Mass Effect DLC Bundles?
I know Mass Effect 3 has been out for about two nears now. The DLC has been made, released, and is now just sitting around. I recently got the Mass Effect collection, containing Mass Effect 1, 2, and...
Forum Discussion
Same thing going on here. We (the players) want to pay less than we currently must for EA's products.
All the arguments come down to two:
1. "It's an old game, the base game goes on sale, so why not the DLC? I don't want to pay so much for add-ons."
2. "Discounting the DLC will [somehow] increase the overall profit for the company by increasing sales of that, (or some other) product to such an extent that those profits will exceed the profits received from DLC sold at the current prices."
All other discussion is just a variation on one of those. The first is just childish whinging. And to be successful the second would have to be demonstrably true from the publishers' perspective. They have incredible amounts of data regarding the purchases of their products, so if this were the case it would already be well known to them. The people making those decisions are business people first and foremost. It is, in fact, their job.
Here, and on the BSN, we're just talking to ourselves, (and mostly sounding incredibly naïve.) There's almost no hard data being provided, (or even available to anyone on the "outside") and what few numbers are thrown around are not reliably sourced. Just lots of anecdotal assertions and wishful thinking.
@ThandalNLyman wrote:Same thing going on here. We (the players) want to pay less than we currently must for EA's products.
All the arguments come down to two:
1. "It's an old game, the base game goes on sale, so why not the DLC? I don't want to pay so much for add-ons."
2. "Discounting the DLC will [somehow] increase the overall profit for the company by increasing sales of that, (or some other) product to such an extent that those profits will exceed the profits received from DLC sold at the current prices."
All other discussion is just a variation on one of those. The first is just childish whinging. And to be successful the second would have to be demonstrably true from the publishers' perspective. They have incredible amounts of data regarding the purchases of their products, so if this were the case it would already be well known to them. The people making those decisions are business people first and foremost. It is, in fact, their job.
Here, and on the BSN, we're just talking to ourselves, (and mostly sounding incredibly naïve.) There's almost no hard data being provided, (or even available to anyone on the "outside") and what few numbers are thrown around are not reliably sourced. Just lots of anecdotal assertions and wishful thinking.
You don't have to insult other users, they're just giving their opinion on the topic whatever that might be. Personally I do believe all the story DLC costing more put together than the main game negates the benefit of the main game being on sale. e.g a recent sale on PlayStation Store had several games and their DLCs on sale together which is what people would like to see more of. Not a The Force Unleashed type of situation where the DLC stays at its original price (overpriced imo) many years after the game has been released.
Game of the Year/Complete Editions of games at least sell well enough for companies like Bethesda to keep doing them so the idea of having the game + DLC be available together for less than the original game's price isn't new to them.
Please show me where I've insulted anyone.
I've simply said that this topic has been discussed-to-death in multiple threads by people who have neither any real knowledge of the economics of the situation, (meaning all of us gamers) nor any real influence on the decisions makers (who don't read forums, they read spreadsheets.)
I have been following this very discussion across multiple game forums, for multiple games, from multiple publishers, for many years now. The "arugments" are always the same, and they don't ever have any real data to support them.
No. Data. Ever.
It always comes down to, "I want to pay less for your product so you should discount it because I say so." I had no patience with that sort of reasoning when my children tried it. I have less now.
The only thing anyone could say that would make me pay attention is some actual profit figures across base games, DLC, bundles, etc., for all channels, over an extended period. If anyone who has access to that information would care to share it, I'm all ears.
Otherwise, "Your money. Your choice." No one is forcing anyone to buy a game in the first place, much less pay for any DLC.
"The first is just childish whinging". You can get your opinions and ideas across without having to use that sort of language. People here have no real data to support what they say on this topic because they don't have access to that sort of data. The issue isn't that people are being forced to buy a game but that they would like to do so and the combined cost of all the DLC which they also think is worthwhile is just too high. Part of the reason why Steam sales and sales in general are so popular. The issue is that sales for DLC can and do occur but not for Mass Effect on PC as far as I know.
When you say "sales", you mean "discounts off the normal price". (Obviously there are lots of "sales" of the un-discounted products.)
EA is a sophisticated business. If they could, in fact, make a higher profit by bundling the game and the DLC together, they would. In fact, they have! (See: "Dragon Age: Ultimate Edition".) So when people STOP buying the DLC at "full price", then we might see a change. Until then, no amount of forum posting matters. Especially when such "arguments" are totally unsupported by any real data.I stand by my statement that such discussion is nothing more than "childish whinging".
(Or, if you prefer, "naïve wishful thinking".)
