Okay, publishers/developers really need to stop doing this...

[JayDeth]

My apologies if anyone else has coined this phrase, but I'm going to call it, making consumers 'pay for the Black Dye' in honor of Fable 3 and I'm sure most of you know what I'm referring to.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against "planning" for future DLC like they did in, say, Fallout: New Vegas by having large, barren, inaccessible portions of the map. I'm fine with that. I find nice, neat, square shaped game worlds kinda silly anyway (GTA series, I'm looking at you).

And there's plenty of good DLC out there that does what it SHOULD do. DLC should add TO a product, not make it whole at a grossly inflated price. Map packs for shooters. Expansion packs for MMOs. These are things that add TO fun games to make them even better.

I understand that as companies, publishers want to make money, bottom line. But when you go to a restaurant and order a sandwich, you expect the whole sandwich, right? How would you feel if that sandwich didn't have a bun and the waitress said, in about ten minutes your bun will be on sale. Enjoy your meal.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not leaving these developers a tip.

 

[Nikolaz72]

I been moaning about this for ages, and i will tell you now save your breath
Because the majority dont give a fuck and some of them will actually defend the devs for doing it.
I know it sounds lazy but seriously i gave up years ago

My new found anger is "pricing of GAMES on PSN/LIVE compared to say the shops and steam
Lets for example take Mass Effect 2 on PSN... its £47.99 on there to download digitaly.. download..
no manual
No case
NO disk
no fuel to cart them round to shops
No shops taking there %
NO NEW GAME SMELL! (sorry but i am a sad wanker who inhales the contents of the case upon opening new game lol)
In the shops i can pick this up now for £20 notes BRAND NEW! yes brand new.. but if i was to do SONY/Bioware a favour and buy it of the store to help them get more money by avoiding all the uneeded costs and help the envioroment, i do nothing but rape my self.

The likes of sony MS ninty and especially devs want digital only sales (lets look at how steam is saving the pc games development to a degree)
But its not going to happen if they cant get there prices right

here me out Sony put me in charge of your PSN pricing and i will not only sell more units i would make you more money and make your fanbase bigger..
hell i do it for a living anyway, and its not hard, only needs 2 people sorting it out.

Ehm. Mass effect 2 on steam is 40 Euro. Do the maths please.

 

[JayDeth]

Topic derailed from response 1. Did I post on GameFAQs by mistake...?

 

[Ajna]

Sony really doesn't need your marketing advice. No, really.

Pretty much this.

What's the phrase TV Tropes uses? "You Fail Economics Forever".

Companies want to make money. They will charge as much money as they can for something, until people will stop buying the product at that price. And if they can make more money by raising the price further than they would from the customers they lost? They will.

If you actually object to the practice, don't buy the damn DLC, or (even better) the damn game. Otherwise, you're giving them no reason to change their practices.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Sony Marketing Department has over one hundred employees. They probably know more than you about marketing.

 

[johnzaku]

>_>

<_< stop the fighting =[

I do agree with OT though, it is a little odd, it;s one thing to add, but to charge extra for the intended product just sucks. so I wait for the kater editions that come with all the previous DLC =/

 

[tzimize]

My apologies if anyone else has coined this phrase, but I'm going to call it, making consumers 'pay for the Black Dye' in honor of Fable 3 and I'm sure most of you know what I'm referring to.

Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against "planning" for future DLC like they did in, say, Fallout: New Vegas by having large, barren, inaccessible portions of the map. I'm fine with that. I find nice, neat, square shaped game worlds kinda silly anyway (GTA series, I'm looking at you).

And there's plenty of good DLC out there that does what it SHOULD do. DLC should add TO a product, not make it whole at a grossly inflated price. Map packs for shooters. Expansion packs for MMOs. These are things that add TO fun games to make them even better.

I understand that as companies, publishers want to make money, bottom line. But when you go to a restaurant and order a sandwich, you expect the whole sandwich, right? How would you feel if that sandwich didn't have a bun and the waitress said, in about ten minutes your bun will be on sale. Enjoy your meal.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not leaving these developers a tip.

I think I love you. That sandwich think was just...ah...it made geeky tears flow down my eyes. I HATE that so few people get this, and mindlessly gobble up sub-par content while screaming MOAAAAAAAAAR.

 

[manaman]

there you go then its that price on pc on steam, that is also overpriced compared to the shops.

£34.41 on steam
£47.99 on PSN

then go to the shops. You know exactly what you're getting when you buy a digital copy, and a fat lot of good it'll do you to want money off because you don't get the "new game smell."

And trust me, Sony really doesn't need your marketing advice. No, really.

And this attitude is exactly what i am on about, no one cares.

That guy is pretty much tolling you, and you are just playing right into it. Dancing like a little puppet.

OT: Money isn't really an issue here. It is but less so then getting a good game. The problem for me is that most of the recent big blockbuster titles feel empty barren and without all the extras I am used to seeing in games. I stopped buying games new and on release from a number of companies. EA is one, and a major one. About the only company I feel isn't releasing half the game and forcing you to incrementally pay for the rest as they finish it over time is Bethesda. Well Fallout 3 felt a bit like that with the first DLC opening up free play at the end. Then you got into the DLC, and it all got better from there.

Both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age felt like unfinished game worlds, and with both of them I felt DLC added something that the game wad substantially worse off for not having.

I can wait, and just pick these games up after a year or two when they finally sell the super special collectors platinum edition packs that include everything for the same price or less then the original retail price.

 

[Nikolaz72]

there you go then its that price on pc on steam, that is also overpriced compared to the shops.

£34.41 on steam http://www.play.com/Games/Xbox360/4-/10267221/Mass-Effect-2/Product.html?searchtype=gameall&searchsource=0&searchstring=mass+effect+2&urlrefer=search&strefer=gameall&searchfilters=s{mass+effect+2}%2bc{362}%2b
£47.99 on PSN http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation3/4-/16164058/Mass-Effect-2/Product.html
that was 17.99 the other day in a sale, and i can get it even cheaper in the shops by me

Are those maths good enough for you?

As i said before devs and pubs charge whatever they want for whatever they want and people will defend it.

I stand by my point. Looking at steam right now and Mass Effect 2 is 40 euro. Want me to show how 40 euro is more than 48 Dollars?

 

[JayDeth]

OT: Money isn't really an issue here. It is but less so then getting a good game. The problem for me is that most of the recent big blockbuster titles feel empty barren and without all the extras I am used to seeing in games. I stopped buying games new and on release from a number of companies. EA is one, and a major one. About the only company I feel isn't releasing half the game and forcing you to incrementally pay for the rest as they finish it over time is Bethesda. Well Fallout 3 felt a bit like that with the first DLC opening up free play at the end. Then you got into the DLC, and it all got better from there.

Both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age felt like unfinished game worlds, and with both of them I felt DLC added something that the game wad substantially worse off for not having.

I can wait, and just pick these games up after a year or two when they finally sell the super special collectors platinum edition packs that include everything for the same price or less then the original retail price.

People still get suckered into buying games on release with pre-order items though. That's what happened most recently with Dragon Age 2. Got a sword and shield combo that increased the experience you receive. Going back to my food analogy, they basically give you a small bowl of soup while you wait for your actual meal to be ready. The difference here though is that they don't charge you more.

 

[Steppin Razor]

I stand by my point. Looking at steam right now and Mass Effect 2 is 40 euro. Want me to show how 40 euro is more than 48 Dollars?

That's a fucking pound symbol, not a dollar that you're looking at there. 48 pounds is approximately 55 Euros at the moment.

 

[manaman]

OT: Money isn't really an issue here. It is but less so then getting a good game. The problem for me is that most of the recent big blockbuster titles feel empty barren and without all the extras I am used to seeing in games. I stopped buying games new and on release from a number of companies. EA is one, and a major one. About the only company I feel isn't releasing half the game and forcing you to incrementally pay for the rest as they finish it over time is Bethesda. Well Fallout 3 felt a bit like that with the first DLC opening up free play at the end. Then you got into the DLC, and it all got better from there.

Both Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age felt like unfinished game worlds, and with both of them I felt DLC added something that the game wad substantially worse off for not having.

I can wait, and just pick these games up after a year or two when they finally sell the super special collectors platinum edition packs that include everything for the same price or less then the original retail price.

People still get suckered into buying games on release with pre-order items though. That's what happened most recently with Dragon Age 2. Got a sword and shield combo that increased the experience you receive. Going back to my food analogy, they basically give you a small bowl of soup while you wait for your actual meal to be ready. The difference here though is that they don't charge you more.

I have a hard time feeling like the pre order items are even with anything. Take that equipment, either it breaks the early game by being the most powerful item you have for a long time, or you discard it very early on and get little to no use out of it. Alternativly, you get it later in the game and encounter the same problem. It is of limited use or game breaking.

I don't know, buying your way to victory just feels like cheating to me. Games should test skill, not who has the biggest wallet.

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

To be fair, Fable 3 is particularly guilty of this. And the Sims 3 to a ridiculous degree, but mostly Fable 3. It's one of many reasons Valve has my admiration.

In Fable 3 if the game could use a new weapon, you can pay $6 for it. In Team Fortress 2, you get it free as an incentive to keep playing. I get the feeling Microsoft plays a role in it, but I'm not certain what.

But yes, I agree. DLC should add to the experience, not be a cash-grab. It seems games are taking a little too much inspiration from F2P games, and in the wrong way. At least with F2P games, there's a purpose behind the minor paid content, and you didn't have to buy a $60/$120/$140 game (depending on where you live) to get to it.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well I get your complaints, but you should know companies are out for money and not to please the customer, as long as people pay $15 to get 4 maps companies will be doing that, and still push forward (if maps make such money maybe the standard game should come with less, or eventually none at all).

The other question is ofcourse what is a fair price on DLC, what kind of DLC should even be sold, should there be DLC at all, maybe it should be big expansion packs only?

Right now he whole dilemma is still very floaty, there are no standards to go by so companies just put up anything that could make an extra buck (selling gold, experience points, extra weapons, armor,... essentially making money off cheats), and even locking off game content to sell it back to you.

Not to mention they started selling demos... things are getting pretty damn rotten if you ask me.

 

[Zhukov]

Uh... examples?

I'm not the biggest fan of DLC, but I am yet to see a game that felt incomplete without the DLC.

 

[JayDeth]

I have a hard time feeling like the pre order items are even with anything. Take that equipment, either it breaks the early game by being the most powerful item you have for a long time, or you discard it very early on and get little to no use out of it. Alternativly, you get it later in the game and encounter the same problem. It is of limited use or game breaking.

I don't know, buying your way to victory just feels like cheating to me. Games should test skill, not who has the biggest wallet.

There's also the aesthetic value to think about. The sword and shield look cool. Same with that golden armor you got on Dark Void. Or even better, the real life deck of Red Dead Redemption playing cards you got for ordering Red Dead Redemption. I actually found out about that one weeks after the game came out and was lucky enough to get a sealed pack of them on eBay. They look so awesome!

But then there's the other end of the spectrum. I remember at least one occasion where they withheld a multiplayer mode from a game for a month and you only got day 1 access to it if you, you guessed it, pre-ordered. What a load.

 

[kingcom]

I stand by my point. Looking at steam right now and Mass Effect 2 is 40 euro. Want me to show how 40 euro is more than 48 Dollars?

Can I use the $70 Australian card? The Australian dollar being better than the US dollar at the moment...

 

[JayDeth]

Uh... examples?

I'm not the biggest fan of DLC, but I am yet to see a game that felt incomplete without the DLC.

Sims 3. Fable 3. What I've heard about Dragon Age 2, but the jury is still out on that until I play it fully myself.

I mean, you had the perfect example in the very first line of the first post of this topic. The Black Dye. In Fable 3 they CHARGED YOU FOR THE BLACK DYE! It may seem like a small thing, but think about it. It's an RPGish action adventure title. Customizing your character is at LEAST half the fun of this sort of game. And if you want to wear anything black, a color I'd like to consider that's pretty basic, you need to fork over $2. What?!

And that's just the tip of the iceberg...

 

[Trolldor]

there you go then its that price on pc on steam, that is also overpriced compared to the shops.

£34.41 on steam http://www.play.com/Games/Xbox360/4-/10267221/Mass-Effect-2/Product.html?searchtype=gameall&searchsource=0&searchstring=mass+effect+2&urlrefer=search&strefer=gameall&searchfilters=s{mass+effect+2}%2bc{362}%2b
£47.99 on PSN http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation3/4-/16164058/Mass-Effect-2/Product.html
that was 17.99 the other day in a sale, and i can get it even cheaper in the shops by me

Are those maths good enough for you?

As i said before devs and pubs charge whatever they want for whatever they want and people will defend it.

I love you guys all talking.

For PC:
Dragon age II on steam is $60.
Retail here it's a little over $80.

DD saves us money which is why retail stores want us to pay more for digital purchases.
So yeaaaaaaaaaah.


Also, in regards to DLC, you get what you pay for.
People are paying for this shite, so the companies will continue to produce it.
I love PC games for a reason. Mods release for free what console high-browers will willingly pay for - like Black dye.

 

[tharglet]

I vote with my wallet. I buy DLC/extras I feel are worthwhile and don't buy the rest.

If a game can't stand up on its own merits, and the price of the stuff to make the game feel "right" pushes the game price more than its worth to me, then I won't buy it.

At the end of the day, you can rant and complain about it, but if people are buying, then they'll keep on producin'. Many other markets are like this - full of cheap rubbish, because that's what the majority want.

I never buy non-discounted games from Steam - always seems to be cheaper to buy from Amazon. (If someone does see I have a prerelease game on my Steam account - someone else bought it for me lol). If the UK Steam pricing rivals Amazon, then I'd buy more non-discount stuff lol.

 

[muffincakes]

Sony really doesn't need your marketing advice. No, really.

Pretty much this.

What's the phrase TV Tropes uses? "You Fail Economics Forever".

Companies want to make money. They will charge as much money as they can for something, until people will stop buying the product at that price. And if they can make more money by raising the price further than they would from the customers they lost? They will.

If you actually object to the practice, don't buy the damn DLC, or (even better) the damn game. Otherwise, you're giving them no reason to change their practices.

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Sony Marketing Department has over one hundred employees. They probably know more than you about marketing.

Really? If that is so, then I'm pretty sure I would take marketing advice from a caveman over Sony's. You can say all you want about their 'experience and blah blah etc,' but that still does not change the fact that Sony rather consistently has had some of the worst marketing ideas in the past.