Are Season Passes becoming ridiculous?

[AJ_Radio]

1 minute ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

This is a convenient sophistry, but it's simply untrue.

 

I'm not against people who exclusively buy and play everything online, but as far as I know there is absolutely no way to get good refunds on most games out there on the internet.

 

I'm strongly supportive of demos and trials and it disappoints me that so few games have those. Try the game for a few hours before you buy it, that is how I played a lot of computer games back in the early - mid 2000s, even the very shitty ones I would never touch again.

 

I can buy a game that doesn't cater to my preference, but I cannot get a good refund back from the online store I bought it from. I can buy something like Ni No Kuni 2 from the Playstation Store and absolutely hate the game. I'm fucked if I can't get a refund, Sony and other companies need to do this. A refund within the first three to seven days would be great.

 

Plus there's the delistings as I just mentioned. A few games that will probably never make it back, unless the publishers will bother to renew the licenses which I strongly doubt they will.

[starcrunch061]

58 minutes ago, Suparichie123 said:

I wouldn't be mentally able to contribute to this problem. Financing such stuff wouldn't really be an issue for me, but there are just so many cheaper options to enjoy games! I tend to just wait a few years after it's release before I play a game. 

 

It's my opinion that this phenomenon is what is powering DLC production now. With digital delivery, I can wait and play games at my leisure, and I can buy them on the cheap when I decide the time is right. By having premium content in the form of DLC, this allows companies to sell a base game years later on the cheap, while keeping the DLC pricey. Of course, I don't care - I will or won't purchase DLC. But at least there is always an avenue to profit from me.

 

For example, I just purchased two many-houred RPGs for $1.99 each. This was down from $19.99, which in turn was down from a full price of $39.99 or so. You could never do this with physical delivery - even at its cheapest, stores don't let go of games for much less than $10 (and usually, they keep the price at $19.99).

 

4 minutes ago, Spaz said:

I can buy something like Ni No Kuni 2 from the Playstation Store and absolutely hate the game.

 

While I know this is a hypothetical, it's hilarious you picked this one out. Yeah - don't buy that one. 

Edited September 20, 2018 by starcrunch061

[AffectatiousDonk]

27 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

This is a convenient sophistry, but it's simply untrue. Further, if this was the case, why is the DLC train gaining steam, even as digital sales make up greater and greater proportions of overall game sales?

 

As for the rest of your apologetic, no one would disagree that everyone deserves to make a living for their work. This might be relevant if anyone was asking for government law to stop DLC sales. As it is, this is simply a thread to bitch, and possibly state an individual's refusal to purchase it (an "entitlement" that has been a cornerstone of consumer-based capitalism since its inception).

 

 

Honestly, I don't think this will matter. However, I'm unconvinced that an all-digital future is in the cards for consoles (at least in the current format of purchasing a console to play games). It's possible that game streaming will take off the way that video streaming has, but I find it hard to believe that people will purchase a console to do this, and if consoles try to be a multitask tool, they'll get eaten alive by phones and the like.

 

Truthfully, I'm interested to see where this all goes at the end of the day.

 

Sophistry, so I am talking to an educated I see. As for the rest of your apologetic, well now I know you are pandering your intellect over me. It’s amusing but redundant as I wasn’t arguing a personal belief as you were I was merely stating a know fact that surfaced from the game crash of 1983. So now please care to educate me with fact and not fancy words, we are both clearly priviallaged in the milieu of are upbringing to acquire such educational dexterity with language so sway me.

32 minutes ago, Spaz said:

 

I didn't mind this as much as some others, but releasing DLC an entire year after the initial game released is bad in my opinion.

 

Since it's Crash, I wouldn't mind going back to it again. Strongly doubt the second game will have DLC.

 

 

Japan got Yakuza 6 two years before we did. Whether that's a bad thing or not I'm not entirely sure, but those games are free from the Season Pass bullshit and all the other shenanigans. I plan to get Yakuza 0 once I finish up a couple dozen games or so.

 

 

Mostly everything from the Playstation 4 generation forward.

 

Sony decided to let shit from Steam make it's way to the Store. Before the Playstation 4 came out Sony was a lot more selective with what games were going to be on PSN. Plus the platinums for a lot of games took a lot more dedication and effort to earn.

 

Spider-Man for the PS4 is about as casual and easy of a trophy list as it gets. I guess Sony is trying to attract younger, more casual gamers to their games. You compare this to something like Metal Gear Solid 4 which took a lot of effort and dedication to get that platinum. Or Resistance 2, which required you to get 10,000 kills in multiplayer matches.

 

Sometimes I wish we were still in the Playstation 3 generation.

 

 

People have sold and traded in games for decades.

 

I can tell you right now that the all digital game future is going to be a big problem in of itself, a part of which because you do not own your games. I have many digital games on Steam and Sony and they have every right to take away those games from you. Plus there are games that get delisted, which has gotten a lot worse these past two years. Like a number of games Activision published that you can no longer download online, you either have to buy the physical versions or try to get someone to game share with you, which is a big risk since that is sharing account information.

 

Is that why Season Passes are issued? To try to get people to play those games for longer and not just return them for a partial refund after a week or two of release?

 

It's all about the money, now more than ever because the video game industry is the most powerful entertainment medium, long surpassing the music and movie industries.

 

I respect you passion on here. I like that you always pick a line and hold it true but eventually you will realise that just because you say something is true doesn’t mean it is. 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Cjshai

[Dragon-Archon]

1 hour ago, Suparichie123 said:

I wouldn't be mentally able to contribute to this problem. Financing such stuff wouldn't really be an issue for me, but there are just so many cheaper options to enjoy games! I tend to just wait a few years after it's release before I play a game. The last game I have bought relatively shortly after it's release and at a full price of 70 bucks was Monster Hunter World, before that probably Witcher 3 in 2015.

I do the same. Last one I bought at launch was Ys VIII and Persona 5. The one before that was Mass Effect 3 somewhere in 2012.

[FawltyPowers]

Yes the whole situation is farcical because I have no idea anymore what it means, what exactly are you getting for your money in relation to the actual finished product?

 

I was under the belief that a season pass gave you access to all future DLC content. Guess I'm wrong so will avoid that in future. No idea what a silver, gold, platinum, deluxe, mega-deluxe edition is.

 

It's been hilarious watching the whole loot box debacle and developers fighting for our right to loot boxes that we don't want. To hear them, it's never something they want or the hundreds of millions they make from them, it's all for us.

 

I'm moving more towards indie titles now, got tonnes in my backlog. For the most part it's buy the game and that's it, no bullshit, just like it used to be 20 years ago.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Stevieboy
Clean up for previous deleted post

[GT__Jedi]

Yep.  They are.

 

You really notice it when a game goes on sale with the season pass and you think "people actually paid full price for this?"

[starcrunch061]

49 minutes ago, Cjshai said:

Sophistry, so I am talking to an educated I see. As for the rest of your apologetic, well now I know you are pandering your intellect over me. It’s amusing but redundant as I wasn’t arguing a personal belief as you were I was merely stating a know fact that surfaced from the game crash of 1983. So now please care to educate me with fact and not fancy words, we are both clearly priviallaged in the milieu of are upbringing to acquire such educational dexterity with language so sway me.

 

What "known fact" is that? Yes - consumers could return games they didn't like back in 1983. Now, they can't. It's a consumer right that no longer exists in the United States. It has exactly zero to do with this conversation. The statement isn't just opinion - it's uninformed opinion.

 

Your point was that DLC was put in place because consumers could get full or partial refunds on games. This is a nice crying retort from the industry, but there's simply no data to back up this claim. As already stated, no one gets full refunds for new games. Further, while used games might (MIGHT) have put a sizable dent in gaming sales a decade ago (though even that data is shoddy), with the current state of digital delivery (incomplete though it is), this just doesn't hold anymore. Gamestop is hardly making money hand over fist from used games (so much so that, at least in the midwest, they have broadened their horizons significantly so that their stores are as much collectibles as games). A significantly larger percentage of gamers who buy physical these days choose to buy new over used, for collection reasons. Doing so significantly lowers any return that might be realized from returning/re-selling the game (at least within the early time frame required to make any sense of your argument).

 

The fact that you think it is an "entitlement" to demand a certain value for your own purchasing dollar is so brain-dead, I don't even know what to say to it. Even industry apparatchiks wouldn't say anything like this.

 

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by starcrunch061

[AffectatiousDonk]

23 minutes ago, starcrunch061 said:

 

What "known fact" is that? Yes - consumers could return games they didn't like back in 1983. Now, they can't. It's a consumer right that no longer exists in the United States. It has exactly zero to do with this conversation. The statement isn't just opinion - it's uninformed opinion.

 

Your point was that DLC was put in place because consumers could get full or partial refunds on games. This is a nice crying retort from the industry, but there's simply no data to back up this claim. As already stated, no one gets full refunds for new games. Further, while used games might (MIGHT) have put a sizable dent in gaming sales a decade ago (though even that data is shoddy), with the current state of digital delivery (incomplete though it is), this just doesn't hold anymore. Gamestop is hardly making money hand over fist from used games (so much so that, at least in the midwest, they have broadened their horizons significantly so that their stores are as much collectibles as games). A significantly larger percentage of gamers who buy physical these days choose to buy new over used, for collection reasons. Doing so significantly lowers any return that might be realized from returning/re-selling the game (at least within the early time frame required to make any sense of your argument).

 

The fact that you think it is an "entitlement" to demand a certain value for your own purchasing dollar is so brain-dead, I don't even know what to say to it. Even industry apparatchiks wouldn't say anything like this.

 

 

 

I am not going to bother arguing this point here but I would state that your opinion while it might be current in the US / Canada is not valid in Australia. I base this on seeing the books and deciding on whether to buy into a franchise of the GameStop extension in Australia. And from the numbers I can assure you your response is incorrect,

Edited September 20, 2018 by Cjshai

[majob]

DLC is ramped up partly because of development costs rising while game prices have stayed static and partly because they're a cheap way to extend the revenue life of a game and they're a means of getting revenue out of those who buy used games seeing as how they can't access the DLC without buying it first or any code the game came with will have been used

[kidson2004]

12 minutes ago, majob said:

DLC is ramped up partly because of development costs rising while game prices have stayed static and partly because they're a cheap way to extend the revenue life of a game and they're a means of getting revenue out of those who buy used games seeing as how they can't access the DLC without buying it first or any code the game came with will have been used

While I do agree with this, I also have to say that any DLC that comes outside of the season pass should be discounted for those who have that pass. 

[majob]

1 hour ago, kidson2004 said:

While I do agree with this, I also have to say that any DLC that comes outside of the season pass should be discounted for those who have that pass. 

I'm with you on that. Things like when SE released the royal edition of FFXV, there should have been a discount for season pass holders at least

[AJ_Radio]

9 hours ago, starcrunch061 said:

Honestly, I don't think this will matter. However, I'm unconvinced that an all-digital future is in the cards for consoles (at least in the current format of purchasing a console to play games). It's possible that game streaming will take off the way that video streaming has, but I find it hard to believe that people will purchase a console to do this, and if consoles try to be a multitask tool, they'll get eaten alive by phones and the like.

 

Truthfully, I'm interested to see where this all goes at the end of the day.

 

Game streaming is nothing new. Twitch.tv has done game streaming to great success for the past five years or so. And before that Let's Plays were popular on YouTube, I found a lot of great guys on that website who were passionate about the games they played, some of which I've supported for many years.

 

Game streaming is nothing all that different than video streaming, they're practically the same thing.

 

We've had capture cards for quite a while too, which for those who don't stream or don't stream regularly are a great way to share videos and game footage.

 

You're going to have to wait until the Playstation 5 to see how this all pans out. But since video games are becoming more and more movie like I have lost a lot of passion for the medium.

[AJ_Radio]

8 hours ago, Cjshai said:

I respect you passion on here. I like that you always pick a line and hold it true but eventually you will realise that just because you say something is true doesn’t mean it is. 

 

It's a critical opinion I threw out. Not everyone is going to agree with me and some people may not like me for the posts I make and the opinions I say. Can't please everyone.

 

I'm just concerned for the future of this industry. I've stuck with gaming all my life, but my major problem in regards to digital and season passes is you cannot get a refund from most of those games.

 

I'm a little passionate for Assassins Creed Odyssey because the setting and time period it takes place in I've always found interesting. But now instead of just a Silver and a Gold Edition they are now having an Ultimate Edition for the game, which costs over $100. So today as far as I can see, Assassins Creed Odyssey has FOUR different versions, or editions if you will of the same game, just with more content the more you pay.

 

If this was a Collectors Edition I wouldn't mind paying over $100 for it. I find collectors editions to come with a nice action figure, some bonus material such as interviews with the developers and maybe a soundtrack disc which is always nice. But this isn't a collectors edition, this is just another way to sucker more money out of people, like the Gold Edition wasn't enough since that gives you a Season Pass code and most if not all DLC that is going to come later after the game is released.

 

It's ridiculous, more so now than just a mere five - seven years ago when you bought a game like Mass Effect 2. A few updates and a couple DLC packs was all you had to worry about. Now with shit like Final Fantasy XV issuing DLC and other bullcrap long after the initial game was released, I just feel these companies are taking this way too far.

 

8 hours ago, FawltyPowers said:

Yes the whole situation is farcical because I have no idea anymore what it means, what exactly are you getting for your money in relation to the actual finished product?

 

I was under the belief that a season pass gave you access to all future DLC content. Guess I'm wrong so will avoid that in future. No idea what a silver, gold, platinum, deluxe, mega-deluxe edition is.

 

It's been hilarious watching the whole loot box debacle and developers fighting for our right to loot boxes that we don't want. To hear them, it's never something they want or the hundreds of millions they make from them, it's all for us.

 

I'm moving more towards indie titles now, got tonnes in my backlog. For the most part it's buy the game and that's it, no bullshit, just like it used to be 20 years ago.

 

Same here. Season Passes didn't really take off until 2012 - 2014, before that it was DLC you had to buy and get separately. LA Noire was four story cases you paid for separately, and some extra content, but that was about it.

 

These days Ubisoft and other like minded companies will issue three to five different editions of the same game. Why the fuck should I pay more for your bullcrap when a Season Pass and a couple other things is all I really need?

 

Some people may of noticed I've been playing a lot of Playstation 3 games and indie games, and that's simply because I get more bang for my buck. Something like the original Assassins Creed or Metal Gear Solid 4, where it's just buy the game and that's it, is a rarity nowadays. I have utter respect for the people who made God of War that decided not to issue a Season Pass, because it's getting ridiculous.

 

It's all about making money. Ubisoft, EA and Activision have made record breaking amounts of profit over the past five years or so, but that's not going to be enough. We have to issue $100 Ultimate Editions, and throw in shit like the NBA 2K19 Deluxe Edition that nobody is going to give a fuck about next year anyway. Companies have to make money, but they can be a lot more ethical and above the belt about it. They're just trying to sucker more money out of people.

[Guest]

I haven't felt a need or a feeling forced to purchase any season pass for as long as I could remember. Even for being a fan of certain games, I have not purchased their season pass or even their dlc if I didnt want to. Do I think companies are going to far with season pass or dlc? naw, I love that they continue support and add to old games. Some games are really good and you just want to keep playing more and more of it even if its just another 3-10hrs of addon content. Of course price is a big issue for me in determining if I'll drop my gold for it. 

[Valyrious]

On 9/18/2018 at 5:33 PM, panikooooos said:

We have gotten to a point where you need to spend one third of the console's value if you want to properly enjoy everything a game has to offer. Seriously I can't believe the state of console gaming atm. Just take a look at the ps store, the front page has Fifa 19 Ultimate Edition for 100 euros, who the fuck pays 100 euros for a DIGITAL version of a videogame? Remember when videogames cost half the price of that and you got a lot of physical goodies too? Yep, that is gone now. Why is this only an issue for consoles? Pc gaming is so cheap, and superior in almost every way, without the console exclusives I'd probably drop out of this shitty industry altogether

You think console games are bad? Try a mobile gacha game and get back to me.