Would you rather have games cut up and sold as DLC or pay full price?

Speaking of episodic gaming lol, it doesn't seem to have taken a hold like I feared it would. At least not yet, but it's seemed to have died down a bit.

 

^It would be interesting to see how the sales figures for the new Hitman went compared to previous games to see whether it hurt or helped sales. I'm obviously a huge Hitman fan and have not played it due to wanting the full game at once.

 

In the case of "Hitman" I was happy to spend the money on that.

While Publishers pressure people to buy digital by only offering the full content in "Day 1", "Gold" and "Deluxe" Editions priced at nearly double new game price...

"Hitman" said give us standard new game money and you get all the content we will ever release for it and that's what they've delivered.

"Hitman" isn't Episodic Gaming in the same sense of those Mobile Phone games the Tell Tale people produce.

It's Installment gaming and the staggered approach to Mission releases can keep the experience fresher.

But ultimately it was the sensible approach to pricing and the promise of no Micro-Transactions that won me over.

 

^^ I hate that approach as it doesn't suit me. It seems like episodic gaming suits you more as it seems you only put an hour or 2 into any given game. I could be wrong, but that's how it seems. If it works for you then great, but for me not so much. I'll
wait until it's complete and then I'll buy it.

 

^ I can imagine that suits Az perfectly who rarely seems to put much time into the majority of games he has.

Wouldn't suit me at all. I'd buy them when all episodes are released.

I'm the same with TV shows. Something like The Walking Dead, I won't watch each episode each week, I wait until the whole season is available then kind of binge watch them over 2-3 days.

 

^nothing salty about the truth.

 

Salty? Who? I don't eat salt, it's bad for blood pressure

 

I will not support the idea of cutting content from the game so that there will be day 1 (or near day 1) DLC, so I would never pay for a game like that. Adding DLC months after the release I'm fine with. I also wouldn't pay a higher price for the game +
DLC straight away. If the game's good and the DLC looks like it's worth the money I'll pay for the DLC when it's time to get it. I would never buy a €90 game just to get the season pass included.

 

^^ Yeah, €90.00 is a bit ridiculous. Some games here are €74.99 and then an additional €40.00 or €50.00 for a season pass.

 

@Old Lofty I couldn't wait to watch TWD or Game of Thrones, because those shows get spoiled quickly, so I always feel like I have to watch them straight away. But I do like to binge shows on Netflix.

Also I don't mind episodic games and waiting for the next episode, and I will admit I can't play games as long as I used to so it kinda gives me a break.

 

I think the DLC can be great. There is a lot that was designed, obviously so, after the original game. And it is great to get that extra content for a great game. I also understand that it is profitable for a company and can help cover more costs of game
development or maximize profits. Which are important for new games.

The issue I have is if they are actually cutting content from the game to sell later. If it is content you can see does not fit the main game well that is fine as I understand things get cut and added. And it is just an issue where that particular content
was not fitting the main release. But I have seen enough DLC that was obviously part of the game, done, and cut to make extra from people who wanted the complete story or whatever from a game. That is really bad when everybody feels the game is thin and
needs more content only to have more "paid" launch later.

"The way I see it though, games companies are their to earn money, not to do us a favour so in that sense it really doesn't bother me one way or another ( I don't mean to sound offish here ) gaming is my hobby, chill out time and it's not something I'll
ever lose sleep over, just not that important in life."

I am slightly different here. Although I agree companies (any) are there to earn money they HAVE to put the customer first. I have a few current cases I could point to from a personal standpoint. But decided against putting anything here. The thing is,
at least from just a gaming standpoint, I know of a lot of issues with the Windows Store and Windows 10. I can honestly say it is hurting the Play Anywhere idea and the Windows Store. If it was just a few that would be fine. But I have heard about it way
to much. I have worked on units with these problems way to much. And they are random. Without the consumer coming first you run the risk of losing. If not for Windows dominance due to volume I could see MS having an issue. Seems like every business around
here wants to move away from MS. I have personally been asked several times about the best alternative. Customers first, not profits. Customers are where your profits come from.

I will admit I have seen more consumers than ever just take what is given. Odd to see so many view it as a corporate profits first mentality. I understand why it happens and that is how things have been push in the past almost 2 decades but it really is
not how it should be. The corporations should not be telling people what they want and should buy. But they do a lot now. A lot of greed and very poor customer service around now. They know they have control. A friend of mine, works for a big company,
was telling me how they were removing features from a product he helped develop some years back. Consumers want those features but they just slowly add them back when they "update" the product. They know they can do this and get away with it. DLC could,
at least sometimes, fall in this area.

Really though it is like digital vs physical. Early on it was that digital would be great for the consumer. And sometimes, especially Steam, you would see some great early sale prices. Then digital caught on a lot more. Now, I can always pick up physical
much cheaper. In the PC world a "physical" purchased can be $20 while digital is $60. Even though Steam. And the game comes from Amazon with, you guessed it, a Steam code. Amazingly, many will still purchased the digital even though the "physical" is a
Steam digital copy. They see this just like I (and other) do. So now prices are riding higher for a lot longer. It is a scenario of consumers hurting themselves.

DLC can be good. But companies will push the envelope. I have seen more and more acceptance of actually pulling game content from the final produce to sell as DLC. I just hope that gaming does not get to the point where you have to keep paying to play.
Whether that be buying new content or whatever. Always connected even for the single player experience. The always connected sounds like it might not be that bad. But it really can be and is totally unnecessary for most games.

 

Wait, wait, wait, I have to lol

I was told just a Thread ago there is nothing Objectivly wrong with Games this Generation and now a Thread about how this was just my Opinion? But I thought it was just my Opinion?

Oh my reason and logic are dead.

 

I think games are still awesome which is why I still play them. Some questionable practices like microtransactions suck, but they may help keep initial costs down, but overall I'm happy with games this gen. Not all but a lot.

 

^ Yep I think overall the games this generation have been brilliant. I can't say every game I've played/purchased is great, always the odd stinker but I'm still here.

If/when the day comes that I'm not enjoying it no more, whether it be the quality ( from what I'd personally class as good quality ) or I just become bored, lose interest etc I'll just walk away and won't look back.

I posted the other day that I thought as I got older I'd lose interest but it still has me hooked.

 

I've been playing since I was 4. That's the same age my son was when he started. His first game was Angry Birds, mine was Asteroids lol. I'm almost 42 and if I haven't lost interest yet I doubt I will.