Excessive, early and excessively early DLC

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Having to purchase something that was previously unlockable is the issue here. Gamers let it happen.

 

Anyways, the demo was super fun. I love parrying especially since it can go back and forth.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

  On 1/28/2013 at 8:42 PM, Atomsk88 said:

You don't have to purchase anything; having the money and/or time later is more important than having something like a skin. Yeah, I could get some cool bonus stuff for a game I definitely want, but I'm not going to put the cart before the horse if it means blowing $60 when I could (if not should) save it for later.

 

Then again, I'm "that guy" who doesn't know the proper method of consuming as a consumer.

 

EDIT: And so to contribute to the discussion of this game, if any of you saw the white cat on the beach, you may have not thought anything of it. If you actually tried to slice it...

 

You're missing the point. You used to be able to unlock skins in games for free. Then someone one day thought "hey, we could charge people for this and have a better idea of how many units we can ship if we just make it a pre-order bonus!"

[CorgiShinobi]

Or you can have both, i.e. DmC Devil May Cry. I could settle for the skins I've already unlocked, or this Tuesday (1/29) I could pay $4 for three new skins.

 

Will I? No.

 

Why? Because I can spend $4 on better digital items.

 

Now, if you're really upset by this, you have three options:

1. Fly out to Japan and speak to the proper representative at Platinum Games about how they made five unique skins for the express purpose of promotional material and how this is very wrong.
2. Go back in time to roughly 10 years ago (or earlier) and assassinate those behind the concept of "get cool stuff for a day one purchase" as it use to be known.
3. Not give a damn and wait for the practice to alter drastically as all content becomes digitally distributed by console manufacturers and their respective e-commerce stores.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

I think the most reasonable response would be to try and get people to quit participating in these business practices in the first place since companies won't use them if they don't work.

 

But whatever takes the blame off of you, I guess.

[CorgiShinobi]

Reasonable? Try impossible and unlikely.

 

There's no blame, but whatever makes you feel superior for buying things the way you buy them.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

Is trying to say that I feel superior your only argument here? I'm not saying that at all. I'm pointing out a bad trend in the industry that you are willingly participating in.

[CorgiShinobi]

I'm one of "those guys" as you mentioned earlier taking part in this perceived bad trend that you have the obvious solution.

 

You can indentify these things as you see fit, bad or good, but don't label others as part of the problem where there is blame to be handed out by you.

 

Lord knows most of us have had pre-order bonuses sometime ever.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

  Quote

 

Lord knows most of us have had pre-order bonuses sometime ever.

I can't think of anything. I tried to get both the limited editions of Dark Souls and Demon's Souls but those were limited runs (and with Dark Souls I was sent the wrong version) and not pre-order specials. With other games all I've encountered is project $10 sort of stuff which is based on whether or not you buy it new or used not if it's a pre-order or not. That practice I'm okay with since it's incentisizing buying it new so the developers and publishers get their money over GS getting their money instead. Since these new copies are also sold at GS, everyone is getting something.

[CorgiShinobi]

So how about people who want a game on Release Date from Amazon, but to do that you essentially have to pre-order the game, and thus you will receive the bonus associated with pre-ordering (if there is one at all)?

 

That's why I said it is impossible. Many times bonuses are merely perceived as rewards for being someone who purchases games on Day One. Yeah, it sucks to sit back and let the opportunity pass, but the important thing is that most of the time the games are still fun and playable without those bonuses. An issue arises when you can receive bonuses/items that could put you at an unfair advantage competitively or make unlocking content easier.

 

That's why recently Bioshock Infinite's new pre-order content has been getting some flack.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

  Quote

 

So how about people who want a game on Release Date from Amazon, but

to do that you essentially have to pre-order the game, and thus you will receive the bonus associated with pre-ordering (if there is one at all)?

 

Unfortunately they have to participate in this practive even if they don't want to. Which is another reason it's not consumer friendly.

 

 

  Quote

Many times bonuses are merely perceived as rewards for being someone who purchases games on Day One.

 

If we're talking stuff like Demon's Souls and Dark Soul's I agree. Stuff like skins however is not like that.

[CorgiShinobi]

Skins are not vital to the game, but are in all aspects eye candy for the player.

 

Now if it was something like, "Hey, pre-order and receive the unlock key to all the costumes in-game," I would agree that it would be terrible. I do wonder if this could be the particular case if all the skins for Revengeance are already available for UK copies.

 

Of course, it could be like Arkham City's skins where other countries are more fortunate because of their retailers.

[Baconrath]

I do not like paid weapon DLC because if it breaks anything they can't always fix it because people paid for it.

 

A good example of this is in Gotham City Impostors concerning the weapon known as the Witch Doctor. It shoots out electric balls that seek out targets and go around corners. This was added to combat health station camping and as a counter to body armor. To counter this weapon you have to buy the DLC and waste a Fun Fact slot (same for that parrot gun from the other DLC pack). It's probably the laziest weapon in the game (i.e. you can kill people behind you. The lightning balls will make a snap turn and ruin your day) and has little to no downsides. This DLC also adds a jetpack.

[Faiblesse Des Sens]

  Quote

 

Skins are not vital to the game, but are in all aspects eye candy for the player.

 

How does that justify the industry trend of making it DLC when  before it would be unlockable?

[CorgiShinobi]

Everyone makes their skins DLC? There's no modern games with unlockable skins? You're saying it is that widespread of a problem?

 

Did Gearbox make a boo-boo when they released new skins for Borderlands 2 last week? They needed to get into a time machine and put that into the game before launch, right? Add four more skins and heads per class to the already massive 86~ (per class) collection available after unlocking through Badass Challenges, Story, and Side Quests.

 

Once we got online network stores, that was the reason content began to be sold for games. If we had such connectivity over a decade ago, this would have happened no matter the circumstances. Imagine having bought extra multiplayer levels for Goldeneye 007. There's nothing inherently wrong with buying extra content, but we do have to be aware of what is being sold to us.

 

Am I actually buying new content, or was it withheld from me to a certain point and for a fee?

 

*cough*

 

Javik

[Thursday Next]

Doesn't matter when the content was created. It only matters if you feel you are getting the content you want at an acceptable price. If the Javik content did not exist would you still have bought the game when you did, for the price you did? That more stuff is added on top at a later date is irrelevant if your original purchase was satisfactory.

 

If you feel that too much of games are being "held back" then stop buying them on release and wait for a sale or the inevitable GOTY edition. People can complain on forums all they like, but if they keeping eating it, publishers will keep serving it.

 

You have to remember that the really big publishers have changed the way the industry works. It used to be that you'd sell the base game, then with those profits you'd make an expansion pack. That meant that you really couldn't afford to start work on the additional content until the game was on the shelves. Publishers now are able to take the profits of X Game that sold well and use them to fund Y DLC for Z Game that is not released yet. This means that content can be developed alongside the main game and delivered very soon after the games launch.

 

This argument that adding features later devalues a product in the past is strange to me. When Apple release an iPad it is priced at £500, even though we know that within six months there will be a new one that will be worth £500 and this one will be worth £400. We don't try to skip ahead to the lower price point. So why do it with games? I see this a lot with PS Plus freebies as well. People will moan "I just bought Mortal Kombat last week and now it is free that's not fair." While it sucks for the person who missed out it is totally fair.

[TheMightyEthan]

I wonder if PS+'s free games aren't going to hurt Sony in the long run.  Now that I'm used to it, I fairly frequently see a game and think "Nah, I won't buy that, I'll just wait until it's free on PS+ in 6 months or a year".  PSASBR and LBP Karting come to mind.

[Thursday Next]

I think what Plus is about is ensuring that people who would maybe only buy CoD and FIFA in a given year have a reason to throw another £40 Sony's way. It's easy to forget that people who buy a game a month or even a few games a year are not the norm. Also, the discounts have led me to jump at games I otherwise would not have, for example the current discount on PSASBR was enough for me to say I will have this game now, rather than wait for it to be free.

[Thursday Next]

This however is hilarious: http://blog.eu.playstation.com/2013/01/29/soul-sacrifice-release-date-and-pre-order-extras-revealed/#more-109597

 

Removing content from an already released game and then selling it is an interesting tactic to say the least, but where that content is the voice acting for the game? Odd. Would you pay to have characters speak in a language you don't understand? If you only understand Japanese, but live in Europe, then is it fair that you be charged extra to understand the plot?

[Saturnine Tenshi]

I hope TK and Capcom don't eventually set a standard with that. : \ Though I know Capcom do have a history of monetizing their releases . . . the fewer items to monetize the better.

Edited January 29, 2013 by Saturnine Tenshi

[TheMightyEthan]

Yeah, it would actually make a lot more sense to release it with only the Japanese VO, and then charge extra for localized audio.

[CorgiShinobi]

On PlayStation Plus, I think they're being smart about what games go free, and technically we can't keep them forever because eventually a subscription will run out. It's very likely the service will carry over to the next console, but are we going to care about having Darksiders or SSFIV: Arcade Edition when we have a PS6 with more new series or sequels?

 

As for content being developed and removed, and then sold later, I use to subscribe to the same thought Thursday. Hey, if you think you're getting the value out of your game, why should you be upset? Maybe people can get use to having seven slices of their pizza where the final slice was removed and can be sold if they're still hungry?

 

If we want to get into Javik, looking in the Mass Effect thread at how the community here reacted when it was a brand spanking new topic would be better. However, I will say there's a difference between content developed alongside at a latter stage of the main development process (Borderlands 2's Mechromancer) and where specific assets built-in are bundled and sold as a separate package. Personally, I prefer the former to the latter option if other projects must absolutely be financed.

[Thursday Next]

Don't know what you mean by "developed and removed". I can assure that once Mass Effect was completed there was not a team of people going around CTRL-Xing a bunch of code from the files.

 

Quite the opposite. A year in advance of release Publishers will decide based on projected P&L what they would like to go into the game and what they want to create for DLC. To extend the Pizza analogy, they will set out to create a Pepperoni Pizza, and will at the same time make a decision to have Mushrooms available at launch, perhaps for those who preorder. They will also plan to introduce the option to include Jalapenos at a later date.

 

I have not, in my experience seen anyone set out to create a Pepperoni, Mushroom and Jalapeno Pizza and once it is baked remove the Mushrooms and Jalapenos to sell them later. I have however seen teams that set out to make a Pepperoni, Mushroom and Jalapeno Pizza, drop the dough several times, try to smooth it out, lose the Pepperoni behind the fridge, and run out of time to prepare the Jalapenos. They end up releasing a Mushroom Pizza and are not around long enough to charge you for the extras assuming they could have ever gotten their shit together.

[Eleven]

  On 1/29/2013 at 6:49 PM, TheMightyEthan said:

Yeah, it would actually make a lot more sense to release it with only the Japanese VO, and then charge extra for localized audio.

 

I think to most people, that would appear bad, selling your game and charging extra for native language support. Damage is already done before you can explain that that was how the game was originally made.

[TheMightyEthan]

But doing the opposite, while it won't matter to most people, makes you look bad to your most core fans.  Never a good idea to piss them off, cause they're the ones who get the buzz going to get other people interested in the first place.

[Thursday Next]

I agree with Ethan. It's not uncommon for niche titles to be delayed due to translation issues which is often met with calls of "Just release the game over here with the original audio." If that did happen, and there were decent (but not brilliant) sales numbers I could see a developer doing the language support at a cost if there was demand for it. Paying for native language support may be galling, but, it is easy to see where that cost comes in. You are paying for some professionally translated, performed and mixed audio.