the right of it. DLC is now being abused to the point that consumers get even less game than they used to, yet have to spend more money to get it. Why did it all go wrong?
While I'd like to just point my finger at greed-mongers such as EA Games and say its all their fault, I can't in good faith do that. I'm sorry to say the main culprit is gamers themselves. Yes you my gaming friends. You are the ones who sold us into bondage.
Every time a company released a game with less content than it should have rightfully contained and consumers bought it any way, every pointless piece of optional extra fluff DLC you paid for that should have been in the game to start with, every piece of convenience game play by-passing DLC you purchased because you were too lazy to just play the game as intended, is another nail in the coffin of our consumer rights. Congratulations. Hope you're proud of yourselves.
And Jim, you find that the show is a little short this week and need to find something to fill the time and this little bit of self exposition is all you could think of? If this wasn't the perfect opportunity for you to film yourself cavorting with sex toys then I just don't know what is. You let us all down man.
*Christian Bale Batman voice* [color="FF0033"] WHAT WERE YOU THINKING!!?? [/color]
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").
(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").
Was there a meta joke here? Two minutes from the end and the video glitched green, stopped and went into an ad for the Publishers Club. Do I have to pay five bucks to get the rest of the video?
On the plus side, I prefer the red shirt, black tie combo Jim. Looks nice
On the plus side, I prefer the red shirt, black tie combo Jim. Looks nice