[Kane Knight]

Originally Posted by Drakul Also, some guy has lodged an official complaint with the Better Business Bureau and Federal Trade Commission because he didn't like the ending of Mass Effect 3.

I mentioned this in the ME thread. It's not just because he didn't like the ending, but because he feels that Bioware's claims on what the endign would be constitutes false advertising. They did promote a product wholly different from the end result. That kind of fits the bill.

I like the fact that actually going through proper channels gets more controversy than the death threats Devs get. I also wonder how many of those were Fangerl.

The way I see on-disc DLC, they keep the price of the game at a reasonable level while everything else in life is increasing in price.

Which is why Compact Discs are now 50 dollars, DVDs are now 70...

Seriously, though, not everything rises in price. A lot do, but so what? They don't need to subsidise the costs with DLC. Have you seen how much more money they made in 2011 than 2010? Have yuo seentheir projections for 2012? The games industry as a whole is gonna like double over the course of three years!

So, rather than hiking up the price of the game instore and damaging sales, they keep it at a price we will accept.

At least, temporarily.

The DLC then lets them make an actual profit in a way that's optional and more managable because it's spread out of a few months.

Ignoring the fact that most of the on-disc DLC is sold as day 1, then yes, it's spread out over months.

If the alternative to locked on-disc DLC was paying an extra £30/40 or an extra $40/50 for every single thing unlocked, would people prefer that? As I see it, that's the legal* options. £40/$60 for the game and a few extra £/$ for locked DLC every other week or £80/$100 instore for everything included.

Keeping in mind these are not the two options, because the market would not stand for one of them.

Honestly, if they're going to hit us with 40 bucks of DLC, something they would NEVER charge us for on-disc if they were being transparent, they should lower the initial price point. Otherwise, they've been making BILLIONS, so the argument that they need to do this to keep up is just plain false.

Also, why don't games like Skyrim need to do it? There's hundreds of hours of content on those games, with fewer iterations in between. Why aren't companies like Bethesda and Obsidian in the toilet? Rockstar? C'mon, man, it doesn't pass the smell test.

But yeah, it really pisses me off when consumers go to consumer advocacy groups or want things at a reasonable price like consumers. Why can't they just be wallets with legs?

Wanting honesty, transparency, and fairness are so selfish. y u so intitld, gamurz?