Are publisher just taking too much advantage of gamers?

VG247 Forum » The VG247 forum

Are publisher just taking too much advantage of gamers?

(93 posts)

Started 7 months ago by Talkar
Latest reply from OlderGamer

12…4 Next »

Talkar
Member
I've noticed a more and more used practice from publishers, when it comes to releasing new games. They seem to have a bunch of DLC, put it on the disc, and then charge you for it. For example, the following are available on the PS3 version of Assassin's Creed 3
```
Captain of the Aquila's Uniform
  Traditional Colonial Assassin Outfit
  Obwandiyag's War Club
  Pirate Flintlock
  Boarding Axe
  Scottish Flintlock
  upgraded Naval Convoy
  new colors for the Aquila
  Lost Mayan Ruins
  Ghost War privateer contracts
  Sinking a Secret privateer contracts
  Sharpshooter Package
  Redcoat Package
```
Some if not all, of them are used as preorder incentives, and in order for the customer to get all of the above pieces of DLC, you will have to buy the game from several different retailers, over and over again, even though it is on the disc already. Assuming you aren't completely crazy of course, you could just wait until it is available on PSN, XBL, or whatever intrusive DRM such as steam it is using on PC.
Yet, the problem remains that you've already bought and paid for a game, on a disc, but you don't get what is actually on the disc.
What do you guys think of this? Any argumements that can support this practice?
Posted 7 months ago #
DSB
Member

They have been for a long while, but without a press to call them on it, and with gamers happily bending over, it's not likely to change.

It must be a lovely industry for an executive, knowing you can get away with pretty much any harebrained scheme :P

Posted 7 months ago #
Talkar
Member

True.
I have noticed it in the past, for well, a long time.
I've just not been paying attention to it x)

Atleast there are some games where they try to pull this shit, where it doesn't really matter. Such as Hitman Absolution. There are so many retailers with so many different DLC packs depending on where you preorder it. But it doesn't matter, because those packs only contain weapons, and i don't ever use weapons in Hitman, so i just preordered from the cheapest place i could find :P

Posted 7 months ago #
locus2k1
Member

One thing I have always questioned is whether this is all the publishers doing, or is it that also more and more retail outlets want some form of exclusive DLC to try and encourage the consumer to purchase a copy there.

Posted 7 months ago #
Deacon
Member

Few people like this, but at the end of the day providing the game itself has enough challenge and content to keep me busy, I could care less for what supplemental tat they might have stashed away somewhere on the disc. These things are rarely game-changing, and most are either aesthetic or variants of existing in-game items.

It's unlikely to change, so either ignore it or buy from the place with the best 'tat' :p

Posted 7 months ago #
freedoms_stain
Moderator

A lot of this pre-order dlc actually hurts the opening balance of some games to the point where I don't actually want it.

When you're supposed to start with nothing but you've got several weapons and some armour from pre-order dlc it usually makes the opening of the game too easy - and a fuck-load of games are too easy to begin with anyway.

Posted 7 months ago #
DrDamn
Member

You don't pay for everything on the disc, you pay for the game as advertised and that is what you get. That is what you should base your buying decision on. The disc is just a content delivery mechanism, you don't own everything you could ever do with the software on it. People have to get out of the mindset of physical. It's digital content you are buying access to, not physical.

The mechanism isn't the issue. Whether the main content is worth your cash and whether any additional charged for content is worth your cash is the issue. If they deliver the content on the same disc you bought the main game on then that's actually a plus for you and the publisher. You don't have to download or store much as it can stay sat on the disc.

Posted 7 months ago #
Dave Cook
Member

@DrDamn Yeah I agree with you on this topic. The disc is the equivalent to an Amazon shipping box when you order a DVD with free delivery. You are paying for the DVD in the box, not the box or delivery itself.

Same deal with disc vs on disc content. You pay for what is stated by the publisher.

I may not agree with the practice of on disc DLC - I really don't - but they aren't doing too much that is dodgy it seems. Plus most exclusive pre-order DLC is wank anyway. Do people get that upset about missing out on a few skins? (Genuine question btw, as I could be wrong, if so, please tell me) :)

(Also, I really hope I haven't screwed up my own Amazon analogy there) :P

Posted 7 months ago #
DrDamn
Member

@Dave Cook
I think the Amazon analogy could do with not being a DVD as that muddies the waters :), but I know what you mean.

Posted 7 months ago #
Talkar
Member

@DrDamn & Dave
I have to disagree with you two.
I believe that what you purchase is what you own. And what you purchase is what you have in your hands. Simple as that, atleast to me.
The amazon analogy doesn't make much sense to me. If the disc is the equivalent to a box, then what is the game packaging and the box the game arrives in for? o.O

Posted 7 months ago #
DrDamn
Member

@Talkar
It's not that simple because we aren't talking about something physical thing. It's digital. Hence it is treated differently. What you have in your hands is the packaging of that digital content.

Posted 7 months ago #
ManuOtaku
Member

I will like to add the always connected for singleplayer games that is also a worrying trend on the industry, and i like to add that i also dont agree and/or see with good eyes the DLC locked content on the Disc, advertised or not,the user bought the license for use the software available in the disc, that includes locked content and open content, therefore the user is free to use, under the rights given by the license of course, all the content on the disc IMHO, as for physical vs digital, regarding the legal aspects for the end user, that will be another discussion for other threads, and a one that i did put my thoughts quite extensevily on previous ones, and no need to start it once again.

Posted 7 months ago #
Talkar
Member

@DrDamn
But when i buy an item, lets say from amazon. I also assume i own what is inside the box that comes. I don't see why this doesn't apply to games.

Posted 7 months ago #
Phoenixblight
Member

You may believe whatever you want but you don't actually own anything on the disc you are just paying to use the software. A publisher/Dev's job is to try and sell their game so they can make a profit if you are mad at the trends with pre-order incentives and on-Disc DLC, look at the mirror. You are the one endorsing it every time you buy a game that uses this business model.

Once we go full digital the discussion of what is "yours" or not will be irrelevant.

Posted 7 months ago #
DrDamn
Member

@Talkar
Because they aren't physical, they are digital. This is the central point. You can't treat it in a physical way.

Here's another way of looking at it. All XBLA titles are free. If you download a trial of the game you get the full game downloaded to your HDD, the majority of the content is locked until you pay though. But it's on your HDD - so you own it, don't you?

Posted 7 months ago #
ManuOtaku
Member

Dr Damn
"Because they aren't physical, they are digital. This is the central point. You can't treat it in a physical way"
Agree, but the thing is that the TOS and EULA treat the digital like physical, because both use the first sale rule as part of them, right now there is a loophole legally speaking, it is a sale? or it is a license?, it is still not clear, i mean what are the users rights, therefore until this important and key aspect is solve, legally speaking, or that is established exactly what it is, we should not advocate for digital distribution only.

Posted 7 months ago #
Joe Musashi
Member

Here we go again.

The concept of ownership does not change at all whether a game is delivered digitally or physically. You don't OWN the game in either case.

JM

Posted 7 months ago #
ManuOtaku
Member

"The concept of ownership does not change at all whether a game is delivered digitally or physically. You don't OWN the game in either case."

Right now as it stands it does change , you cannot sell a digital copy of a game, while with a physical game you can sell it, and/or gift it, broke it, therefore legally speaking it is a differentiation, in what you can do, which affects the ownership rights.

And i think this is because they are not clear if this is a sale or a license, at least legally speaking has not been sorted out, therefore the issue is not the ownership, it is to know what the nature of the transaction is, a sale or a license.

Posted 7 months ago #
Joe Musashi
Member

You can physically sell it - but you are not the owner of the game and you do not have reselling rights. Typically such rights are expressly forbidden and stated VERY clearly.

I can physically break into a car and run down a pedestrian. I can do it physically. It's possible. Does that mean I'm entitled to do it? No. Should I assume that anything I can physically do I am automatically entitled to do? No.

The concept of ownership HAS NOT CHANGED. It's just that with digital delivery you can no longer get away with doing the things you weren't allowed to do in the first place. You do not have ownerships rights and you are not a victim - quite the opposite in fact.

You don't own it. It's not yours to resell. Grasp that fact without trying to twist it for once. There isn't any "legal" difference between physical and digital ownership. You just BELIEVE it's different BECAUSE you can hold it in your hands and sell it. The game is DATA - and not the medium its delivered on. The DATA is absolutely the same in both circumstances. DATA and the MEDIUM it is delivered on are two distinct things. You own the medium, sure. You absolutely do not own the DATA on it. You never have.

JM

Posted 7 months ago #
YoungZer0
Member

@locus2k1: It's actually the retailers, not the publishers. The retailers are the ones that ask for exclusive stuff. Exclusive stuff allows them to sell more copies. If they expect to sell more copies, they buy more from the publisher. You could of course blame the publishers for being greedy bitches without balls, but they are usually not in it for the games, but the money.

And i really could care less what people think, if i buy the game, it's mine, i can and will resell it as often as i like. If you don't think you should have the right to resell your game, you're a corporate whore and i feel sorry for you. You piss on the little rights you have with a smile.

You don't see that in movie business. Movie makers are not blaming people for reselling their movies. They are not pissing on them for not buying their film day-1. They are not insulting them, nor are they saying that resellers are on the same level as pirates. They simply are not doing that, and the film business is also in it for the money. Yet they do seem to have more respect for their crowd, they do seem to do rather good. All that, while piracy and the resell market are much stronger here.

If they have such a huge problem with reselling, maybe they shouldn't ask 70 Euroes of their new game. Maybe go down to half the price and you'll see that nobody is going to buy your game used. Or maybe just sell their digital copies for half the price. But they are not going to do that. Oh no, preach but no practice.

Really videogame publishers have no shame whatsoever, they are greedy, that's all. I have little to no respect for them, especially dipshits like Ubisoft, who continue to treat their paying customers like shit.

If you pay 70 Euroes for a game, you deserve the whole package. You shouldn't have to pay 70 Euroes for the game and another 50 Euroes for 15 Maps or some other little DLC they release.

Posted 7 months ago #
Gheritt White
Member

What would you rather - this, or games costing over $100 a pop? Games haven't increased in price-per-unit since the mid-to-late nineties, despite SOARING production costs and inflation rises.

Publishers need to make a profit somehow so as to continue to find development 0- this is just one of many tricks of the trade. Be grateful it's optional.

Posted 7 months ago #
Gekidami
Member

I get why publishers do it, -to secure more day one, brand new purchases- but goddamn, at least stick all of the pre order stuff into the most expensive CE you're selling.

Posted 7 months ago #
DSB
Member

Gheritt has a point, but it's a very selective way of looking at it.

Who suggested that gamers want games that cost 20-100 million dollars to make? As I see it, it's primarily douchebag CEOs with a bag full of buzz words who are driving that development, and it doesn't seem like the market agrees with them, looking at how terribly virtually all of their businesses are doing.

Clearly, the publisher isn't always right, and I think there's a lot to suggest that the further we go into the nickle and dime, the more you lose the core gamer in favor of the core consumer, which aren't neccesarily one and the same. I think the industry has a real possibility of building a Zynga style house of cards, with the way they're going at the moment.

I think it's fair enough to make demands of producers. Maybe they need to cut budgets. Maybe they need to make less technically demanding games. Maybe they need better talent. Maybe they need to take a critical look at their mostly oligarchal leadership.

Posted 7 months ago #
YoungZer0
Member

Rather sad you believe in all that bullshit.

Videogames always have been overpriced. There is no reason they should be more expensive now. Sure graphics are better, but so's the technology. Back then videogames would get new maps released with patches without costing the player anything. Why?! If they had the same price back then, why didn't they need more money?

Answer me this: Why can Videogame developers like CD Projekt RED flourish and get bigger every year? Sure their game has the same price at the beginning, but in less than half a year, i could get The Witcher for 24 Euros in a normal retail store. The full game, with a map, a huge booklet/walkthrough, a papercraft Witcher, a lucky coin, a DVD with artbook and making of-documentary.

They released patches that added new quests, a new arena, new difficulty, the third patch got rid of the DRM, they still improve the game to this day. And yet they didn't charge jackshit for it. How come?

They don't ask for anything, yet people seem to buy their game, how could that be?!

And look at the production value: Insanely great graphics, superb gameplay, fantastic writing, lovely music and sound, beautiful animation.

They give us all that for the price of the game alone. That is all. No more charges asked. It's for PC and i can still resell it. A PC GAME THAT I CAN RESELL. That's insane! It's like they respect their customers or something.

Posted 7 months ago #
Dave Cook
Member

"You shouldn't have to pay 70 Euroes for the game and another 50 Euroes for 15 Maps or some other little DLC they release."

DLC is optional. Always has been.

@YoungZero I think it's because they're part-funded by GOG. I'd have to look into the numbers to see how much of that money actually goes into their game development, but I'm sure that's how they managed to thrive.

Posted 7 months ago #
DSB
Member

Just like a car where the panelling and seat covers are optional.

You may not need it in the most existential sense of the word, and you may be perfectly capable of sitting on a bare foam cushion, looking at sheet metal on the doors, but it's still very much a part of the complete product Dave.

Posted 7 months ago #
Dave Cook
Member

@DSB

Avatar and weapon skins are not crucial to the overall package though. I think that's what the topic started out as discussing - gone massively deeper than that since the start mind you.

Publishers view that extra content as bonus material, add-ons. Based on interviews I've done, may of them see them as entirely optional. If you buy fine, if not, fine as well.

In that regard I don't see them as part of a complete product I'm afraid dude. Not saying you're wrong, but that's my stance on it.

I do feel that the core disc content should be considered the full content - I say 'should' because some studios still withhold content off the disc - AC2 being a prime example - and that practice is absolutely wrong.

Posted 7 months ago #
The_Red
Member

I'm sorry but when we pay 60 bucks for a game (And in case of people like me who live in effed up countries, something like $120), we OWN everything that is on that disc. In other words, on disc DLC and other such practices are immoral and wrong and HAVE to become illegal (But sadly won't).

Posted 7 months ago #
DSB
Member

Well, you have your truly optional DLC and then you have DLC that is really just ripped content from the finished product.

EA for example, as a matter of routine, tend to cut weapons from their games to incentivize preorders and create a demand for future DLC packs.

That's just blatantly ripping people off, in games where you know that people are going to care about their weapon selection, and what it means to the balance of the multiplayer. None of those weapons constitute an extra expense to the publisher, they're simply exploiting it to generate extra revenue.

Skins and actual expansions don't bother me, because one is truly optional and the other is an actual product seperate from the main game.

To say that the industry respects the distinction between those three is just ludicrous though.

Posted 7 months ago #
Ireland Michael
Moderator

The assumption that you don't own the content of the disc, that it's a "license", blah blah blah, is complete bullshit, and always has been. There is absolutely *nothing* in the laws of any of the major regions to back it up. If there is, please feel free to quote it for me.

The law dictates that when someone buys something, it is their property, and they can do whatever the hell they want with it as long as they're not breaking any other laws in the process - E.G. piracy, copyright infringement. etc.

EULA have barely any legal backing, and TOS involve services, not goods. There is no confusion to be had here. The data is on the disc. It's yours to do with as you wish. Music, for example - you can listen to it, you can rip it, you can copy it. Just don't sell it, put it onkine, or give it to others for free. *wink wink*

If you had coding knowledge and wanted to brute force your way into accessing "locked" data on a game disc, you would be entirely within your right to do so. It's your property.

If some people actually got off their asses and started suing companies regarding the farcical nature pf disc-locked content, the practiss would die out pretty fast. Downloadable content is completely fair game though.

If you don't support it, don't buy it. You can't "take advantage" of a consumer. They *choose* to buy something, and ignorance is never a valid excuse.

Posted 7 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12…4 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.