POST STUFF
|
 by Sol Invictus, Level 55
Last updated at August 13, 2009, 9:15 am
|
|
EA/Bioware plans to make it worth your while to buy Dragon Age: Origins brand new. Introducing a new scheme that is bound to rub a few individuals the wrong way, the company has announced that anyone opting to pre-order or purchase a brand new copy of its upcoming role-playing game will receive with their orders a free DLC entitled “The Stone Prisoner”.
Individually priced at $15 USD, the content pack contains a whole quest line related to the rescue of a recruitable character by the name of Shale, who is described by the developers as a “mighty stone golem who can become one of the most powerful party members in the game”, a description that would doubtless apply to any party member in the game.
Those who buy the game new are also entitled to also receive an “exclusive set of themed armor” for both Dragon Age as well as the sequel to the science fiction RPG, Mass Effect. Lastly, they'll even throw in an in-game item that boosts your experience points, for what it's worth.
Regardless of the obvious effort to market the character, Shale, the content package seems a worthy enough incentive for to purchase a new copy of the game for anyone already interested in playing it, for there seems to be little point in waiting for the price to go down (by purchasing a pre-owned copy) if one is yet encouraged to pay for the additional cost further down the road.
As predicted, the news of the content bonuses did not go down quite so well with some members of the gaming public, some of whom were quick to slam the company for its supposed “greed” in reducing used copies of the game to less than worthwhile purchases.
In response to various allegations about how Shale was purposefully omitted from the game for the sake of boosting pre-order sales, an EA/Bioware employee replied with the following message:
"Shale was cut from the game a long time ago. As in development was incomplete and the work was stopped. There are a lot of art, VO, and other assets that were partially done. With the formation of the PRC/Live team for DA, and the strong feeling that Shale was an excellent character, the PRC team, separate from the main game team, put Shale back into production. The main game was basically content locked and Shale could not be added into the main game but could be developed as a separate download. Lots of work was done by the PRC team to get Shale completed and able to be optionally added into the game. Shale was not "just removed" from the game.
Regardless, purchasing the game first hand will get you Shale at no additional cost."
It must needs be mentioned that no company apart from GameStop sees benefits from the sale of overpriced, used copies of the game, so it shouldn't be difficult to see why Bioware would opt to make their products worth purchasing brand new. It is a business, after all.
Report Post
51 comments
Project_Xii Aug 13, 2009 at 9:42 am
+1 votes
This is becoming very common. Sacred 2 Collectors came with an "ultimate graphics upgrade", which you could only get in the collectors. Turned out to be garbage anyway, but people were still pissed about not having it.
The White collectors edition of Assassins Creed 2 comes with 1 bonus side quest, while the Black edition comes with 4. Won't be long till we see them charging you $50US for half a game, or double that for the full thing. Or making us buy a full priced sequel full of stuff that should have been in the first game. Oh wait....
It's the fast track to bull****, milking us gamers for every penny we have. I blame Hellgate: London. Makes me feel better.
The White collectors edition of Assassins Creed 2 comes with 1 bonus side quest, while the Black edition comes with 4. Won't be long till we see them charging you $50US for half a game, or double that for the full thing. Or making us buy a full priced sequel full of stuff that should have been in the first game. Oh wait....
It's the fast track to bull****, milking us gamers for every penny we have. I blame Hellgate: London. Makes me feel better.
4 replies to Project_Xii (hide)
4 replies to Project_Xii (show)
Permalink
Post Reply
Reply to this comment
Lonethar Aug 13, 2009 at 1:33 pm
+1 votes
I blames Hellgate:London for an unsatisfying sexual experience last week. I know. I need to drop my hate.
Project_Xii Aug 13, 2009 at 7:55 pm
+1 votes
Curse Bill Roper!! Affecting our wallets is one thing, affecting our love life is another! I mean, who wants to go to bed with his wobbly chins on their mind.
*gag*
*gag*
Lonethar Aug 14, 2009 at 12:08 am
+1 votes
Yeah... Im kinda upset that my nemesis is a terrible looking fat guy...
Agamemnon Aug 15, 2009 at 8:58 pm
+0 votes
I think the first clue that Willy was a dunce was with that one article.
MIK0 Aug 13, 2009 at 10:09 am
+1 votes
I think should be illegal, or considered by law some sort of foul marketing. You can't discourage second hand market cheating this way. In my opinion, the moment you sell a game you should have to guarantee a way to pass your DLC along with it out of the box.
In this case also, knowing that the DLC is already ready, make the thing more subtle.
In this case also, knowing that the DLC is already ready, make the thing more subtle.
Sol Invictus Aug 13, 2009 at 10:21 am
+1 votes
I don't think it should be illegal. I mean, why? You can always vote with your money if you do not like it.
MIK0 Aug 13, 2009 at 10:28 am
+1 votes
Vote with money has always been the biggest lie about marketing.
It shouldn't be able, by any means, to limit your use of what you purchased.
Developers/publishers are the strong part in the agreement with the customers and so they can do what they want.
It shouldn't be able, by any means, to limit your use of what you purchased.
Developers/publishers are the strong part in the agreement with the customers and so they can do what they want.
OKIM Aug 13, 2009 at 11:22 am
+1 votes
>>"It shouldn't be able, by any means, to limit your use of what you purchased."
But what you PURCHASED was the original game. Say you buy an apple from a fruit stand. Then later the guy announces he also has a magic sauce that makes apples taste better. Just because you bought the apple doesn't meant you're entitled to the sauce for free. If you want to buy the sauce separately, great, do that. If you don't, then do without. Offering the sauce for sale separately in no way restricts what you do with your original purchase.
But what you PURCHASED was the original game. Say you buy an apple from a fruit stand. Then later the guy announces he also has a magic sauce that makes apples taste better. Just because you bought the apple doesn't meant you're entitled to the sauce for free. If you want to buy the sauce separately, great, do that. If you don't, then do without. Offering the sauce for sale separately in no way restricts what you do with your original purchase.
MIK0 Aug 13, 2009 at 11:45 am
+1 votes
What I meant is that this is a cheap and unfair way to discourage second hand market, not based on true product value.
The apple case has no sense here.
The apple case has no sense here.
MuffinMan Sep 24, 2009 at 1:47 pm
+1 votes
Except that a more logical comparison would be that the apple was only 90% of an apple with the ability to grab the other 10% from another vendor down the street if you buy it in the first week of it being for sale. After the first week you lose that 10% (not the best comparison for used products...but a used apple would have less than 90% of it left so I had to find something else to make the analogy work).
Making money is one thing, breaking your product into individually payable sections and bundling those sections to promote people to pay less up-front (which if the back end individual products are over-priced already this "up-front" cost can easily be overpriced and still look like a deal) is and I quote "bull****". Besides after the extreme disappointment that was Red Alert 3 (and numerous games before that), it's of my opinion that EA stopped caring about consumers long ago (which is the only road to a monopoly).
In the end, corporations are not to be trusted....you reach a size in which you can't manage to treat some or most customers with respect.
Making money is one thing, breaking your product into individually payable sections and bundling those sections to promote people to pay less up-front (which if the back end individual products are over-priced already this "up-front" cost can easily be overpriced and still look like a deal) is and I quote "bull****". Besides after the extreme disappointment that was Red Alert 3 (and numerous games before that), it's of my opinion that EA stopped caring about consumers long ago (which is the only road to a monopoly).
In the end, corporations are not to be trusted....you reach a size in which you can't manage to treat some or most customers with respect.
OKIM Aug 13, 2009 at 11:21 am
+1 votes
>>"It shouldn't be able, by any means, to limit your use of what you purchased."
But what you PURCHASED was the original game. Say you buy an apple from a fruit stand. Then later the guy announces he also has a magic sauce that makes apples taste better. Just because you bought the apple doesn't meant you're entitled to the sauce for free. If you want to buy the sauce separately, great, do that. If you don't, then do without. Offering the sauce for sale separately in no way restricts what you do with your original purchase.
But what you PURCHASED was the original game. Say you buy an apple from a fruit stand. Then later the guy announces he also has a magic sauce that makes apples taste better. Just because you bought the apple doesn't meant you're entitled to the sauce for free. If you want to buy the sauce separately, great, do that. If you don't, then do without. Offering the sauce for sale separately in no way restricts what you do with your original purchase.
Bry Aug 13, 2009 at 11:29 am
+1 votes
I dont see anything wrong with this! people are still getting the full game, even if they buy it second hand, its just an extra incentive to buy it first hand, which is a god way to boost sales
personally, i do buy used games, because they are cheaper, but if incentives like this are added, i will buy the game new
development costs are enormous nowadays, particularly for a new ip like dragon age, and its biowares right as to whether or not they reward customers for buying new.
i feel used games do somewhat ruin the market, because if there were no used games, the game producers would be getting more revenue, and maybe then guys like the activision chief wouldnt be raising the price of games in order to recoup their development costs!
i personally feel that real gamers should try to buy new games as much as possible, as it gives more revenue to the producers, not the middlemen like gamestop, and then the producers can use that revenue to create new games for us to enjoy!
hear hear to bioware!!
personally, i do buy used games, because they are cheaper, but if incentives like this are added, i will buy the game new
development costs are enormous nowadays, particularly for a new ip like dragon age, and its biowares right as to whether or not they reward customers for buying new.
i feel used games do somewhat ruin the market, because if there were no used games, the game producers would be getting more revenue, and maybe then guys like the activision chief wouldnt be raising the price of games in order to recoup their development costs!
i personally feel that real gamers should try to buy new games as much as possible, as it gives more revenue to the producers, not the middlemen like gamestop, and then the producers can use that revenue to create new games for us to enjoy!
hear hear to bioware!!
MIK0 Aug 13, 2009 at 12:15 pm
+1 votes
It's wrong because is dishonest.
Second hand market has to exist. If you buy a game and get bored after a month I don't see why you can't resell it. It's a quality game control also. If you develop a game that in a month became useless you are not entitled to get more money from another customers that want to buy it. If the game is worth keeping it for more month, second hand become useless because the first hand price will drop and however you don't gain the advantage to playing it near release. If the game is worth, or because replayability or because the customer want to keep it because he liked it and think it deserves to be in his collection (like me) than that's a worthy first hand purchase.
If you limit sencond hand with cheap trick like account related DLC, digital download and other thing not trasferable, that's dishonest and a first hand purchase made because of this is an extortion. Maybe in this case is only dishonest, but the way of incentivate first hand purchase without quality but trick like this came from the same reason.
I obviously not considering GameStop as second hand example because we all know that they are thieves too (most second hand games cost something like 10% less of the first hand but they give you almost nothing when you sell it). I mean old fashioned second hand, the one in which you sell a buy at an honest price. However even Gamestop should not be a problem for publisher because if a customer buy a game 10% cheaper a month later release than the problem is not price but the game.
I hope that what Stardock is preparing, a way to resell our games, even digital, will become a normal thing.
The problem is that publisher are enabled to do some kind of dishonest agreement with the customers (like the license vs. ownership things), and that is make possibile because law don't stop them. There's a reason an it's not justice nor honesty.
Second hand market has to exist. If you buy a game and get bored after a month I don't see why you can't resell it. It's a quality game control also. If you develop a game that in a month became useless you are not entitled to get more money from another customers that want to buy it. If the game is worth keeping it for more month, second hand become useless because the first hand price will drop and however you don't gain the advantage to playing it near release. If the game is worth, or because replayability or because the customer want to keep it because he liked it and think it deserves to be in his collection (like me) than that's a worthy first hand purchase.
If you limit sencond hand with cheap trick like account related DLC, digital download and other thing not trasferable, that's dishonest and a first hand purchase made because of this is an extortion. Maybe in this case is only dishonest, but the way of incentivate first hand purchase without quality but trick like this came from the same reason.
I obviously not considering GameStop as second hand example because we all know that they are thieves too (most second hand games cost something like 10% less of the first hand but they give you almost nothing when you sell it). I mean old fashioned second hand, the one in which you sell a buy at an honest price. However even Gamestop should not be a problem for publisher because if a customer buy a game 10% cheaper a month later release than the problem is not price but the game.
I hope that what Stardock is preparing, a way to resell our games, even digital, will become a normal thing.
The problem is that publisher are enabled to do some kind of dishonest agreement with the customers (like the license vs. ownership things), and that is make possibile because law don't stop them. There's a reason an it's not justice nor honesty.
hankmurphy Sep 6, 2009 at 9:12 pm
+1 votes
no. afirst hand market must exist or no companies will make games anymore.byebye
hereticaneue Aug 13, 2009 at 11:30 am
+1 votes
Who buys used copies of PC games anyway? And if you do, you're buying the game, not all the extra DLC that the original owner might have bought along with it.
It does suck that you have to pre-order the game to get this pretty large bonus, though. But I didn't complain when I got a free copy of Shadow Hearts when I pre-ordered its sequel.
I'm not sure where I'm going with this comment anymore. :P I guess I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.
It does suck that you have to pre-order the game to get this pretty large bonus, though. But I didn't complain when I got a free copy of Shadow Hearts when I pre-ordered its sequel.
I'm not sure where I'm going with this comment anymore. :P I guess I have mixed feelings about the whole thing.
Sol Invictus Aug 13, 2009 at 2:44 pm
+1 votes
I'm pretty sure it just comes in every copy of the game, regardless of whether it's pre-ordered. I might be wrong, though.
Yak Aug 13, 2009 at 12:14 pm
+0 votes
Do people buy a second hand car and then complain that it doesn't have
that "new car" smell? No. Any developer is entitled to put whatever
incentives they like for customers to buy their games new, if you don't
like their policy you don't have to buy it.
While I don't like a lot of what EA has done in the past regarding DLC
and churning out the same games each year the, I can see little reason
for people to complain about this, they are simple protecting their
investment by adding additional content when bought new. They make
absolutely nothing off of second hand sales and rightly try to make
purchasing it new more attractive (Epic did a similar thing with Gears
of War 2 if i remember) Surely if anyone is the big bad ogre in all
this it should be the like of Gamestop who sell the game to begin with,
buy it back for a relative pittance before selling it on again for yet
more profit.
that "new car" smell? No. Any developer is entitled to put whatever
incentives they like for customers to buy their games new, if you don't
like their policy you don't have to buy it.
While I don't like a lot of what EA has done in the past regarding DLC
and churning out the same games each year the, I can see little reason
for people to complain about this, they are simple protecting their
investment by adding additional content when bought new. They make
absolutely nothing off of second hand sales and rightly try to make
purchasing it new more attractive (Epic did a similar thing with Gears
of War 2 if i remember) Surely if anyone is the big bad ogre in all
this it should be the like of Gamestop who sell the game to begin with,
buy it back for a relative pittance before selling it on again for yet
more profit.
MIK0 Aug 13, 2009 at 12:28 pm
+1 votes
Car is a degradable good. Games at most, are not. Well phisical support is, content is not. However other thing change like actuality: games bought near release feels of major value than games bough month later. However the point here is that the games doesnt loss something, publisher steals it. And not only do this, it also damage another market, the second hand one, and not adding quality in its own market but subtracting the value in the second hand one by cheap tricks. That's the difference.
Mike Aug 14, 2009 at 9:34 am
+0 votes
Games are a degradable good, the graphics and style are only "new" for a certain period of time. To the current generation , an Atari game is barely playable yet I know I had some great times with those games
D4ncingP3nguin Aug 14, 2009 at 11:55 am
+1 votes
Apparently at this point, the game is a degradable good. I see it as a viable option for game developers and producers.
If you don't, try to file some sort of a lawsuit for extortion or something. Good luck.
If you don't, try to file some sort of a lawsuit for extortion or something. Good luck.
MIK0 Aug 14, 2009 at 12:00 pm
+1 votes
Never said that it's not legal but how many are legal but not right and honest. Law itself is far away from justice.
Also I pointed the degradable goods thing because usually is developer excuse about software and second hand, that software is not degradable so a second hand software steal from a first hand purchase where an old car versus an old car is another matter.
Also I pointed the degradable goods thing because usually is developer excuse about software and second hand, that software is not degradable so a second hand software steal from a first hand purchase where an old car versus an old car is another matter.
Agamemnon Aug 15, 2009 at 9:04 pm
+0 votes
I'm not sure why car comparisons fascinate people's minds to compare them to anything and everything in an argument. Protip: cars can only be compared to other cars. Anything other than that and it's a poor metaphor masked for a terrible argument, i.e. your argument in this case. As MIK0 said, video games are not degradable. In fact, video games only age better as they get older, as Neverwinter Nights, another Bioware game, has more than proved.
The idea to offering pre-order and early buying incentives is usually to mask that the game is not going to be all up to snuff. This way they are ensured profit even if the majority of people don't like the game. That's all it really is--a cheap business tactic. It encourages terribad consumer intelligence: "Buy this product before it's even out and before anyone has even tested it or written reviews for it! We'll throw in a free flashlight if you do!"
The idea to offering pre-order and early buying incentives is usually to mask that the game is not going to be all up to snuff. This way they are ensured profit even if the majority of people don't like the game. That's all it really is--a cheap business tactic. It encourages terribad consumer intelligence: "Buy this product before it's even out and before anyone has even tested it or written reviews for it! We'll throw in a free flashlight if you do!"
thajackel Aug 13, 2009 at 12:36 pm
+1 votes
heres whats wrong with your comment giving an example a person buy a
new car he gets onstar free xmb radio and 10 years warranty and oh ya
free Car Paper now tell us should a person who goes buy a second hand car complain not getting those deals
new car he gets onstar free xmb radio and 10 years warranty and oh ya
free Car Paper now tell us should a person who goes buy a second hand car complain not getting those deals
jakethesnake Aug 13, 2009 at 12:56 pm
+1 votes
I understand the frustration of many because what we see (or at least what I see) in this is not the one action, but how this simple concept can be easily abused. It comes out of the fact that I have felt ripped off by some companies and their tactics and instead of seeing this as a bonus, we see this a way of them to try and screw us little consumer. But if I am honest, I don't have a problem with this idea as presented here, but I don't want this to catch on because I assume that it will be used to try and sell half a game and then get the other half free if you buy it new.
Also, other industries have done this before as well with no problem. I have bought several CDs that came with a one time use code to download some extra tracks. I have also bought second hand CDs that came with these things that I didn't get since I wasn't the original owner. At the time, I viewed it as a bonus that I did or didn't get, not as the music industry trying to rip me off. As long as Bioware is selling a finished game and giving away some extras for free as an incentive, that is okay. If someone comes along and abuses this idea, that is anything but okay. It is okay to see things in shades of grey sometimes!
Also, other industries have done this before as well with no problem. I have bought several CDs that came with a one time use code to download some extra tracks. I have also bought second hand CDs that came with these things that I didn't get since I wasn't the original owner. At the time, I viewed it as a bonus that I did or didn't get, not as the music industry trying to rip me off. As long as Bioware is selling a finished game and giving away some extras for free as an incentive, that is okay. If someone comes along and abuses this idea, that is anything but okay. It is okay to see things in shades of grey sometimes!
MuffinMan Sep 24, 2009 at 3:18 pm
+1 votes
Well said sir. Dawn of War 2 has a good example of extra content that isn't consumer abuse. You basically get some cheap wargear (for the campaign only) and maybe a few other items....but all this compares to is a simple "mod". It has persuasive power to buy early and new while not ripping you off...as you said you still got the cd, you just missed a "bonus". The problem is (especially with EA) these "bonus"s will easily get abused.
I'd also have much more faith in developers if I was able to play my PC game without having to wait for patches for it to work (Mass Effect, Red Alert 3, etc. have had issues that were fixed with patches weeks after I purchased them). In the end, this is a vendor trust factor...which with game developers is hard to come by.
I'd also have much more faith in developers if I was able to play my PC game without having to wait for patches for it to work (Mass Effect, Red Alert 3, etc. have had issues that were fixed with patches weeks after I purchased them). In the end, this is a vendor trust factor...which with game developers is hard to come by.
Aaron Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57 pm
+3 votes
It should be noted that the free DLC is only available if you get the Collector's Edition, which is $15 more than the regular version anyway. So even if you bought the game brand new at $60, you would still have to pay $15 for the DLC. So that right there throws a kink into what people are saying. This isn't an incentive not to buy the game used. It's an incentive to buy the Collector's Edition.
Meanwhile, who buys their used games at Gamestop? You know what? They're ripping you off, too. Has anyone ever looked at the prices for used games online? They are a much better deal than Gamestop will ever be. So here's the deal. Wait two months, get the game for half price, download the DLC... and you'll still be saving money than if you bought it new. If you want to buy it brand new, then buy it brand new. Just don't expect to get the DLC for free if you get the $60 version.
Meanwhile, who buys their used games at Gamestop? You know what? They're ripping you off, too. Has anyone ever looked at the prices for used games online? They are a much better deal than Gamestop will ever be. So here's the deal. Wait two months, get the game for half price, download the DLC... and you'll still be saving money than if you bought it new. If you want to buy it brand new, then buy it brand new. Just don't expect to get the DLC for free if you get the $60 version.
Charles Aug 14, 2009 at 6:34 am
+1 votes
According to EA the DLC is included in ALL versions of Dragon Age Origins NOT just the collectors edition
Kevin Aug 14, 2009 at 7:34 am
+1 votes
That isn't always true. I'll agree, Gamestop usually isn't the best place to buy used games. However occasionally they practically give games away - usually on last generation games that have lower demand.
A couple weeks ago I bought Jet Set Radio Future for 75 cents from Gamestop. i couldn't even have the game shipped to me for that amount.
Overall, I don't see this causing much of an issue. I'd go with the regular version, try to see if I like it, then buy the DLC if I even decide it worth going that far into the game. Not only that but I agree waiting until its used is still the best option. Not only that but at the same time the price of the DLC may go down as added incentive for people who decided to live without it.
A couple weeks ago I bought Jet Set Radio Future for 75 cents from Gamestop. i couldn't even have the game shipped to me for that amount.
Overall, I don't see this causing much of an issue. I'd go with the regular version, try to see if I like it, then buy the DLC if I even decide it worth going that far into the game. Not only that but I agree waiting until its used is still the best option. Not only that but at the same time the price of the DLC may go down as added incentive for people who decided to live without it.
LaLa Aug 13, 2009 at 1:25 pm
+0 votes
Brother, if you cannot afford a new game, then don't buy it.
You are paying for the game, the free DLC is an incentive.
It's the basics of investing.
You are paying for the game, the free DLC is an incentive.
It's the basics of investing.
Agamemnon Aug 15, 2009 at 9:11 pm
+0 votes
The entertainment medium is NOT an investment. People need to stop making that terribad argument. Back in the days when developers had hearts, new content developed after the game launched used to be these things called "patches;" now they're sold for $15 and called "downloadable content." Wool = pulled over your eyes. Or should I say horse armor?
Forging a Passion for Video Games
24 Subscribers
6 Likes: 1 February 9, 2010, 9:23 am10 Likes: 7 February 4, 2010, 12:27 pm17 Likes: 4 February 4, 2010, 5:30 am2 Likes: 4 February 3, 2010, 3:54 am4 Likes: 5 February 3, 2010, 1:30 am38 Likes: 5 February 2, 2010, 9:49 pm1 Likes: 9 January 27, 2010, 9:12 pm6 Likes: 7 January 27, 2010, 7:29 pm7 Likes: 9 January 27, 2010, 3:58 pm2 Likes: 8 January 26, 2010, 6:30 pmStarted August 15, 2008
678 Total Entries
678 Total Entries
Your Comment is being posted. Please wait...