I know it is, of course, but gamers, like any consumers, are happiest when they feel like they’re being looked after.
The subject of day one DLC rears its head frequently here on TSA, but recently EA’s Peter Moore spoke out about addition revenue streams and, as picked up by Gamasutra, something he said has echoed around the web.
“The key thing is selling digital content on the day of launch,” he said, proudly. “When we sold Mass Effect 3 back in March, we saw a 40 percent attach rate that first week to DLC at GameStop in the United States.”
“Not only are you selling a $60 game,” he added, “you’re selling $20 DLC, so the sale becomes $80.”
Well, that’s really nice. But as a consumer these sort of comments grate a little bit, because it seems like this is quickly becoming the norm. Yes, it’s optional, but it’s clear that – like Project $10 and the online pass – day one DLC will very quickly become the standard.
It’s all about the money, isn’t it?
“Once we get that disk installed in the tray of an Xbox or a PS3, we then look at our consumer on an ARPU basis,” added Moore. ARPU? Average Revenue Per User.
Long term, I see this becoming more and more essential too – publishers will still label it as ‘optional’, but it’ll start with a slightly better gun as DLC, then a faster car, then an extra level… Anything to get us to keep spending even though we’ve already paid for the game which, I might add, are hardly getting cheaper.
bigbaldwolf
Oh and here comes Tuffcub again.
It’s the way that this guy from EA comes across that people are annoyed at. As if to say ‘I know that we could do it better but we like taking your money this way so :p’
As I said in the last DLC rant article, there is a difference between money grabbing DLC and properly thought out and put together DLC.
DLC itself isn’t bad when done well, it’s the way that some publishers do it that is questionable.
I think I reached the limit of how many times I’m allowed to say DLC in one post
stillirise6257
Another issue is the rate of games coming out, especially around christmas, i mean i can never afford to buy them all so i have to choose, but i dont want to get to the point where i base my decision on what comes free with the games i buy.
Batman arkham city was the biggest kick to the teeth, it was as if they thought they would sell me half then sell me the other half later lol
hazelam
people still try to say the catwoman content was extra, added later.
when rocksteady themselves were talking about the part she plays in the campaign from almost day one.
i think the first thing they revealed after that initial trailer was that catwoman would be playable in the game, AS PART OF THE CAMPAIGN.
stillirise6257
although i am going off point of EA…
Roynaldo
Having a sudden sense of de ja vous with this divide in opinion. I dont think ive expressed mine yet….I think il leave it for another day. :)
LTG Davey
Oh EA, how I’ve come to dislike you over the past year or so. Fortunately you pretty much release garbage these days so I have no trouble avoiding your products like the plague.
David Carlson
EA is just following Activision’s model: shit on your consumers
LTG Davey
To be fair at least Activision usually avoid the concept of online passes.
Sympo
I actually agree Activision aren’t really the evil company that many seem to make them out to be.
IAmJacksMedullaOblongata
The attitude that ANY publisher “shits”, “hates”, “laughs at”, “derides”, “abuses” or “any other negative word” their customers is not only inherently wrong, it’s downright insulting – to the person’s intelligence making the assumption.
Listen, publishers are in the business of making lots of money through making great games. They want their customers engaged. It’s why the invest in so much money on campaigns and advertising and trying to figure out what they like.
There is NOTHING a publisher wants more than to make you, the customer, happy. Why? Because a happy customer will spend money. Ulterior motive? Perhaps. But don’t tell me any publisher chooses to shit on its customers. That’s beyond boneheaded. Publishers make mistakes, be it on pricing, schedules, how DLC is released, whatever. I’m not saying all publishers are perfect and can do no wrong. But it’s in their interest to treat their customers WELL, not like SHIT. Why? Because us gamers are a fickle bunch, and we’ll go elsewhere and spend our considerable disposable income on another game if we feel we’re not getting value for money or not being treated well. All publishers know this. All publishers are trying to find the balance of giving the customer what they want/making them happy and maximising profits because, after all, this is a business we’re talking about, not a charity.
It’s difficult. They get it wrong sometimes. They learn. To suggest any business wants to shit on their customers is ludicrous.
Forrest_01
Yeah, i think “shit on your consumers” was probably the wrong turn of phrase. I think what they meant was that they are squeezing all the money they can out of their customers, but of course they are as they want a thriving business.
Still don’t think it’s the best move in the world to come out & admit as much though. Gamers tend to be an entitled lot (generally speaking of course).
UKZ-N3M1515
I honestly fail to see the problem, Its not forced upon you, and it is their buisness to make money. If you have spare money and you love the game then DLC is a plus, no? I would much prefer to spend £40 on a game and have the option of downloading parts which are just add ons, than spending £50 and having pointless costumes and what not already on the disc. I see it as a Win Win situation…
Scythegpd
I think where the issue lies is the TYPE of content they makd into DLC.
I’m not against DLC. I’m not even necessarily agains day 1 DLC. However to me there’s a huge difference between:
– Day 1 DLC released so your character can have a blue jock-strap instead of a green one and carry a bigger gun
versus
– Day 1 DLC that contains content which has a huge impact on the game/universe/story
I know someone mentioned Catwoman earlier, here’s my view of B:AC vs ME3, after buying both games and both DLC packs
The Catwoman DLC was superfluous. While I agree RockSteady went about it entirely the wrong way (selling it like game content then making it DLC days before release), to me Catwoman wasn’t a critical part of the story or universe. I could happily have played B: AC without the Catwoman DLC and not felt like I’d missed anything of Batmans story, it was IMO completely separate to my adventure as Batman and would had no impact on my enjoyment of playing the game as the dark knight. The fact it was day 1 (and their bad media) caused a stink but it didn’t expand on the main show, Batman against the villians. Without it I wouldn’t have gotten Catwoman but I would have for ALL of Batman and his universe
The Javic DLC, however, was a massive part of the ME3 universe. Had I played ME3 without Javik I felt I would have missed out greatly, especially regarding his commentary on things like geth/AI, Thessia, Cerberus base, Liara, the Crucible and so on. And as a team member he was probably the most important new character since Shepard, we’re talking about the last living prothean, a species that has been central to the ME universe and Shepards story since the very start of the first game. Had I not had Javik in my team I feel the game would have been less than it was as he provided insight and interaction that reflected on what happened then and what is happening now.
And that’s what I dislike. Give me DLC, hell give me day 1 DLC. But make that DLC additional and superfluous. Don’t take something that is central to the entire cannon/universe and make that DLC, that’s IMO stripping out of the main game and that’s out of order. I would have ahd NO issues if James and Diana were the day 1 DLC because they add nothing to the game or the univers. but no, they decided to leave them in and make the prothean the DLC instead. Allocating main game resources to the fluff while dedicating “a separate DLC budget” to the core is unacceptable.
bunimomike
Simple really. Tuffcub is absolutely right about it being just business. The smart publisher/dev will give it an additive feel as oppose to something subtractive. Hitman will be rewarding day one buyers with DLC that’s a separate sniper challenge, I believe. Perfect way to reward eager fans and not penalise people late to the game. Also, if they charge for this DLC for anyone who doesn’t have it then that’s their choice and it most certainly doesn’t detract from the main feature.
It’s so obvious I just can’t get my head around why the industry has ballsed it up again and again.
Burgess_101
Really if you think about it this issue only reared its head because of the ME3 cock up. The industry normally has it right just EA seem to be the exception.
InternationalGamer
I can totally understand money being the big game here, I would never except a company to treat their customers with extreme loyalty, but this is a bit far.
I never liked the idea of day one DLC, it’s basically the actual part of the game… except in an additional fee.
wonkey-willy
pucker up and kiss my fat pink ass moore nop one likes you or *edit*
Please don’t use insults like that ~cb