Gamers, the neverending cash-grab
By Bokan 24 Comments
When it comes to gaming, there are three things you can count on: Companies releasing yearly versions of the same game: DLC being released at launch that really should have been part of the game: and Steam Holiday deals big enough to convince you to buy games you'll probably never even play(Sorry Crayon Physics Deluxe, it's the truth). The question is why do yearly games and DLC at launch continue to be not only successful, but more common?
It's simple, because we keep buying them.
full game. The Madden series show little sign of slowing down, and plan to continue with their yearly games even if the NFL has a lockout next season. You've gotta question the validity of a football game that's simulating a season that isn't even going to happen. Although at the same time, maybe that's exactly the draw to next season's game. Perhaps it will fill the football void in all of our hearts, who knows.
That does not explain the NHL series. Even without the license, the NHL series has done little differently in the past few years. Since its successful 2009 game it has gotten minor tweaks in gameplay(board-play for 10, and sticks breaking for 11). My friends always tell me the same thing, "Board play is a major change to gameplay". Despite the accuracy of that statement, only one thing matters. Is a minor feature like 'board play' or any of the other minor features in these t itles really worth $60?
No.
Somehow EA's managed to dupe us all into believing that with every se ason must come its own game. This was mostly done out of convenience for roster updates, graphical improvements, and gameplay changes in the past. Nowadays, the graphics are insignificantly different, the roster gets updated automatically t hrough the internet, and gameplay changes are minor. The days of yearly games should have disappeared much the same way the 5-year console cycles have.
Activision follows a similar formula with its yearly releases of Call of Duty. The main difference is the change in developers each year. Whether it's Infinity Ward or Treyarch, the formula for the game stays the same. The developer does have a change in the feel of the game, as each developer has their own take on the same formula. The weapons or maps may change but the overall 'Call of Duty' experience has remained in tact since Call of Duty 4. The one aspect in which Activision has improved from the EA formula is sales. No matter how ridiculous the sales of a Call of Duty game are you can bet that those sales will increase for the next title. Perhaps they release the games so quickly that gamers can't process that they are paying 60 dollars per year to play the same core game they're been playing for years. Whatever the case, those gamers complaining that Activision's evil or greedy aren't thinking things clearly. Activision is a company, they are going to get us to pay as much money as they can for as little work as possible. If we continue paying, that's not them being evil, it's us being ignorant.
However, yearly games are not the only problem.
A more recent trend in the industry is the growing issue of DLC at launch. Don't get me wrong, the idea of expanding the gameplay experience through a small purchase is a great idea. The problem begins when companies withhold content from the original game and releasing it alongside the game as DLC . The biggest offender is, no surprise, EA. Dragon Age: Origins was released alongside two separate DLC's, while Mass Effect 2 had 7 separate DLC's within two days of launch. Capcom is no better, as they try to avoid this issue by simply delaying already finished DLC by one month for Marvel vs. Capcom 3. Even worse, they separated Jill Valentine and Shuma Gorath into their own respective DLC, charging $5 each. Another DLC came out only two weeks after the game's release. The content? 6 alternate costumes. the price? $ 5.
With Dragon Age 2 coming next month, that trend will undoubtedly continue. More than two months before its release 'The Exiled Prince' DLC was announced. It will be released at the same time as Dragon Age 2 for $7. Will we buy it? Of course. If we didn't condone this form of financial abuse then we wouldn't be gamers. It's the equivalent of buying a DVD, then finding out in order to watch commentary you have to pay $5 extra. Nobody would tolerate that... nobody but us.
Something is seriously wrong.
The blame can be spread both ways. Yes, the companies are at fault but they're in the business of making money. Its really our job to make sure they cater to our needs in order for them to get their money. Players can whine all they want but nothing will change unless sales are effected. As a community, we're either financial masochists or simply brain dead. We continue paying money for overpriced content. The growth of Steam and its deals does provide me with a shred of hope for a financially responsible future in the industry. If only every company was Valve.
Maybe gaming is a drug and we're all addicted. At least that would explain why we keep paying so much for our fix.
Log in to comment