next »

[skaldicpoet9]

Hey kids, how would you like to not only pay for extra optional DLC on your games but also pay for the ending as well? Well, apparently some developers think that is a potential idea. Now this is just outlandish to me. I haven't ever been the biggest supporter or opponent to DLC but to withhold the ending of a game is going too far in my opinion. I have heard major publishers stating their disdain for the used game market and I just don't understand how they feel as if they are entitled to the resale profits of their games. Publishers don't make money off of used books, movie studios don't make money off of used DVD sales, so why should video game publishers make money off of used video game sales? Is it just me or is this notion just preposterous?

DISCUSS.

[deadeye]

Yes, that is ridiculous.

I don't think DLC is bad in general, if someone wants to pay extra for a shiny new weapon or a new character or costume or whatever, that's all fine and dandy.  Some people seem to have a problem with that, but I don't.

But making you pay extra just so you can finish the game is just about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

[skaldicpoet9]

Yeah, I don't see anything completely wring with DLC in and of itself. Hell, if people want to pay for a little something extra then so be it, especially if it extends the life of the game but to withhold an ending so as to circumvent the used game market is just crazy. All things at some point get sold in the used market and none of the original sellers of these things get the profit from these used sales, for video game publishers to think that they are exempt somehow is just insulting to consumers and the market in general.

[dmoonfire]

Eh, when giving a "please enter your Paypal email address to finish the fight", I'll just go to games that don't do that. Say, World of Goo or Crayon Physics Deluxe. Making someone pay for something just means you lose a percentage of the people simply because it you just put up a barrier for their enjoyment. And most of the players will take the path of least resistance and either give up the game saying "I would have won that fight, good enough" or go on a forum "I need a end boss crack, ASAP!".

[moi]

Hey let's leave the rules of the free market sort it out, it's gonna be okay.

[Skofo]

I've always thought that DLC is a horrible way to leech money, and I hate Microsoft for it. Microsoft presumably makes more than enough money with their games, but they've made a habit of charging for everything. Charging for multiplayer and game patches is inexcusably greedy. They even made Valve release their content packs for a price on the 360 while it is completely free on the PC.

Microsoft and many publishers already pushed their anti-consumerist agendas over the edge of the cliff. Epic wants to push it over to the fourth dimension with this bullshit. I say fuck Epic. Who cares if they don't get money for rented or resold products? That's the way it has always been with everything ever sold in the world, it is not a "huge" issue. It is plain immoral and greedy for them to try to bend and dam the laws of market with their shitty, broken digital restrictions management systems.

Fuck Epic and their shit.

/

[deadeye]

Eh, when giving a "please enter your Paypal email address to finish the fight", I'll just go to games that don't do that.

Exactly.  There isn't a single game franchise that I like enough to support this kind of thing.

Then there's the poor kid who got the game for his birthday and doesn't have XBox Live or an extra 20$ lying around and halfway through the game it pops up with "You're done, kid.  No more fun for you.  Now go screw yourself."

DLC like this is just a way to alienate your players.

[moi]

Fuck Epic and their shit.

/

Yeah I used to be an Epic fan, but nowadays it seems the enterprise side has been dominated by a bunch of greedy bastards and the creative side has been totally phagocyted by CliffyB and his frat-boy mentality. Fuck them.

[Melly]

Sounds like Microshaft's 'Starter' edition for Windows.

You know? The one that only lets you use 3 programs at once? "Hai kid, wanna have more compy power? Just gimme da moneyz and you too will be able to do it like people were doing back in 95!"

When I first heard of that I thought it was an enourmous insult to a company's customers. Much like this "Pay to finish the game, moron" bs.

[Tobasco Panda]

Hm... I think the issue from the developer side is more how to get people to pay for the game they are playing. This is partially due to the rampancy of pirating and the large chunk that Gamestop takes out due to pushing used games so heavily. I don't mean for this comment to open up either of those cans of worms.

Honestly, I think this won't be an issue 5-10 years from now. Digital Distribution is hugely on the rise and will be a major factor for all of the next generation of consoles. It COULD allow developers to sell their games for less due to the decreased cost of manufacturing and distribution, and since it cuts out the resale market (which is a huge chunk that developers make NO money off). Personally I would love to see games be able to drop back down to $30-40, which would make them more accessible to buy, offsetting those who would be mad that they can no longer buy used games.

Whether or not this will become a reality is another question...

[Chris Whitman]

Hm... I think the issue from the developer side is more how to get people to pay for the game they are playing. This is partially due to the rampancy of pirating and the large chunk that Gamestop takes out due to pushing used games so heavily. I don't mean for this comment to open up either of those cans of worms.

Well, I know you don't mean to open up those cans of worms, but... it isn't like the large game publishers are starving, or pirates are twisting their arms or anything.

The truth is they are a business: they want to maximize their profits. If you want to find somewhere to place blame, my recommendation would be pushy shareholders.

[Gnarf]

It's good to see that whether it's pirates or the stores selling their games that is their problem, they stick to their original strategy of fucking with the people who actually buy their games. No flip-flopping.

[skaldicpoet9]

Personally I really dig the idea of digital distribution and I think that everyone involved benefits from this model. The only problem I see is people that don't have access to the internet not being able to play a game due to being exclusively distributed through online services. Believe it or not but there are still a lot of people who prefer the old fashioned method of buying games and always will.

Well, I know you don't mean to open up those cans of worms, but... it isn't like the large game publishers are starving, or pirates are twisting their arms or anything.

The truth is they are a business: they want to maximize their profits. If you want to find somewhere to place blame, my recommendation would be pushy shareholders.

I agree. I think that a lot of companies over-exaggerate the impact of piracy so as to justify actions that gamers wouldn't stand for if they hadn't played the piracy card. I find it hard to believe that these so called pirates would even buy the games if pirating them was impossible. If piracy has that great of an impact on sales it is negligible if existent at all in my opinion.

[The-Imp]

I died on the inside.

This is one of the worst ideas EVER.

Next to those Skippy peanutbutter tubes... Oh god...

[Neo1493]

For the most part I find DLC a bunch of BS if you buy the game you should get the game if the game has easy normal and hard modes I want the hard mode with the game I dont want to buy it later at 10$+. How ever if a said game had a user level/mission creation tool selling these would be ok as long as they gave some of the profits to the creater.

[Gainsworthy]

CURSED DLC! You keep getting worse and worse, everytime I look.

Also, I'm still as big an Epic fan as I ever was, as previously stated. Loved (and love!)  Jazz Jackrabbit, got Gears 2 on launch day. Somewhat co-incidentally, I own a large portion of their games.

But if they try and pull a stunt like this, screw them. I'm out. This could have serious implications a few years down the track.

ALTHOUGH: As far as preowned games go, developers should be able to make a little money out of them, too. I mean, hell, I see EB and such selling pre-owned Big Games (ala Halo, GTA, etc) a good 6 months down the track at $90. That ain't quite right either.

[Don Andy]

Haven't we been copped out of a real endings for ages now? I mean, only like 1 out of 10 games these days give the story a real conclusion. The rest is just vague bullshit to keep it open for a sequel, where all the questions that have been left open in the first game don't get answered either.

I mean, yeah, you usually get a bunch of new features in the sequel, but most of the times it's really just souped up graphics and one or two new features.
Like, you know, Half-Life 2? Actually, yes, I think if anybody would pull this off first it'd probably be Valve. With Half-Life 2.

Making this with DLC would just be much more obvious and much easier for the developer/publisher to cash in on an unfinished story. Just like they do now, but without the cost of having to produce a sequel.

[Valter]

I can say confidently that this will never work. Any idea like this will be shot down so quickly you'll hardly even see it as it passes by you in its death spiral. The games that don't have this will outperform games that do by miles.

Remember the Divx? People kind of enjoy owning the things that they pay for. Selling games to people and then telling them that they can't finish it won't work.

[Cheater‽]

Second hand sales? Wasn't piracy the problem last week?

[moi]

In any case, it doesn't even matter since GOW2 won't be out on PC