AceAceBaby wrote:
I accept the argument about inflating games costs by holding things out to drip-feed, but that's a different argument to "what's on the disc is MINE". I blame MMOs for that anyway. They get us to pay £200+ to play a game.
I don't mind that so much, I guess as I'm from a tech background I appreciate what's needed in terms of technology to keep things running and I wouldn't expect that for free. I don't mind paying for online games as I can clearly see where the money is going - I'm literally paying for a service, that being keeping the servers running. The game isn't playable any other way, we knew that going in and so I'm not bothered.
Mr Dave wrote:
Lave wrote:
The main reason companies make DLC is make money out of the second hand market. The disk can be sold, but everyone needs to give them money to get the rest.
Not quite. It means that the stuff they didn't have the time to finish off can be finished off and released. If they couldn't charge for it, then they couldn't justify the hours spent finishing off the content. Before DLC, you'd see it as part of a sequel (or in some cases, pretty much the entire sequel, for full price) or scrapped. The amount of unfinished content for pretty much any game is phenomenal.
Which is fair enough. Except when the cost of that downloadable content massively exceeds the value of the stuff in the box. If a driving game comes with 30 cars and 20 tracks and costs £30, then DLC with 15 cars and 10 tracks should cost £15 at most. In reality the tracks will be £2 each and the cars £1 for a total of £more than the original game for less than half the content