- 745
- Canada
Then sell GT6 for more money. I hate DlC
No DLC
- Thread starter FiftyBelowZero
- 43 comments
- 2,646 views
- 1,257
- England
- porthillking
PD need to charge more money for a game which would have the same content, then not release any DLC to improve the game? Is that what you're saying or have I misunderstood?
- 1,983
- Ohio
- IceManPJN
- IceMan PJN
Won't work. The higher the price point, the slower the game will sell. Believe it or not, price is actually a big factor for many gamers. That's why 150 million PS2 owners don't all have a PS3 yet, even though they all want one. Not all players download optional DLC.
- 5,897
- Canada
Why? Wouldn't you want cars that have been released after GT6 in the game?
- 591
- London, UK
- TAM-Spencer
As long as DLC isnt abused as a way of making more money to deliver what the full tittle should of been to start with then DLC keeps games fresh and alive
- 745
- Canada
Yes
TheeFrogmanlego
(Banned)
- 1,546
- Downey
- frogmanlego
The OCD would be neat to have as the DLC page...
One new car every other week for a year =D
52 new cars over the span of two years
Not to hard to accomplish.
One new car every other week for a year =D
52 new cars over the span of two years
Not to hard to accomplish.
- 1,754
- PletdeKoe
I think it would be very hard to accomplish.
- 4,549
- Australia
Yes, absolutely.
- 14,436
- Los Angeles, CA
- Lma_robot
- lImaRobotl
52 cars in two years actually does not seem so far fetched. They could split it into a DLC every six months containing 13 cars, or if they really want to keep the fans more interested they can at least do it ever 3 months with 6 or 7 cars
I know that they are not the same and probably don't do things the same but if T10 can produce 10 cars a month then what's stopping PD from getting half, or at least a quarter that.
Hopefully standards are completely dropped next game and everything is premium. If that happens though I see the car list getting some cuts.
- 11,276
- Sweden
- eran0004
When DLC is used as a way to unlock things that are already included in the game when it ships, it's bad.
When DLC is used to add content to a game after it has shipped, it's great.
I also think that the price tags has been fairly reasonable, I mean, 6 premium cars for the price of a hamburger meal. I'll take that deal any day.
When DLC is used to add content to a game after it has shipped, it's great.
I also think that the price tags has been fairly reasonable, I mean, 6 premium cars for the price of a hamburger meal. I'll take that deal any day.
DLC is mostly a way to get the consumer accustomed to paying more and more after the initial purchase.
Keep going down this road and I would expect to see a subscription fee attached.
As far as I'm concerned, it's the duty of the consumer to always resist paying extra.
Keep going down this road and I would expect to see a subscription fee attached.
As far as I'm concerned, it's the duty of the consumer to always resist paying extra.
- 2,012
That's not necessarily a bad thing. If the game is objectively better that way, with a solid vanilla release then constant support for a number of years, I'd gladly pay.
iRacing is a prime example of that: Sure it is expensive, but it's the best.
edit: to make it clearer, the vanilla state of that game (2008) is not comparable to April 2013 iracing, and the latter will be surpassed by April 2014. That didn't happen with 99% of games before the subscription model and dlc appeared.
Last edited:
- 2,012
Could do a poll here asking GTP users how they would feel about PD charging $50 for 100 new unique premium GT5 cars. That's absurdly expensive on the console market, but the majority would buy that package in one second.
There are games that require constant development, no possibility of yearly releases and in which their fanbase sticks to one game. The GT series is one of them, so dlc works both for companies and for customers.
A great example is the first GT5 dlc, which was sold almost a year after the game's release (very late) and was pretty lackluster in content, yet it sold more than a million copies in just 2 weeks.
Another one is the forza series, which dlc is quite expensive for a console game. On the other hand forza4 already has more than 100 completely new cars added that way, compared to gt5's 10 or something (removing duplicates).
At the same time other games have sequels all the time, though dlc works wonders for them. The SF4 series exemplifies it very clearly, with character skins. All that marvelous yet simple content did not exist before dlc, on primarily console games.
Another way to see it is as a way to not have that much constant sequels, thus customers end up spending less though getting the same, and also dlc is way of making enough revenue to keep the game updated for "free" (someone pays for it, in form of dlc). That's the case with SF4:AE, 2012 and 2013.
With all that said, I want more. That means paying for it so I like the dlc model very much.
Last edited:
- 1,997
- United Kingdom
- 11,276
- Sweden
- eran0004
DLC is a way to expand the game. Before DLC, it was done by releasing expansion packs on discs, or "gold versions" or whatever they were called. It's not a new thing that came with DLC. What DLC has changed though, is that the development of a title can progress gradually and doesn't have to come in few big leaps like it did with the expansion packs of the past.
Of course they want to make money from their products, that's a goal of any business (not necessarily the primary goal for all businesses though, but definitely a requirement if they want to stay in business).
- 11,276
- Sweden
- eran0004
You just said it yourself, they're one use only. It can't have been too hard to do something to make those paints permanent rather than having to spend $1 each time you want a new one.
But also you have the point that it could have easily been free DLC. How much did it cost for PD to adjust the values to create those colours and put them us as DLC? Peanuts.
But also you have the point that it could have easily been free DLC. How much did it cost for PD to adjust the values to create those colours and put them us as DLC? Peanuts.
And the corollary in the free market model is for the CONSUMER to pressure the business to make fewer dollars off each purchase, not to just blindly pay and pay and pay.
I never said you said. It's the title of the thread
And what is wrong about the paint pack? It's exclusive paints, just like DLC cars are exclusive cars. Sure, the paint chips go away when you paint your car, but that's a flaw with how the entire paint chip system works, not bad DLC.
How convenient, did it occur to you that maybe the entire paint chip system was designed in that manner in order to potentially maximize their profits from the sale of "exclusive" paint packs?
- 40,849
Companies happily charge for content that was included on the game disc from Day 1, including PD; and customers happily rally around to defend the practice, so I wouldn't use that particular chicken -> egg explanation to justify DLC.
It's edited hex values that basically provide the only outlet for the customer wanting more customization options like virtually all of GT's competitors. That they charged you at all for it is rather silly. That they expect you to repay for it each time you use it just pushes it way beyond ridiculous.
I'm not understanding how the DLC not taking any steps to correct that flaw (not even letting you redownload the DLC to "refresh" it, as cumbersome as it would have been; or hell, even giving you more than one of each color), and in fact exploiting it for financial benefit, doesn't make it bad DLC.
It's actually $2 now.
Last edited:
