Excessive, early and excessively early DLC

[TheMightyEthan]

There's a testing phase in there, it's just shorter than the whole game test phase (which makes sense cause there's less content).

[Thursday Next]

Not sure what level of transparency is needed / required / whatever. To hear some people talk they won't be happy until we install webcams in all our offices and they can see a Truman show style live stream of the game being developed.

[MasterDex]

TN, that's a very biased representation of the issue in that image. "How consumers view game production" may as well be entitled - "what idiots think" because any consumer of average intelligence will know that there are different phases to the development of a game, even if they don't know what those stages are exactly. Most people of average intelligence know that products go through a development/production cycle and it's not just "let's build this sketch I drew into a car", etc.

 

Furthermore, it misrepresents the problem that people have with Day 1 DLC which is, to put it simply, the developer/publisher saying "Buy our new game! It's great" and then after you buy it going "Oh yeah!Buy this part of the game too" before going "But wait! There's more! Buy this other part of the game and you'll have the best version" wheras the consumer would rather pay their money, get a full experience and not have that experience marred by some salesman sitting on their shoulder going "You know you're not getting the complete experience right? Go on! Buy it! Buy it! There's more now! Buy that too!"

 

It's the difference between Mass Effect 3 and The Witcher 2. It has nothing to do with the consumer's perception of game development and everything to do with the expectations of the consumer for a fair and non-duplicitous relationship with the industry.

[Yantelope V2]

Yeah, sometimes it's just the principle of the thing. I hate being nickled and dimed for add-ons and such. I know marketing works because people can be manipulated but that doesn't make it good.

 

In a way DLC is almost like the fiasco at walmart involving bulk stacks in the middle of the aisles. They took the clutter out of the aisles because customers hated the clutter but they lost a ton of sales because customers buy stuff off of the bulk stacks.

 

Gamers complain about DLC all the time but they still buy it. Publishers and Developers don't care that DLC annoys and irritates gamers because they still buy it. It's one of those things about humanity that makes me nuts and now whenever i see someone buy something off of the stacks in the middle of the aisle I want to punch them.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Yantelope V2

[TheMightyEthan]

I don't buy anything off the stacks in the aisle (except occasionally the "bargain bin" type things) or endcaps because they're almost always more expensive than the stuff on the regular shelves.

[Thursday Next]

"How consumers view game production" may as well be entitled - "what idiots think"

 

Ummm...

[MasterDex]

Gamers complain about DLC all the time but they still buy it. Publishers and Developers don't care that DLC annoys and irritates gamers because they still buy it. It's one of those things about humanity that makes me nuts and now whenever i see someone buy something off of the stacks in the middle of the aisle I want to punch them.

 

The downside to that on the developer/publisher side then is that feeling of resentment from consumers that slowly grows as they continue to get nickle and dimed. The general opinion of Capcom in regards to DLC is a good example. Like that quote from Iwata, it works for the short-term but not for the mid and long term.

 

"How consumers view game production" may as well be entitled - "what idiots think"

 

Ummm...

 

Yeah, yeah, the consumer is an idiot, harharhar!

 

But seriously, even if the majority of consumers were idiots, most still have enough higher brain function to, eventually, come to the realisation that they'd be better off buying IndieShoot 1 than Manshoot 20: Piecemeal Paramilitary because IndieShoot 1 offers the better value.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

But seriously, even if the majority of consumers were idiots, most still have enough higher brain function to, eventually, come to the realisation that they'd be better off buying IndieShoot 1 than Manshoot 20: Piecemeal Paramilitary because IndieShoot 1 offers the better value.

 

But marketing.

[MasterDex]

Only goes so far.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Call of Duty says otherwise.

[TheFlyingGerbil]

Consumer stupidity is a limitless well that most companies take a sip from. Some happily throw the customer in their to drown.

[MasterDex]

Call of Duty says otherwise.

 

There's very little that marketing did for Call of Duty that word of mouth hadn't done. Modern Warfare and the quality of the game was what drove sales into overdrive for that series and being the same thing over and over again, it's easy for the everyman to just pick up the next installment, especially since that's what all their friends are playing. It's not going to remain a sales behemoth forever and treating consumers as no more than ATMs and a lack of innovation are likely going to be the major causes to its fall from grace.

 

But that's kind of beside the point. Marketing can do a lot for a product but it only goes so far when the general opinion of consumers is that the game is of lower quality or value than another game or when most consumers feel like the developers or publishers don't care about the consumer.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

being the same thing over and over again, it's easy for the everyman to just pick up the next installment, especially since that's what all their friends are playing.

 

This is what I'm referring to. Regardless of quality, it sells.

 

I think marketing works wonderfully as long as a product meets a minimum standard.

 

When customers feel like the devs or publishers don't care... they still buy. Every single major thing gamers have complained about in the past few years is proof of that. Insert screenshot of the Steam "Boycott Modern Warfare 2" group where most of the players were playing MW2.

[Yantelope V2]

Keep in mind too that we as the core gamers are a vocal minority. I have many friends who are gamers but aren't so core as to comment on internet forums and it just doesn't bother them so much. They either buy the DLC or they don't but they don't seem to care as much about day 1 DLC and whether or not they're being ripped off. At least, that's the impression I get from my less hardcore friends.

[MasterDex]

being the same thing over and over again, it's easy for the everyman to just pick up the next installment, especially since that's what all their friends are playing.

 

This is what I'm referring to. Regardless of quality, it sells.

 

I think marketing works wonderfully as long as a product meets a minimum standard.

 

When customers feel like the devs or publishers don't care... they still buy. Every single major thing gamers have complained about in the past few years is proof of that. Insert screenshot of the Steam "Boycott Modern Warfare 2" group where most of the players were playing MW2.

Keep in mind too that we as the core gamers are a vocal minority. I have many friends who are gamers but aren't so core as to comment on internet forums and it just doesn't bother them so much. They either buy the DLC or they don't but they don't seem to care as much about day 1 DLC and whether or not they're being ripped off. At least, that's the impression I get from my less hardcore friends.

 

I agree, in essence, with what both of you are saying but at the same time, I'm not a big believer in this vocal minority catch-all that the industry in particular likes to throw around to dismiss complaints. Though we, personally, are more involved than your average bear, we still only make up a subsection of people commenting online. The vocal minority, in my opinion, isn't so much a minority but a representation of the wider consumer opinion. There's a bunch of people both casual and hardcore that will be pissed off at things like the removal of dedicated servers, etc that don't post online - until they can't get their game to run and start a thread on the official forums for a game (which is the reason such forums are so awful 99% of the time) but conversely, there are also those that don't care about this or that but will post online. In otherwords, I believe the "vocal minority" is representative of a much larger demographic and developers and publishers would be wise to heed their complaints - to some degree.

 

P.S. I wish people would stop bringing up that Steam group screenshot. It's not an accurate representation in any way. It was one page out of like 20 with less than half of the 50 people on that page actually playing MW2 - out of over 800 people in the group.

Edited March 14, 2012 by MasterDex

[Yantelope V2]

At the same time, I know a lot of gamers who aren't even informed enough to know what "day 1 DLC" would mean or the implications of it. These are people who play a decent amount of games they just don't follow game blogs very much and they don't really keep up with game news every day. If you explain to them about day 1 DLC and things like that they generally do understand why people are upset and agree that day 1 DLC seems pretty lame but they just don't know about it or care about it unless someone tells them. I feel like I know a lot of people like that. People who didn't know about the Deus Ex HR codes being taken from the Gamestop boxes. Those sorts of stories never make it out unless you're the kind of guy who checks game blogs every day and lets face it, I don't think even 50% of the gaming population reads kotaku or joystiq or destructoid regularly.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Yantelope V2

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah, several of my friends are video game people, video games are what they do, and they still really only get their news through me.

[RockyRan]

P.S. I wish people would stop bringing up that Steam group screenshot. It's not an accurate representation in any way. It was one page out of like 20 with less than half of the 50 people on that page actually playing MW2 - out of over 800 people in the group.

 

Agreed. I admit it took me quite a while to catch on to that, but the picture is very misleading.

[MasterDex]

At the same time, I know a lot of gamers who aren't even informed enough to know what "day 1 DLC" would mean or the implications of it. These are people who play a decent amount of games they just don't follow game blogs very much and they don't really keep up with game news every day. If you explain to them about day 1 DLC and things like that they generally do understand why people are upset and agree that day 1 DLC seems pretty lame but they just don't know about it or care about it unless someone tells them. I feel like I know a lot of people like that. People who didn't know about the Deus Ex HR codes being taken from the Gamestop boxes. Those sorts of stories never make it out unless you're the kind of guy who checks game blogs every day and lets face it, I don't think even 50% of the gaming population reads kotaku or joystiq or destructoid regularly.

Yeah, several of my friends are video game people, video games are what they do, and they still really only get their news through me.

 

It's the same with me too. That isn't to say that their purchasing choices aren't affected by the quality or value of a game, or the actions of the developers and publishers. Take a look at the time EA fell from their throne. Gamer's had stopped prioritising EA releases quite a while before that happened yet they were still getting sales from the general population. It didn't last however. Even the uninformed masses stopped buying EA games in any great number and EA suffered as a result. Granted, we have a much bigger general population actively buying games while not engaging in gaming culture or the community at large but I still don't think publishers - and certainly not developers - are as unsinkable as they may believe themselves.

 

As I see it, a lot of these quick-cash schemes aren't examined enough before been put in place. They're seeing the cash but they're not seeing the hole at the end of the bag. They're not looking at the long-term effects for long enough.

 

I feel like I'm beginning to waffle now so I'll try to be more succint. My point is that although the invested and vocal minority aren't a majority of the total market, they do represent the general consumer on some level; even if the general consumer is uninformed. It's a bit like the thing they say where nerds, by general definition, are at the forefront of trends. We see things coming before the everyday Joe but we all react accordingly.

 

...I've probably just confused everything altogether.

 

Agreed. I admit it took me quite a while to catch on to that, but the picture is very misleading.

 

It does say something though. Not everyone is going to stick to their guns.

[Yantelope V2]

I guess only time will tell how these schemes work out in the long run but I don't think they're to the point of inspiring long term brand degredation. DLC oversaturation is pretty much an annoyance right now and it usually doesn't keep me from buying a game (Mass Effect 2 excluded). I don't think there's going to be longterm fallout with the gaming community over it especially since it's being done industry wide. Perhaps if it were only EA you'd see people fleeing to Capcom but Capcom is just as guilty as is Activision and THQ. Everyone is on board with this with a few minor holdouts so unless there's simple backlash against gaming as a whole I don't see it impacting a single publisher more than another.

[MasterDex]

I'm not saying that one publisher will be affected more than another but I think developers and publishers will have to rethink their DLC strategies in the not too distant future.

[P4: Gritty Reboot]

I know I'm not the majority demographic by a long shot, but I do not buy DLC. I'm not morally opposed to it--if it helps devs stay alive, all the better--but I just haven't seen the value in it. As far as "brand degradation" goes, there's some truth to it. Valve never milks their franchises with DLC, and they're still one of the only companies I will pre-order games from, because I know they will support the release. Other devs/pubs are often really a case-by-case basis.

[Saturnine Tenshi]

I started to read this thread and the first ten or so posts were, "Maybe I wasn't clear enough" back and forth. XD Regardless, I'm not very fond of DLC. In most cases it's duplicitous: you're not simply paying for something that was made after production. And if so, it's often something that wasn't included in production for the purpose of selling it later on. So I don't buy it. You'd think people who disagree with something would follow that mantra. Don't like it: don't support it. I'll admit to purchasing one or two items of DLC in the past, but I learned my lesson quickly.

[TheMightyEthan]

I take DLC on a case by case basis. If the game seems complete to me without the DLC (as in, if I didn't know DLC were even a possible thing, would the game seem complete) then I'm okay with them doing DLC. Whether or not I buy a specific piece of DLC depends on just a value judgment like any purchase: does this product seem worth the money?

[excel_excel]

So its going to cost $20 for the on disc characters, also $13.00 each for seperate Street Fighter and Tekken costume packs.

 

Saying there's loads of fighters in the game already is missing the point. Who cares how many there are when it comes to all this DLC bullshit? That's $46 to get all that content that was made before release that is already on the disc. Sure its a high number fighter roster already, but that does not excuse this practice.