New DLC Anoucement, Season Pass Increases

https://bethesda.net/#en/events/game/fallout-4-add-ons-automatron-wasteland-workshop-far-harbor-and-more/2016/02/16/77

Looks like theres somes small add on stuff that seems interesting but Im really excited for this new valentine case. They said the new land mass is their biggest additional content yet.

Increasing the price of the Season Pass post-release is a fucking disgusting practice on so many levels.

What? Thats the whole point of the season pass, its an preorder of all the DLC for a reduced price.

Yeah, I was always worried that this would become a thing.

It's pretty gross. Totally invalidates the idea that you can be a sensible person and wait for it all to come out before buying the pass.

If you look at it another way, the people that took a blind a chance and bought the season with absolutely no idea what was in it are rewarded with a cheaper price. I don't think the idea of early adopters being rewarded with a discount is an inherently bad practice. In this case, it certainly would have been better if they had made it known beforehand that the $30 price was temporary, but I still kind of like the idea of rewarding early adopters instead of punishing them with a price drop in six weeks. Early adopters are your most loyal customers, and it's almost always those customers that get the short end of the stick.

The real crime about the increase is the fact that it costs almost as much as the base game now. I would eat my own shoe if they can actually justify the amount of content for that price. I realize dlc takes man hours post-production or however they try to sell it, but shouldn't we be spending LESS on this content considering the engine and most of the assets are already in place?

I'd be interested to know any of these levels. Either you think Season Passes are gross or you don't. I don't see how raising the price after the fact would change your opinion either way, when they've expanded the scope of what they're offering and are giving players the news two weeks in advance so they can still buy it at the cheaper price.

It's still $30 until March 1, so buy it now if you want it at that price.

Well, this thread took a very quick turn. I didnt know about the season pass increase so I went ahead and updated the thread title to reflect that. I agree with exile in that I wouldn't have a problem with it if they said this would happen upfront. That said, I still only care or will buy story content DLC so the season pass still doesn't matter to me all that much.

Edit: And I just realized that Valentine DLC is only 6 dollars less than the entire season pass cost right now...hmmmm. Might have to change my mind about that.

So, the people who have no idea what they are purchasing, because the content has not been revealed, and put their money up front should be rewarded? For what? Loyalty? Purchasing something? I don't get it. And people who try to be sensible by not committing to something that is virtually a blind purchase should be punished? I play Star Wars Battlefront, but I am not purchasing the season pass yet, because I do not know what the content will be like, therefore, I should be punished by them raising the price now, and everyone who bought it before is 'rewarded'?

This kind of argument seems totally *EDIT* (I will refrain from using the term anti-consumer in regards to this. I feel it sparked more negativity than I wanted.) *EDIT* unhelpful for consumers, overall, and I can only see this coming as a justification for already buying the season pass and feeling "rewarded". Sorry, maybe I just don't understand? *shrugs*

I'm sorry but this is not as black and white as you make it out to be. I have no problem paying for a season pass if the content it includes is worth the money you pay. The problem is that this is the exception rather than the rule.

I enjoyed Arkham Knight a lot but the season pass is an absolute joke especially for the price they're asking. In contrast, the second expansion is not out yet but I feel pretty confident in saying that the Witcher 3 season pass will end up being a great deal since the first piece of content is one of if not the best DLC I've ever played.

The problem is that you don't know that in advance and if you do the sensible thing and wait until all or at least some of the content releases so that you have at least some indication of what you can expect you're kind of getting fucked over in this case. It rewards people who blindly buy something in advance (similar to preorders) before knowing if it's any good or not. It might not be that bad in this case if what they're putting out is worth the increase in price but it might also set a precedent where publishers use this price increase to make sure that people buy the season pass as early as possible.

How is it anti consumer to reward customer loyalty with a cheaper price? It's no different than the idea of early access games being at their cheapest when they're first available. It's the developer allowing the customer to pay less if they jump in early and buy the game when it's not finished. Is Minecraft anti consumer because it was significantly cheaper 5 years ago?

Anyway, my point was less about the specifics of this instance and more about the idea. As the game industry operates now, the most loyal consumers are the ones that always get the shaft. The people who buy a game day 1 always end up paying the most amount of money for the least amount of content. I just think the idea of a developer or publisher saying "Hey, thanks for being a loyal consumer and buying our product day 1, here's a small discount" is not such a bad idea. If publishers actually want to make pre-orders worthwhile, they should offer them at a discount. At least people would have a reason to pre-order games and would have some justification for taking the risk and buying something before they know exactly what they're getting.

@huntad: What exactly is anti-consumer about giving them more options. If you don't want to pay for something before you know what it is, that's totally fine and you can do that. If you really like a game and want to consume everything, you can buy the season pass. That doesn't make you a horrible person.

What's your ideal pro-consumer course of action? That season passes are abolished and you just pay for DLC that you want as it comes out? You can totally already do that. People really need to stop worrying about other people buying season passes because it has zero negative impact on them.

It's always pro-consumer to offer more choices. Should monthly subscribers to Giant Bomb start getting all pissy because of the anti-consumer yearly subscription option is cheaper and we have no idea what the content will be like in 7 months?

I bought the Best Buy bundle with the game, season pass, and a pair of socks. After GCU and reward zone certificates I think I paid like $50 for it. REALLY glad I went that route now.

These look like they could be fun, I just hope we get mods on XBO soon.

@altairre: I still don't see the difference. Either you're OK with putting money into a thing without almost zero information on what that thing is outside of a promise that it will be worth your money, or you're not. A $30 season pass for shit you have no idea about is OK but a $30 pass that will later go up to $50 for shit you have at least some idea about is somehow crossing a line?

It is not the same as early access though. With early access you know exactly what you're getting into. The reason why it's cheaper is that you're taking a chance with an unfinished product that you want to support and maybe even help to improve so that it's worth your investment down the line by becoming the game wanted in the first place or at least something similar to it. Even then you've probably watched some gameplay videos already and looked into where the devs are planning to take the game. That is just not the case with DLC of and AAA game like F4. Don't get me wrong, if you want to buy all the DLC sight unseen because you like the base game then that's absolutely fine with me but there is no reason why that behavior should be encouraged or rewarded just as there is no reason that waiting for the reception of that content should be punished.

There is nothing there that sparks my interest AT ALL, especially a $10 add-on that literally just lets you build a fucking robot.

I have the season pass already yet was so disappointed by the actual game. My fault for pre-ordering, but it sounds like it's kind of working out. I'll check in once all this content is done and by then the mod scene should be really rocking.

It's cool they're not doing a "Season Pass Part 2" or something. I wouldn't put that past some other companies.

I think announcing a price increase along with those three pieces of content is a mistake. Only Far Harbor seems like it has any meat, and they want $25 for that alone. It suggests to me that there will be one other big piece of content, and several little things to be announced later, or, even worse, four or five little things. Automatron and Wasteland Workshop seem like mods someone could have made months ago if they had released the GECK at launch. I'm sure they are actually more complicated than that, but of all the things they could add to improve Fallout, more poorly implemented customization options sure isn't one of them.

As I recall the first season passes I heard about were handled exactly this way. I feel certain that some of the first season passes actually stopped being available once all the content was out. Maybe I'm remembering that wrong.

It's always tried to be a way to try and encourage to make a bad choice (buying content sight unseen), which I think is what the negative reaction is about. It's distasteful in the same way the focus on getting preorders is a bit gross, but I don't think it's really anti-consumer?

You don't have to buy a season pass without any information about it though. You can still buy the season pass after all the content is out if you wish to do so and it'll be cheaper than buying all the DLC seperately. That's the idea behind that bundle in the first place. If you increase the price before any of the DLC is out you're actively discouraging people to wait and judge the worth of it for themselves. I don't like the precedent this sets.

@altairre: I don't think a game dev expanding the scope of a project and being able to adjust the price accordingly is bad precedent. What's the alternative? Devs just never expand the scope of things because they're not allowed to ask for more money?

@ll_exile_ll: In this case, you are paying for something you are not getting until months from when you payed for it. I'd have to say that's pretty different. If I were to buy an early-access game on my XB1, I get to play it immediately (disregarding preorders). Buying the season pass before the content is released is essentially pre-ordering dlc content. But regardless, raising the price is a new precedent that could change the way publishers implement their season pass policies. That is potentially scary.

I agree with a discount being cool, but no one does that, and this isn't that. Most likely what will happen is publishers will weigh the costs of the season pass, give early adopters the base price, and just raise the price for those that are late, or sensible in buying content that is not going to available for months. Best case scenario, the price would be like $5 dollars cheaper at $25, and then raised to $40 or $50 for those who buy the SP late ( I concede that I maintain a healthy amount of skepticism in this matter).

@hunkulese:Couple issues with what you just said. First, modifying a previous option that was already available is not another option. Season passes already exist, and simply upping the price does not make it a new option. I'm sure you already know this, but you seem to think I am against those who buy season passes. I do not like season passes just as I didn't like on-disc dlc, but this is the world we live in. I am against the raising of season pass prices months after release when the developer/publisher deems it viable. Upping the price on a 'product' that was already vague to begin with, does not help consumers overall.

I am not sure where I gave the impression that season passes should be abolished. I've been waiting for content to come out, reading reviews on it (our very own website that we are now chatting on advocates waiting for reviews before purchasing content, right?), and then making sensible purchases for a while now. I don't understand the defensive tone of your reply. Don't worry, I will not reply back to you again. Have a nice day.

P.S. The Giant Bomb prices were all given up front. You did not buy the membership, and then months later they announced that the yearly subscription is available. Subscription services are different than season passes, also. We receive content on a weekly basis. A season pass' content is set and done.

This news had me go to Green Man and buy the season pass immediately - 20% off coupon works - $23.00 - I don't love the increase, but one piece per month is kind of neat. I'll definitely be interested about it justifying that large increase.

Wasn't there originally 4 pieces of DLC in the season pass? I'm confused.

They have only announced the first three so far, but there are more that haven't been detailed yet.

It sets a bad precedent because there is no way of knowing what it means when they're saying that they're expanding the scope. It leads people to think "I can get something worth 50 bucks for 30 bucks if I buy it now" even if they have no idea that what they're buying will actually be worth the price. It's very easy to abuse that. I'm not saying that Bethesda will necessarily do that but I don't think it's hard to see why it might be a bad thing.

@huntad: Well put.

@altairre: It's no different than them saying you can get $40 bucks worth of stuff for $30 which is the core principle of the season pass. Pay X money ahead of time to get >X worth of content without knowing what that content is. The only difference here is that now Bethesda is saying for $30 instead of getting $40 of mystery stuff you're getting $60 of mystery stuff.

That's not what season passes are though. You don't have to pay for them ahead of time. You can still pay $30 for $40 bucks worth of stuff after the fact once you know that it is indeed worth $40 and not 20$.

On the one hand, I appreciate what charging a higher price could mean for the scope of DLC. On the other hand, scrap the season pass marketing bullshit and treat it fully like a goddamn expansion.

After Fallout 4 came out, the shape it came out in and overall quality of the game, I wouldn't feel very good about supporting Bethesda in future endeavours by paying for pricey season passes. Thats just me though, I know some people love the formula to bits. Heck, I've played all those Souls games and every single one of them has had the same bad camera, the same bad framerate and a plethora of other bugs that they don't seem too concerned with fixing, so I get it. At the same time, increasing prices like this is still pretty shitty. It's a business, but sometimes a little goodwill towards your playerbase goes a long way, especially considering the fact that a lot of those fans had to deal with shitty bugs and issues with the game until the first patch was released - again.

@altairre: So really what you're against then is preorder incentives.

After being disappointed with Fallout 4 I can say with 100% certainty that I will not pay $40 and definitely not $60 (Canada) for a season pass. By the time I want to play this game again the ultimate edition or whatever they call it will be on sale for $30.

I certainly am. Usually preorder incentives are small things that are not really relevant to the game (like outfits, weapons or whatnot) and even then I think it's a shitty practice (definitely not consumer friendly). Here we are talking about 20 bucks. Now, again, it could be that they really are expanding the scope and that what they are going to put out is of a quality that justifies the 50 bucks. That is impossible to know however and considering the season pass will still be 30$ for the next two weeks it might also just be a way to get more people to buy the season pass in advance sight unseen. If it is successful even if the quality isn't up to par it could set a precedent where other devs use the increase as a late adopter tax that merely punishes people who want to wait for reviews.

60$ for a season pass is pretty crazy, It sucks because I am a person who wants to get every thing out of a game, and if It's a game I am really into like the Assassin's Creed series. 140$ for a full experience is pretty crazy. I have a good paying job and no kids so it's not a thing that I can't afford to do this for every game, It's just that it's not worth it.

Why even let people buy it if price isn't finalized?

I actually hate this trend, and won't buy it after an increase knowing I could have gotten it cheaper.

Waiting for a big sale on the season pass.

Then again Skyrim had awful DLC, so might not even want it.

Okay when I first read this thread I thought the price increase was altogether awful...but according to the link anyone who bought the DLC pass at the reduced price still gets all the content and you are still able to buy the reduced content pass for a couple weeks, which effectively lets you get more out of the DLC pass than Bethesda apparently intended for you to get out of it. I understand how this could be the beginning of a bad trend but all things considered it doesn't sound that terrible. Since it looks like Far Harbor will retail standalone for $25, getting everything for $30 sounds like a good deal.

That being said, I really enjoyed Fallout 4 but Far Harbor is the only thing detailed here that really interests me.

I recently started a new playthrough of this and was on the fence about the season pass. What's been announced sounds interesting enough for me to bite before the cost increase. It's actually a pretty savvy move to catch people on the fence like me.

I really didn't expect to see a backlash against the price increase because they have at least warned people about it. The new season pass price is still going to be cheaper than buying the new pieces separately. Another way to look at it is that people who get the season pass at the original price are getting more content than they originally bought in for.

I mean really we have no idea what $60 of content actually means, and the Bethesda marketing machine can divide the value idea of that into whatever they need to make this seem like a good deal. Mainly I am interested in the idea of them making extended content additions for that game. Its install base must be huge.

I wonder if the success of GTAV online DLC has anything to do with them expanding their plans.

Considering you can still buy the season pass until March for the original $30, I'm definitely doing that now.

I really don't understand the anger about this considering if you already bought it, you still get everything. They changed it from $30 for ~$45 worth of content to $50 to $60+ worth of content. Seems fine to me. It seems like some of the outrage boils down to "I fundamentally don't like season passes and this is another loose excuse to complain about them."

That's why you buy in early. Guess what if you already bought the Season Pass now you're getting more DLC for a lower price because you took a gamble and rolled the dice. It's your choice as a consumer in a free market to reject the idea of Season Passes but nothing underhanded is going on here. They are being pretty clear with their messaging and intent. It just so happens in the case of Dying Light and now Fallout 4 the people who bought in early are the ones profiting the most here.

You can still do that though? They're going to release well over $50 in DLC, so you are now paying $50 for $60+ worth of stuff after the fact once you know how much the stuff is actually worth. Its just $50 season pass for $80 dollars of DLC or whatever it is instead of $30 for $40.

I literally do not understand any of the complaints in this thread.

Looks like the Fallout 4 Season Pass is currently the top selling thing on Steam, so I guess the message got out there.

Also is this the first time a Season Pass has topped that list? I'm going to guess it is.

By the way you can currently use a code on GMG and buy the season pass for $24 - less than the day one cost of Far Harbor alone.

After Dying Light and now Fallout 4 season pass's are starting to feel like old school expansions I hope this trend continues.

Now THIS is how you use the concept of loss aversion to your benefit as a developer. I'm seeing posts from casual Street Fighter fans all over the internet saying that they're not going to buy the new game because it doesn't include a basic arcade mode vs the computer. People don't like when you take things away from them.

And now the Fallout 4 developers threaten to take something away from you--20 dollars that you intended to perhaps spend at a later date--UNLESS you act now. You know that game that you probably haven't even finished yet, almost certainly haven't completed all the quests in, and probably never will? Well, now you can buy all sorts of new content, for a game where you still have all sorts of unfinished content, AND you can save some money that you would lose otherwise by committing to it right now.

You can save money now, and all those suckers who wait will be stuck with a higher price! I'm actually considering picking up the season pass now, and while I'm still leaning more against it than for it, I'm closer than I ever would have been before.

This is customer manipulation at its finest. Kudos, Bethesda. Well done.

@huntad: Again, it doesn't negatively affect anyone. If you want to wait and see if it's worth it, you can totally still do that, and there's a 100% chance this stuff will be on sale before everything comes out. How does this affect you if you were already planning to wait for reviews of everything? This is pretty standard practice for pretty much everything. If you're willing to pay up front and in bulk, you get a discount.

If you already bought the season pass, you're not affected at all.

Selling goods for what you think they're worth is not anti-consumer and is one of the major problems with the video game industry right now. DLC is the only thing that they can price according to what they think the value is. They're going to sell the most season passes when the game launches so of course they're going to put them on sale even if they don't actually know what's going to be involved. Would it be a better solution for you if they just said the season pass was $100 at the start just in case? If people feel like they're getting ripped off, maybe they shouldn't buy it.

There's absolutely nothing shitty or anti-consumer about what they're doing. Are Occulus scummy dirtbags for giving early backers free retail versions of the rift?

You know it's kinda unsettling that the content plans are so loose that they can warrant that much of a price increase, but still be fine with taking money for. Like sure, whatever, don't start proper asset and code development until the game's through cert/almost out but... the broad plans should be already well set out. With the price hike it'd probably be something close to 155 CAD total and that's.. a lot. A lot a lot. At this rate I should probably just switch to using GMG for as much as possible.

@hunkulese: I respectfully disagree with almost every single thing you just said. We can agree to disagree because you are obviously not seeing my point. Good day.