Yup, that's really annoying me. I'd certainly check out the DLC stuff for AC3, but 10 per pack? No friggin' way, sorry.
During the Christmas sale, the DLC were actually more expensive than the game itself. I mean, each piece of DLC, not all of them together.
Ridiculous.
Yes, the AC3 DLC packs are very expensive indeed. I would understand if it cost $10, but it consists of 3 chapters for a total of $28.
I'm still waiting for my Mass Effect 3 DLC price to drop...
There was a sale recently, all half price too I believe (US PSN). Unfortunately for myself I picked them up a couple of weeks before the sale.
You realize that a lot of times games are discounted specifically because they want to drive DLC sales, right?
It's basically the same as the Free 2 Play model, though I suppose it's a bit like the razor & blades model that console manufacturers have always used. Sell you something dirt cheap, then gouge you on the required accessories.
This is particularly common with multiplayer games. They can give you a deeply discounted copy because they know you will buy add-ons and map packs for the multiplayer and those are very high-margin purchases. It's not exactly a coincedence that Super Street Fighter IV was free a month before they started selling the Ultra Street Fighter IV DLC. Sales of Halo 3 maps probably went through the roof when Halo 3 was a free game.
That is a good point but I just wish they were a bit more generous with their DLC pricing. The AC3 DLC in particular sticks out in an ugly way because if you want to experience the DLC then you must pick up all three DLC chapters for $28 rather than just one or two of the three.
luckily, you really aren't missing much with the dlc.
that washington going evil had such potential too
You finished the DLC? What are your overall impressions on them in comparison to the main game?
Yep, its crazy stupid. The best thing to do is wait for GOTY editions.
GOTY editions for those who have not bought the original = awesome. Things is, you can't be sure that every game will get one. Sometimes you end up waiting and then you don't get a GOTY edition and have a hard time finding the original game at the same time, risky decision at times >_>
You know how hardware manufacturers will sell you a console at a loss, so that they can make it up later by selling you games?
In this case, games like ME3 are the "consoles" and the DLC is the "games". They'll heavily discount the core games in order to get you to pay full price for a bunch of DLC. It's ridiculous, IMO (I spent more on ME3 DLC than I did for ME1, 2 and 3 combined), but I think that's where their heads are at with this.
I agree with your point. It just is a bit shocking for those of us who spend full price on the game rather than a sale price. My copy of AC3 was bought for $60 back when it came out >_>
Ever play Train Simulator 2014 my brother?!
What's the story with that?
I was planning on buying the DLCs for Fire Emblem: Awakening and I almost fell of my chair, since the ones that are left for me to buy equal to more money than the whole game (about 40-45 dollars). Fuck that.
Another DLC stunner for me - very expensive DLC that is more expensive (overall) than the base game >_>
Illogical? Retail prices for games go down, so they react. Retail prices for download content...well...
But I grant them this small weapon against the used games market. Especially with many games getting a GOTY edition later.
It's understandable why the prices don't go down for DLC, what sucks is that their base prices can be way too high in the first place IMO.
Bioware selling the context for ME3's ending 5 months down the line was so dumb
Someone's pinching pennies in this situation and its not the OP
Thanks for understanding my point Dryk.
These company need to put an option for
GoTY upgrade whenever there is a GOTY version..
It is stupid that buying skyrim legendary edition is cheaper than buying the dlc without the main game..
It makes Early adopter feel stupid
I agree! This situation sucks for early adopters.
I don't think the pricing is illogical at all. Is it worthwhile? Probably not, but that's a matter of the content quality, not so much the pricing. In the past games used to have full expansion packs, so let's say a game was 50 bucks, the expansion would be 30-40 bucks. Sometimes by the time the expansion comes out, the game might already be discounted to 30-40 or less. Regardless, later on the game might be discounted significantly at stores while the more recent expansion pack might remain at the normal price and cost more than the main game. This is not unusual.
What we're looking at with DLC pricing is the digital evolution of this logic. When a publisher charges 20-30 bucks for a season pass, I think it's fair to say consumers should expect a significant amount of content. Sometimes the value is worthwhile, often it is not. But this is not illogical pricing, this is simply poor value content. It means the publisher and/or developer are not putting in the effort to make the season pass worth its price.
The base game being much cheaper than the DLC on their own or in a set is definitely something very common these days, especially when we're talking about actual DLC content released months or a year after the release of a game. Before the Fallout New Vegas Ultimate Edition was released for example, there was a time where the game itself was 20 bucks, while each DLC was 10 bucks. It would cost twice the price of the base game to buy all four DLC packs. I don't feel there's anything wrong with that though, just like there's nothing wrong with Diablo 3 being 20 bucks during a sale, while the expansion is 40 bucks.
You are right duckroll, it is not unusual at all. This practice has been in effect way before digital downloads even existed. Back then though we would get one massive expansion pack (from what I recall) for around $30. Nowadays we get multiple expansion packs that cumulatively can eclipse $40-$60, you know what I mean? It just feels pricier. Comparatively, the pricing of meaty DLC like Bioshock 2's single player DLC is much more logical at $9.99.
Your season pass point makes a LOT of sense, it gives me a different perspective on the whole discussion. I can understand that from a publisher point of view, but again like you said the content tends to be of poor value and for those of us who don't shell out money for season passes (as we usually like to pick specific DLC rather than get a bunch of DLC we don't care for), the price really sucks.
Had I picked up a game like Diablo III/AC3/Fallout NV at the $20 I would have felt a lot less bad about the DLC's pricing. I guess the lesson is for early adopters of games to expect this situation. Thanks for taking the time to share your points, I found them insightful.