The State of the Gaming Community

[Cole Brown]

I have searched, and looked through threads and have not really found anything like this, I thought about posting in the Current events section, however, I feel this will be better in a gaming section.




Here we can talk about the state of the gaming community. Ranging from new games of all kinds that are to be released, rumor mills, conventions, how developers handle things and more.

I think many healthy conversations can spawn from this, so here are some starter points.

Do you think what IO Interactive, the Creator of the of the latest Hitman and series are doing could revolutionize the gaming industry? By making all DLC Free? Those of you who do not know what I am talking about is that IO Interactive will release Hitman digitally on December 8th, 2015. However the game will not physically release until mid to late 2016 after they have completely finished the game. Then after, they will continue to support the game with free DLC.

At the beginning of this year, it was a major conversation that this would be the year that we show Developers that they can no longer be lazy, and keep ripping us off. I'm sure that there are plenty of games that come to mind when you think of unfinished, not polished. So on. So the main point being that many of us may have or may not have, said that we would no longer pre-order games. Where do you stand on this?



Just some starters for people to talk about, if there is anything else you wish to add about the gaming community. Please do so, one exception. Nothing about GamerGate. That will get far too out of hand. But welcome guys!

 

[Grandea GTR]

Just a heads up, did you intend on making the poll end within tonight?

Edit: goddangit, September. Ugh.

I can't give my full thoughts on the topic at hand right now, too much typing for a mobile phone.

 

[Cole Brown]

Just a heads up, did you intend on making the poll end within tonight?

Edit: goddangit, September. Ugh.

I can't give my full thoughts on the topic at hand right now, too much typing for a mobile phone.

That's fine, just glad some people will be coming here! (:

 

[JR98]

IMO, DLC should be free. If I pay $50 for a game and I expect to get a full, completely working game that will last me at least 30 hours. I don't mind paying for DLC if it is good content that wouldn't be available at launch (hence why I hate pre order bonuses), but if it would have been available Day 1, I will usually not pay for it unless it is REALLY good. About HITMAN, I like how they have a little "early access" thing for those buying digital then those that want physical need to wait for the full game. The free DLC is even better. GT6 and GTAV are doing perfectly well without payed DLC so what game devs SHOULD do is release a FULL WORKING game at launch with FREE DLC and include microtransactions (similar to GTAV) so that you can pay for the free DLC if you can't be bothered, or don't have the time, to earn the content in game.

Edit: I never really pre ordered games so can't really vote on the poll. I did pre order 2 games in 2013, GTAV (PS3) and WATCH_DOGS (PS3). I then pre ordered GTAV for PS4 in 2014.

 

[ImaRobot]

IMO, DLC should be free. If I pay $50 for a game and I expect to get a full, completely working game that will last me at least 30 hours. I don't mind paying for DLC if it is good content that wouldn't be available at launch (hence why I hate pre order bonuses), but if it would have been available Day 1, I will usually not pay for it unless it is REALLY good. About HITMAN, I like how they have a little "early access" thing for those buying digital then those that want physical need to wait for the full game. The free DLC is even better. GT6 and GTAV are doing perfectly well without payed DLC so what game devs SHOULD do is release a FULL WORKING game at launch with FREE DLC and include microtransactions (similar to GTAV) so that you can pay for the free DLC if you can't be bothered, or don't have the time, to earn the content in game.

It's a bit odd that you used those two games as an example. The two that are taking/took extremely ridiculous times to release it's free content.

I think I'd rather stick to consistent paid DLC rather then praise a company for its advertised free content that you have to wait literal years for.

The only way we'd really be able to know if IO is going to change the industry, which I doubt, is actually seeing what this content consist of. That would be the selling point. Getting the game that much earlier then its physical release date? I'm not sure that it sounds anything other then a glorified beta at that point.

 

[Cole Brown]

IMO, DLC should be free. If I pay $50 for a game and I expect to get a full, completely working game that will last me at least 30 hours. I don't mind paying for DLC if it is good content that wouldn't be available at launch (hence why I hate pre order bonuses), but if it would have been available Day 1, I will usually not pay for it unless it is REALLY good. About HITMAN, I like how they have a little "early access" thing for those buying digital then those that want physical need to wait for the full game. The free DLC is even better. GT6 and GTAV are doing perfectly well without payed DLC so what game devs SHOULD do is release a FULL WORKING game at launch with FREE DLC and include microtransactions (similar to GTAV) so that you can pay for the free DLC if you can't be bothered, or don't have the time, to earn the content in game.

Edit: I never really pre ordered games so can't really vote on the poll. I did pre order 2 games in 2013, GTAV (PS3) and WATCH_DOGS (PS3). I then pre ordered GTAV for PS4 in 2014.

I'll agree to that, DLC should be free, it shouldn't be like DriveClub, or Dirt 3, among some others, just the first that come to mind, that you have to buy the rest of the game on top of 60 just to complete it. It's not right. And I don't mind paying for DLC either, it's just the inconvenience of paying $130 for a entire game.

I think IO Interactive will do it right. I think what they're doing will bust other Devs.

It's a bit odd that you used those two games as an example. The two that are taking/took extremely ridiculous times to release it's free content.

I think I'd rather stick to consistent paid DLC rather then praise a company for its advertised free content that you have to wait literal years for.

The only way we'd really be able to know if IO is going to change the industry, which I doubt, is actually seeing what this content consist of. That would be the selling point. Getting the game that much earlier then its physical release date? I'm not sure that it sounds anything other then a glorified beta at that point.

I can agree to that as well, Rockstar is much better than PDI, but still. Heists were promised for months without hearing anything, so good point.

The best example I can think of it Bungie with Destiny, paid content that consistently has added to the game. I had it for a while, but got rid of it before the first expansion. Now, the deal they have for all of them plus the Season pass I think is perfect.

From the way they have talked, the new content that will drop month to month, with the addition of patches, I think it will be pretty hefty, do to the online modes, and the single player component. I'm buying in to it. So we will see.

 

[Luminis]

First off, about that poll... I hardly ever pre-order games and if I do, it's a game that's pretty much a sure hit with me. Thus, I'll only pre-order games if I know the developer got their games right in the past and if I kept an eye on the game prior to release. Something with a strict NDA is ruled out altogether. The last few games I pre-ordered were, I think, Diablo III: Reaper of Souls and GTA V. I can't remember whether I pre-ordered The Witcher 3, but the next game I'll pre-order is Metal Gear Solid 5. Generally, that habit hasn't changed much, so I voted no.

However, I absolutely agree about pre-order incentives. I hate those with a passion - if they're in-game assets that are being cut in an attempt to get players to buy into the game sight unseen. I don't mind some stuff on the side for those who put their money down prior to release, though. Say, key chains, T-shirts, posters, OSTs, you get the idea. Same with early DLC. Always makes it feel like it was intentionally cut from the game to sell it to us later on. I partially get that same feel with free DLC during the first months of release, by the way. Take The Witcher 3 (I loved that game, by the way, and think very highly of its developers, so don't take this as me bashing them): The game got a whole bunch of free DLC right from its launch until now. However, I've got the suspicion that all that stuff could've been in the game when it was released. However, cutting some content and patching it in over the course of a couple of months makes for some good publicity. "Hey, free new content, sweet!" - that's the reaction they want and it works. Conclusion: Even free DLC can have a sleight of hand feel to it. Free DLC sounds oh so awesome but it might just mean you're paying full prize for half a game and get the other half over the course of the next twelve months. A poor investment, that.

On the other side, I don't mind paying for additional content. I might even pay a pretty penny as long as I feel I'm getting my money's worth. That's why I like expansions so much. Granted, paying thirty bucks for additional contents is sorta steep, but looking back at expansion sets like Lord of Destruction for Diablo II, The Frozen Throne for WarCraft III or Reaper of Souls for Diablo III, it all felt like money well spent. The longevity was there and it didn't feel like all the content was ready to go on day one just to be put on hold until them idiots were ready to throw more money at the publisher. Give me DLC of that quality and I'll be all over it. Sadly, with the way DLC is being handled currently - and the ever increasing popularity of free to play / freemium games and micro transaction - I don't see that happening any time soon. At least not for the majority of publishers and developers. That's not to say that you don't get quality DLC anywhere today, just that publishers are trying ever harder to cover the (drastically increasing) cost of developing games and meet the (drastically increasing) revenue targets a big industry like gaming brings with it.

At the end of the day, I'm okay with how things are. That's largely due to the fact that I've little to no interest in the games that are notoriously ripping players off with their DLC (imho), like Call of Duty or whatever turd EA has been pushing out of their doors lately. PC gaming in general feels okay-ish in that regard, with all the Steam sales and generally lower prices (probably because even the most greedy publisher understands that, should they ask for too much, their games will be pirated to hell and back again) as well as a whole slew of indie titles. There's some guys in the business that one should avoid (imho), like EA and Ubisoft and you've got to keep a close eye on basically everything to not get ripped off. However, with the internet doing its thing and all, I feel like we've got a good amount of transparency. You can get a lot of info on whatever it is you#re into before making the purchase. it's just a matter of actually doing it - and a matter of having the strength of will to resist the urge to pay for stuff you know is gonna burn you (why, hello there, Dragonball Xenoverse!).

 

[Jahgee]

Why did you switch Yes and No so that No is on top, I meant to vote No, but I accidentally voted Yes because of how the poll is orientated

 

[Cole Brown]

It's been the same since the day I made this thread. The way it is oriented however, No then yes. Just how I did it.