Hey everyone I thought this group of people above all else should be the first I contact regarding....what this post is about haha. Hopefully it's alright to post this here, but if not, no hard feelings if this thread gets locked.
Basically I'm tired of us gamers getting ripped off for map packs and other DLC, having to pay more for them on top of an already overpriced game. It is not fair and it is not right. Big industry "leaders" (for lack of a better word) release games with a fraction of the content they should have just so they can charge extra for the rest of it later on down the line, in multiple transactions no less! That's ridiculous and unacceptable in my eyes.
So I've created a page on Facebook (as a start) to help raise awareness to the issue, gather gamers that are also sick and tired of being ripped off for bad games and extra content that costs more, and well try to get these publishers and developers to see that enough is enough. We don't want it anymore and refuse to buy into the money grubbing scams.
So I ask you, Stardock gamers, gamers who are very well versed in the world of gaming, gamers who support The Gamer's Bill of Rights movement, and gamers that are pro-modding, freedom, and virtually unlimited and ever changing user based content within the games we love. I ask you to join in and help raise attention to the issue of paying for pitiful content that should be included with games for free.
Keep in mind PC gamers, Xbox gamers, Wii gamers and PS3 gamers are all gamers. We are all in this together.
Myself, and I assume many others here are fed up with the greed and want to bring the gaming industry back to where it belongs...where the developers and publishers think about the GAMERS FIRST!
We, the gamers, the consumers that buy the games put on the shelves are the driving force behind the video game industry. We need to remind companies of that fact and make sure they know we won't put up with being ripped off any longer. We need to take a stand, gamers of all platforms uniting to combat the greed that has taken over the gaming world.
It's GAMERS vs. GREED and the gamers need to win!
I invite you all to join up on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Fight-For-Free-DLC/151294358277116
You're invited to be an active part of the page because after all, without gamers...gaming can't exist! Feel free to show your support, complain about these money hungry companies, chat in the discussion board or reminisce and share stories of the older better days of gaming, or spread the word and share stories about companies like Stardock and developers like Ironclad who have it right! Spread your knowledge and experience to others on our page and don't forget to tell all your gamer friends about our cause. The more the merrier!
We're also on Twitter at http://twitter.com/fffdlc
We will also be adding videos to YouTube before long at http://www.youtube.com/fightforfreedlc so feel free to subscribe there too!
Thanks everyone for taking the time to read this and I look forward to chatting with some of you more on the issue.
Have a great day!
Best solution here. Don't like DLC or the game then don't buy it. Don't even pirate it.
DLC helps pay for extra content. If you think the original product doesn't have enough, don't buy it. As a consumer, you simply do not have enough insight into the production to say what has been chopped from the original product, and what has been produced as content to stand on its own.
There's DLC done right, and DLC done wrong. Vote with your wallet, buy what you want. Nothing else is going to matter.
If it is, as you say, a "rip off", yet you buy it anyway, that's your own problem. And if people buy it despite the DLC, they clearly think they'll appreciate the game more than the money they used to buy it is worth to them: to them, it's not a rip-off, evidently, even if the DLC is a negative.
I don't see the problem. Let people buy what they want. If they like a game despite DLC, good for them. If they think the DLC and the price outweigh the positive qualities of a game and refuse to buy it, that's fine too.
"It's GAMERS vs. GREED and the gamers need to win!"
Greed (desire for profit) is one of the biggest reasons why we even have a market for video games.
I don't like DLC personally but I don't think it's something to raise this much of a stink about. If some gamers are fine paying for games with DLC, I see no reason to tell the developers/executives of those games to do otherwise.
If you find DLC to be overpriced or a ripoff in anyway don't buy it. This little movement you're trying to start seems to be more about begging for free stuff than it does fighting for anyones rights.
...or, about getting everything a game has to offer in a nice, complete package, to ensure everyone is on a level playing field.
(not that I support the "movement", but games without DLC do cost money - there's nothing "free" about it. Of course, it means there's less incentive to make extra content, but that's fine)
I'm not sure it's quite as simple as just saying 'don't like it, don't buy it'. Oh, on the one hand it clearly is, on the other hand, if the trend goes to the extreme where everything is driven by this model then what? Don't buy it? Means don't play, well, anything I guess. Hell it's a fine initiative if only to maybe make some developers reconsider their business model for various games.
Yeah, you send a message when you don't buy something. But you send a louder message when you don't buy it and you let everyone know why you're not buying it. Otherwise the marketers are not going to think 'hmm, there's no market for DLC' they are going to think 'hmm there's no market for *this* game, so we won't make anymore of *this* kind of game'.
That said, I don't buy games anymore really, at least not until they've been out for a year or more, and I can know straight off what I'm getting, not what I'm potentially getting (*cough*EWoM*cough*). That is an extreme position perhaps, and if everyone adopted it... well, yeah, things would be pretty crappy for the developers I guess
Go for it gimpy, I understand your complaint completely. I am all for game makers making an honest profit, but when they aren't making an acceptable trade for the price with this intentional idea stagnation/overmilking it is bound to upset people. Our society doesn't allow room for this angst because the "god given price" is what the game costs and haggling isn't allowed to happen.
A lot of games in the industry are using a form of "idea planned obsolescence" that is frustrating to no end and this creates a noticeable frustration in the modern gamer. A good example of this idea done well is Shogun 2 Total War, which is a great iteration of the total war idea and one of the best titles they have ever released.
You don't make money by giving people what they want, if doctors healed everyone they could, they wouldn't be able to enjoy the social status that they do as they wouldn't have a recurring customer. What you are really upset is corporate fascism, control of the environment for the express benefit of these corporate entities. The only way to fight this idea properly is to not participate, to give it no value whatsoever, and to defame it at every turn. One key component is fear, don't be afraid to stand up for yourself in every way and stay true to your self. Fascism cannot work without fear. I challenge the fear I see in others all the time, it helps to cure them of this disease of the mind.
As for gaming innovation, it is up to the new generation for some new tricks, look to new development teams as the new crop will be much larger and far more creative as they haven't found their professional "comfort money making zone" yet.
Game design takes a while, so patience is necessary.
I'm not fed up with paying for DLC.
Anyway, there are like 100 caveats for my statement and the one in the OP. Gamers don't mind paying for DLC if its giving you new content for a game that you enjoy. For example, let's say Mass effect 2 gets released 3 months ago - BOOM - here's a brand new mission that tells you more of the mass effect story. You read some reviews and it sounds good and gives you 4 more hours of gamplay. You like the ME story, you pay. Or you just hold off and wait for a game of the year edition that has it all. We all, obviously hate "DLC" that provides a 10k unlock file that give you access to something that's on the disk you own. That's crap, imo... and I figure we all just might be on the same page here.
Anyway, I'm sure we are all in agreement - if we are getting gouged, then we don't like. If I'm getting something that was created after the game was released and I want more content, then cool. I'll read a review and buy if I'm into it. And if I'm a patient gamer, then I could care less about DLC. Odds are it will be included in the game of the year edition I'll be buying in 6-8 months. Side note - patient games love DLC.
Hey, if it's too expensive for you on release, then wait for a special...or wait a year or two for the extra content to be added as a package.
I like a lot of things I can't afford. So I can't enjoy them as much as I'd like. This is your problem too. If the cost of a game is more money than you care to part with, you don't buy it.
Think of some of the things we pay money for in the entertainment industry. The cost of a game vs the hours of entertainment we get for it is worth it. LAter down the line some more content is released for the game for a purchase price. If you're still enjoying the game and want that content, pay for it. If you think it's not worth paying more for it, give up gaming.
I actually think a subscription based fee would be good. I'm not a programmer of any kind (A Butcher actually), but I think it's too good a deal to pay for entertainment once and have unlimited acces to it. We should pay more. If I had to pay by the month I would. If I had to pay annually I would. So long as I still enjoyed the game I'd keep paying. Obviously the price would need to be a rate that was worth the enjoyment I got from the game. For example, I rekon I'd pay around $80 a year for a good game like DG, so long as I play it frequently and can enjoy the game without too many bugs.
And is giving up gaming so bad? NO. If it gets too expensive go and learn a sport/hobby/recreation that doesn't involve a computer game, it won't be the end of the world.
SNAP...... and
BTW ZAAAAP
Remember when sending an e-mail involved using a phone modem that cost 25c to connect to the internet.
Oh wait... there's so many things these days that are incredibly cheap or free that we take them for granted, and then we start expecting everything to be free.
Think of the lifestyle of people who are without such riches to have a home, a car, a computer... what kind of greedy people are we becoming to complain about the luxuries we have in our perfect lives?
Time for another beer (that I paid for)
PS.. ZZZZZAAAAAAAP
Best comment ever. Wholeheartedly agree. I enjoy gaming. I also enjoy other things. With the gaming industry as a whole (with some exceptions) starting to go this way I have no issues waiting for games to finish maturing and reading a good book/playing sports (the outside variety for those who see gaming as a sport).
I feel like dlc is bullshit. I dont buy games with it.
Fighting for free dlc... i feel the best way is to simply not buy the games of companies that do this.
I havent brought starcraft 2 for similar reasons. Announcing that your going to have (multiple!) expansion packs before the origional game is even out... up to removing units from the game so they can be added in later feels like DLC to me as well.
Not all DLC is bad. A lot can be free. Nadeo's mini expansions for its Trackmania games have all been free. Egosoft releases free "updates" for its X Series, which not only fix things but add a lot of new things to do. EVE Online releases its expansions for free (you do have to pay monthly, but expansions come often, and arguably have more content and can be enjoyed more than a WoW expansion). EA released free map packs for Battlefield Bad Company 2 (not sure about BF3, because their doing a classic "pull from base game a sell separately" with the Karkland expansion)
I noticed that the DLC explosion happened after Fallout 3 was released, with Bethesda charging for small expansions (that are usually worth it). I think the other companies started to take notice afterwards. Could be wrong though.
As for the whole facebook thing, I seriously doubt it will do anything. Money talks, the executives of the big corporations like its sweet song.
I've been buying the DLC for Napoleon:Total War. It's cheap, like $3.50. It gets me just a little more replayability value out of the game. My last DLC got the game off the shelf and me playing it for like 3 more days.
It depends on what DLC you're talking about. I haven't looked at Starcraft II for that reason (and the fact that it doesn't seem to offer much over the first).
Then there is Fallout 3. It alone is a great game with all the story, sidequests and action I could ever hope for. Played it with no DLC and was totally happy. Then when the DLCs started coming out, I did my research and waited for all three to come out closer to the price of 2 individually. I saved money and got to see all the extra content (practically a whole game in itself) at once. I was completely satisfied.
Then there is Sins of a Solar Empire. What? We need DLC just to get starbases and a thoroughly developed diplomacy system? Well, that seems unfair at first, but then they release each for ten bucks. Even cheaper with Trinity, just like Fallout 3. And we get a discount on Rebellion for already having Trinity? Hmm, not a bad deal. And what's this? It's designed to be modded, so I can get with a mod team and the lot of us can make it into anything we want? Even add ships? And mods are free? On top of not having Big Brother watch us *coughsteamcough*, I'm pretty happy.
So I guess it depends what you offer and for how much. I have an RPG planned out (though will probably never happen) where you get a whole game for the price of a normal game. And I was estimating the cost of a new 'plate' being half as much (a plate being an adjacent area to the original map and being of equal size and a whole new storyline). I think if something like that existed and people could interact in an MMO environment, many would choose such a purchase.
But it does come down to that, doesn't it? You can choose. For example, I rarely play anymore. Instead, I refurbished a rifle and got it in better working order than average. Now I'm going to go buy 20 rounds of DLC for it and pop some holes in a paper target.
I hate thieves.
yeah, those thieves who want to play games for free are definitely not likable.
People just feel entitled to everything. If you don't want to pay for something, then don't. you have no right to steal it. You do not deserve it. And you are an idiot if you think games are over priced. 20+ years ago I was spending the exact amount of money I am today for 8 bit Nintendo games. If you illegally download a game or dlc, you are not fighting the Man and their outrageous price gouging, you are simply a thief, a thief that has made the world a worse place and made companies try and find ways, like DRM, to protect themselves from people like you. I hate you.
As someone who bought CivV on realease day and who is looking to get Shogun 2 someday, I wonder why I should ever bother buying games full price when they come out when I can instead wait, oh say a year, for the (game of the year/gold) edition prepackaged with DLC at a lower price.
For multiplayer-centric games I despise DLC that add new maps and game modes as it only results in splitting the community. Good DLC is stuff that only affects the aesthetics of the game. League of Legends does an excellent job in that regard: selling skins that look cool, yet does not affect gameplay.
For single player games, all is fair.
exactly - do just that. The current sales model is to cater to the folks that buy on release day. Then the folks that will buy dlc... then the folks that will buy GOTY editions, etc, means that the industry picked up that some folks won't buy it immediately.
The model would completely change if NO ONE bought games at launch because they were waiting for a GOTY edition. Believe me, they pay attention to the numbers. So, enjoy the fact that if you are patient, you can get what everyone else paid full price for at a discount. As long as there are still folks that buy games at launch, the model will stay as it is today.
? Starcraft 2 doesn't have DLC.
Good point, but as I understand it, they're releasing the story in a series of games, and for the price I doubt I would find it entertaining enough to justify the cost.
One post above, forget number, stated that "without greed, there would be no games." The point the writer was making, i think, is that without the profit motive, people would not work so hard to make 'good' games. The market just informs the companies about what games should be 'made.'
Now, please consider that a few people, who have the 'tools' have made games even when the ultra-profit motive is not fully operating. I suspect that Froggy puts in more work, effort, etc., into SD games than a person purely motivated by cash profits would do.
So, the greed / profit statement is true to a point. But it is not an absolute. Also, consider, please, that some games have been made with no profit (cash) motive. Dwarf Fortress comes to mind. So, too, do many mods for many games. Consider Nehrim, a total redesign of TES4 (and better than vanilla TES4 IMHO). These are works of a non-profit nature - labors of love, as they said in the old days. So, the greed statement is probably more true than not - but it is not always true. Neither must it be.
Now, consider a world where all the 'wealth' created by our robots, and automation freed us from the need to be indentured to corporations. How many more labors of love along these lines might be made? Imagine several open source gaming engines that continually get improved by the community - and the games created using these engines? Greed predominates in the current markets because of the economic system chosen by those with power and wealth. But greed/profit is not always and only the absolute reason for games being designed currently.
A good example of an open-source mod labour of love is fheroes2 (adding features/bug-fixing to standard HOMM 2). You don't want to be using archers when a powerful AI is capable of casting Shield and Mass Shield (something that didn't happen in standard HOMM 2). Also, the bug that increased damage when you had Shield on units when attacking a castle has been fixed in fheroes2.
When really big maps become possible in fheroes2 (bigger than H3's biggest maps), there could be some really epic maps (maybe including LOTR).
Best regards,Steven.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
