It#s not only inflation but also the production costs. Movies were made for millions of dollars ten years ago already but in games the production costs increased really fast in the last years because of bigger teams licensed graphics etc. And for PC games like the witcher the market has less customers than ten years ago. Most of the players have consoles. (sry for bad english, not my language)The DLC thing:First I think that the responsibility for quality and the price of the product is higher if a boxed expansion is made, because of the presence in the media and because of that you mostly get more (or better) content for the same money.Second, dlc are much more cheaper for the company. They do not hve any chainstores taking part of the profit and no costs for packaging/handbook/cd. For this reason dlc are mostly overprized.
When Blu-Rays first came out they were $30-$35, now they're about $25, how do you explain that? Is the movie industry following its own imaginary rules of economics? No, it's more likely that as Blu-Rays are getting more popular, they can afford to lower the prices. If movie productions are costing more, and are putting the movies on this newer blu-ray format, yet can still lower the price -- the video game industry can do the same thing.Also, the X-Box 360 came out in 2005 and games for that system were $60, but the year before with the PS2/Xbox1/Gamecube era, games were $50. So in one year, game prices shot up 20%....because of inflation?If anything it shows how easily the game companies think they can get away with this kind of thing. Instead of raising the price by $2 every year they raise it by $10 all at once....Oh, btw, speaking of video game companies wasting their money, I heard Justin Bieber promoted the Kinect at one of his concerts, I wonder how many millions of dollars that must've cost Microsoft. They could've use that money to figure out how to stop the Red-Ring-of-Death, which will save costs in the long run due to all the systems people are returning to them, but instead all they see the profit factor.The video game industry is going to crash because of this. There is only so much people are willing to put up with.freakie1one said:
When BluRays were first released they were not accepted as the standard. They were in direct competition with HDDVD. They dropped in price to be more competitive and also, like you said, they eventually became the standard and thusly had more sales. But $25-30 is still more than a DVD costs. Prices have risen for movies, not decreased. You mention consoles and I have little knowledge of consoles and their pricing. I started gaming on an Atari 2600 in the 80's, then went to a Nintendo, Super Nintendo and the last console I purchased was a Nintendo 64. This is why I gave you the numbers for PC games. I think all current consoles are rip-offs because many console games aren't even longer than 10 hours. I wouldn't pay more than $20 for a game that lasts only 10 hours or less. This is why I stick with PC games. Console games tend more towards action and instant gratification whereas PC games usually have more depth. Anyways, I've already shown that PC games haven't been price gouged. If consoles are being price gouged then stop buying and supporting them.saadishsnake said:
New technologies always come down in price from their first introduction, because production becomes cheaper, and also the people selling them hope the novelty will entice people to pay more early on, but that wears off pretty quick. but prices will only drop only to a point, then they'll level off and be subject to the same inflation and whatnot as any other product that's been around a while. It's not applicable for comparison to games since the technology in them evolves so rapidly, it's almost ALWAYS at least partly new, from a technology stand point. New renderers, new engines, etc. that stuff doesn't come cheap, and building worlds in 3D is much more time consuming than using, say, an isometric tile based system. More time means more money. There are games being sold for a lot cheaper than $50, but they use older engines and such, and due to the tech-obsessed audience, they don't tend to sell in huge numbers. The way games are made is comparable to how movies are made, though. They are made by groups of people working together to give people a creative final product. The big movies also tend to use ever changing technology to make them. Industrial Light and Magic ain't cheap. (even the non-special effects blockbusters to a degree, the ability to use digital cameras was HUGE) but we have to look at the *first* line of distribution to make a real comparison, since that's what we're dealing with when it comes to game prices, the first line/wave of distribution. Movie ticket prices have gone up. a LOT. when I was a kid, it was like 4-5 bucks to see a new movie. Now it's nearly 10 dollars, up to 20 if you go to 3D (but that is subject to the whole novelty thing mentioned above, i think that will come down in time)
No, I'm pretty sure the price dropped occurred after HD-DVD "lost" the "format war." And Blu-Ray will go down in price just like how DVD went down in price when it was first released on the market.As for what you're saying about consoles -- PC gaming doesn't exist in a vacuum. The price they're based on is also relative to the price of console games. Last-gen they were $40, now they're $50. Hell, look at Starcraft 2 -- it's a hardcore PC game and it's being priced at $60 (just like other console games). If you're not a fan of console gaming, I don't really care, but to say it's completely separate from PC gaming isn't true. PC games are usually $10 cheaper than console games because of licensing issues, but when console games jumped from $50-$60, PC games jumped from $40-$50. I even think that The Witcher 2 will retail for $50 even though The Witcher 1 retail at $40 because they believe it will sell at this higher price due to the higher trends.freakie1one said:
*Wonders if saadish even reads his posts before he replies* lol I can't keep going in circles and having you put words in my mouth. It's pointlesssaadishsnake said:
So congrats, you've worn me down and I'll no longer post in this thread No, I don't read the posts at all, I reply to the voices in my head...HERP DERP!Is that what you want me to say? You feel like you're "going in circles" because I'm not agreeing with you and we're on the Internet where nobody ever agrees with anyone else. I've been repeating stuff in this thread too, but I'm not saying, "gee, since you don't agree with me you're obviously not reading my posts."I like CDProjekt and loved The Witcher 1, but maybe it's time you looked at what best benefits you, the consumer, instead of looking at what benefits the video game companies.freakie1one said:*Wonders if saadish even reads his posts before he replies* lol I can't keep going in circles and having you put words in my mouth. It's pointless
What benefits the game companies does benefit the consumer in the end. they use profits from the games (and DLC) to, you know, make more and better games...
As long as they don't go the way of Mafia 2...purposely removing content from the final game in order to sell the rest shortly after as DLC. Thats a good strategy to have if you want your company to fail. Lol It's sad the amount of anger over in their forums. I don't see how they come back after that debacle, and they aren't selling well either.
I have learned a lesson from my most recent gaming adventure. NEVER buy a game based on its potential for DLC, And if a publisher starts peddling DLC as a marketing tool pre launch be very skeptical. The game should stand on its own without even thinking of dlc first and foremost. This may likely limit my pool of games to nill but I feel it is the only way to look at things now.
how do you know? development companies which started as fully supportive of pc and modding communities have turned sides often.i hope this is not the case, but the fact is, they probably will get more profit from dlc. it's all about what kind of reputation they want to develop, and if it's possible to maintain it in today's profit driven atmosphere.PetraSilie said:
DLCs are fine as long as they do not tamper with the main story. Something on the lines of "Price of Neutrality" maybe. If they start modifying the main story on the lines of what Bioware did recently with DA:O and ME 2, They are a complete waste of time and money.I wouldn't mind paying for side adventures, as long as they don't f**k up the main storyline.An alternate approach can also be employed where you can earn achievements in the game, and use achievement points to "buy" new content.
It's better if DLCs are not attached to main story for the following:1. Say main story ended in base game with "A" killing "B" with the help of "C"2. DLC added part where "A" finds out real enemy is "C", and kills "C"3. Next version of game to be released. Should "C" be alive or dead? Mind you, not all players played the DLC. IF "C" is alive, the ones who played DLC will find it odd. If "C" is dead, with perhaps a cinematic explaining what happened, many players will feel deprived.4. It's much better if "C"s fate is decided in either version 1 or 2. Not in the middle.That's what I meant.Look at what DA:O did. Brought out a bunch of DLCs that modified the main storyline. Now they have to make a sequel with no direct relation (character wise) to the first installment, because the fate of the characters is all screwed up thanks to the DLCs. I really do not want something similar to happen to TW.Retail expansions are not the same as DLCs. DLCs have always been "exclusive content". They must never become essential for continuity in the storyline.
I cleary stated that DLCs are not classic expansions. THAT is why they should not modify the main story. If main story is to be modified, that's the job of the expansion. Classic expansions are more than welcome. But they should not be made into DLCs. That was my point.If you release a retail expansion, it is MEANT to modify the main story. Future versions are MEANT to take the changes in the expansion into consideration. However, DLCs are "exclusive content". If they start doing what expansions do, they do longer remain "exclusive", but "essential".I have nothing against expansions. In fact, I encourage them. But expansions should not be made into packages that you can only buy online, ieLCs.
LCs.But why do you state opinions as facts?
DLCs can be anything, from a set of model retextures to huge expansions like Ballad of gay Tony or all expansions to Borderlands. In latter case the only difference from classic expansion is the method of distribution.Vilgefortze said:
And the method of distribution is what I have a problem with. There is a difference between a D2D purchase of a game that I know I CAN buy a DVD for, and a DLC that I know I can only download. If there is anything wrong with the DVD , I can get a replacement. If it is only available for download, and not at a store, if anything goes wrong during the download, it becomes a huge "download a fresh copy" hassle.Verification of online purchase forms takes a longer time than going to the store with a receipt, from my experience. As such, distribution of parts of the main story should not be restricted to solely downloadable packages.When EE was released as the 1.4 patch, there was that whole MD5 package integrity problem. My first download was corrupt as well. Now imagine if such content was only available online, and if it modified the story. In this case I was able to find a DVD copy, but what if (by implementing DLCs), such content was not released in a DVD version, and the only way for me to obtain it was to keep downloading till it worked?As for your argument that a DLC can be anything, I never denied that. All I'm saying is essential content must not be put into DLCs. Retextures and sidequests are fine.Again I stress there is a difference between making a content available online, and making it exclusively online (as in a DLC).
OK. I see you point, though I don't see the problem myself. In my opinion going to a shop for a DVD replacement is much more annoying than redownloading the file. And purchase verification is the problem of the store, not the DLC itself. There are online stores where only login is needed to redownload bought products.
Not everyone has a uber-fast connection you know... And expansions can be pretty big. I personally operate on a slow wireless network most of the time thanks to my traveling lifestyle....I mean, releasing a DVD version doesn't hurt anyone or anything.But whatever, truce.