It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussion (archive)Pay less for less(65 posts)(65 posts)
(65 posts)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Posted January 04, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Seriously, it sounds more like you are just opposed to newer games in general. If anything, this is a good thing. It will encourage post-release support, so we might actually get patches for the buggy sacks of crap.
avatar
Siannah: Wrong. For todays management, cutting costs is everything. So you got that initial sales and some bad word-of-mouth because of technical problems? Crap, release the already finished DLCs then cut the whole thing and move on.
Let's stay for a moment with EA and their new approach. Ricchitello claims it's part of fighting piracy - I call that straight up bulls**it. It's to get their hands on the second market and nothing else and I don't see, why they should profit there again.
They sell a product full price. Now I'll buy some DLCs for that product too. A year later I'm selling that game to some other guy but I'm stuck with my investment on the DLCs for eternity, without any use or the ability to resell it for me? Now why THAT shall be a good thing is beyond me.
This approach isn't for the gamer or costumer, it's for company top-tiers who think their new 10 million crib needs a bit more improvement.
Even though EA is the culprit here, I'm far from trying to bash them. But blaming piracy for ridiculous limitations paying costumers have to endure, all the while their trying to get a few bucks more out of you, isn't really new or EA exclusiv.
Take digital distribution for another example. You cut costs on a printed manual, a retail box, 2 or 3 resellers between you and the costumer.... yet the price stays the same or is even higher then buying it from your local retailer?
The whole gaming industry seems to take the same road the music biz went - on the fast lane.

Well said, I agree especially that they are on the same road as the music industry.
Posted January 04, 2010
Hopefully it will end like CRIAA did with them getting sued for infringement!
We need GOG to aggressively expand their catalog and save us from the cheap (but not good) stuff!
Posted January 04, 2010
So as far as cutting support for games that get bad-word-of-mouth: So they should work their butts off to polish a game that everyone thinks is a turd? :p
Yes, there are problems with this. But at the same time, there are benefits. Because if EA thinks they can make more money, they will keep supporting it. Look at the Battlefield games. Those got patched out the whazoo. Why? Because they kept releasing Expansion Packs/Booster Packs. So there was room for profits.
So, if we assume that the good games will still be good and the bad games will still be bad (no reason not to), this means that we would have slightly more polished, but shorter, games for cheap that get supported over the course of a year with DLC. A massive bug pops up? Well, if they want to keep selling the DLC, they will need to patch it. And so they patch it. Bioware did that with Mass Effect PC, and GTA4 is doing that for their DLC.
As for the problem with reselling games: Honestly, that IS an issue. But there are ways around it (sell your account).
That being said, I am probably less afraid of that, because I like to keep my games to play them later. I figure, if I don't think a game will be worth playing more than once, I probably won't buy it. And I sure as hell won't buy DLC for it.
Is this planned with the CEOs and publishers in mind? Hell yeah. But that doesn't mean we can't benefit from it.
Posted January 04, 2010
Hmm, but one wonders when a CEO running a business has consumers in mind or himself. I'd like one who thinks about the consumer, but it's his product anyway so it's up to the quality of person to decide how to treat pirates and legit customers.
I am in the boat about reselling games, I learned just to hold onto them forever so I can play them again after I forget them in a few years. With over a thousand games on PC I can cycle through them indefinitely. Reselling would be a nice option to have but is not worth doing anymore. No one wants to buy a used copy of a game like Battlefield 2142 for example.
Posted January 04, 2010
avatar
tb87670: Hmm, but one wonders when a CEO running a business has consumers in mind or himself. I'd like one who thinks about the consumer, but it's his product anyway so it's up to the quality of person to decide how to treat pirates and legit customers.
I am in the boat about reselling games, I learned just to hold onto them forever so I can play them again after I forget them in a few years. With over a thousand games on PC I can cycle through them indefinitely. Reselling would be a nice option to have but is not worth doing anymore. No one wants to buy a used copy of a game like Battlefield 2142 for example.

Any intelligent business owner has both in mind, at all times. If a business can sell widgets at a slight discount, but make considerably more sales, it is a good thing. The business owner makes more money. And the consumer gets to buy his or her widget(s) at a discount.
It isn't a zero-sum game. There is room for everyone to benefit. And I figure, this potential business model won't hurt too much, and has the potential to provide great benefits to all involved.
Posted January 04, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Any intelligent business owner

A breed that is few and far between I'm afraid.
As far as OP is concerned, yeah sounds fine. Worth a try anyway. Things are hardly perfect the way they are now.
Posted January 04, 2010
avatar
Gundato: Any intelligent business owner
avatar
BladderOfDoom: A breed that is few and far between I'm afraid.
As far as OP is concerned, yeah sounds fine. Worth a try anyway. Things are hardly perfect the way they are now.

True, but that is why capitalism works. The way for the producers to profit is to cater to the consumers. You can only screw people over so much until you start losing profits. And generally, profits are increased by "helping" the consumer to some degree. Now, this all falls apart in the face of a monopoly (or even a duopoly), but that isn't really an issue here :p
Posted January 04, 2010
It seems that EA might actually understand how people think with respect to this strategy. In general, people are quite bad at recognizing the total cost of something if that cost is spread out over a long period of time. For example, how many people do you think would have bought the iPhone if they were being asked to pay a lump sum upfront of $2500+ for the phone plus two years of service? By segmenting a game into a core plus numerous bits of DLC EA can theoretically charge significantly more for the same amount of content, while getting more people to buy the game because of the lower perceived costs. If this actually ends up working out like this then I can't really fault them from a business perspective. However, at the same time, I have no interest personally in buying a game in pieces. I want what I view as a complete product, in one chunk, with no strings attached. If EA isn't offering that then I'll simply spend my money elsewhere.
Posted January 04, 2010
Article that I'm pretty sure is similar to the one you posted and slightly more explanatory. Meh, doesn't matter to me since I prefer modable (Moddable?) games anyways.
Posted January 04, 2010
I'm sure it will rope in the younger generation/less discerning gamers who have grown up in an era where pretty much every game that comes from major publishers are just another iteration on an FPS with few major distinctions... well... that or another Sims expansion. And I do agree it will allow such publishers to essentially charge more money for the same because people don't look at the total cost.
Say what you will about Steam but at least it gives smaller developers a popular/highly visible platform for them to get their games noticed. What the smaller developers excel at are offering quality games at a reasonable price that offer not only more personalized support but better support in the form of more patches and free additional content. Of course, instead of trying to compete quality-wise, EA is just going to put up a facade of this model and pretend to deliver more.
Posted January 05, 2010
avatar
tb87670: Hmm, but one wonders when a CEO running a business has consumers in mind or himself. I'd like one who thinks about the consumer, but it's his product anyway so it's up to the quality of person to decide how to treat pirates and legit customers.
I am in the boat about reselling games, I learned just to hold onto them forever so I can play them again after I forget them in a few years. With over a thousand games on PC I can cycle through them indefinitely. Reselling would be a nice option to have but is not worth doing anymore. No one wants to buy a used copy of a game like Battlefield 2142 for example.

A CEO HAS to think about profits, because the CEO of any publicly traded company is LEGALLY BOUND to focus on company profits.
Posted January 05, 2010
avatar
Crassmaster: A CEO HAS to think about profits, because the CEO of any publicly traded company is LEGALLY BOUND to focus on company profits.

However, there are many different ways that a company can potentially go about trying to maximize shareholder value, and unless a CEO shows gross negligence with respect to this goal they have pretty much nothing to worry about (hell, even when a CEO does show gross negligence they're usually just given a golden parachute).
Posted January 05, 2010
avatar
Rohan15: Article that I'm pretty sure is similar to the one you posted and slightly more explanatory. Meh, doesn't matter to me since I prefer modable (Moddable?) games anyways.

Thanks for the link, I agree, it is more informative. The link I posted was the first one that popped up during my daily news gathering ritual.
There is a link to Destructoids source on their page that is a good read as well.
Posted January 05, 2010
Personally I don't see a huge problem with this method. It's certainly no worse than forking out monthly fees for an online game in which the content hardly ever changes. And look at how many people gladly stump up the fees for such games. It's also not like anyone is going to force you to buy every little expansion that is released for any given game...
Posted January 05, 2010
avatar
DarrkPhoenix: It seems that EA might actually understand how people think with respect to this strategy. In general, people are quite bad at recognizing the total cost of something if that cost is spread out over a long period of time. For example, how many people do you think would have bought the iPhone if they were being asked to pay a lump sum upfront of $2500+ for the phone plus two years of service? By segmenting a game into a core plus numerous bits of DLC EA can theoretically charge significantly more for the same amount of content, while getting more people to buy the game because of the lower perceived costs. If this actually ends up working out like this then I can't really fault them from a business perspective. However, at the same time, I have no interest personally in buying a game in pieces. I want what I view as a complete product, in one chunk, with no strings attached. If EA isn't offering that then I'll simply spend my money elsewhere.

Exactly my point (though you explained it with much more clarity)! Unfortunately, just like the sheeple who fell for the iPhone scam, the majority of gamers will very likely fall for this scam, it will end up becoming the new standard for PC games, which will basically mean no more PC gaming for me. At the very least it means I won't be buying any games from EA anymore. There's a reason I don't play MMOs or other piecemeal games like that: when I buy a game, I want a whole game, not just the part of a game that I then have to pay for again in order to complete. I'd like to think I'm not alone in that and I'd really like to think that I am part of the silent majority when comes to that, but I fear that is not the case.
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussion (archive)Pay less for less(65 posts)(65 posts)
(65 posts)