Poll: Is it oke to sell cosmetic dlc for 2 bucks?

[themilo504]

This weeks jimquisition kind of got me thinking about dlc prices, I myself tend to buy a lot cosmetic dlc made by paradox interactive and those are generally priced at 2 bucks, and I wondered is that oke? Isn?t that too much money for something that doesn?t really add that much to the game.

After thinking it through I decided that yeah I think its oke, while it doesn?t add much what it does add can really enhance the game and make it better.

 

[skywolfblue]

Why not?

It's up to the buyer to decide whether the DLC is worth it or not. There are a lot of people who buy it, so clearly there are a lot of people who feel that yes, it's worth it to them.

Personally I don't buy cosmetic DLC, instead buying more "expansion pack" stuff like Minerva's Den or Undead Nightmare.

 

[Tahaneira]

Is it essential? Does it add anything of great value to the game?

If not, they can sell it for however much they wish. It's your decision whether or not a thing is worth spending money on. If you think it's too expensive, don't buy it. If you think it's worth it, buy it. To my mind, that's how far the moral dilemma goes.

 

[krazykidd]

This weeks jimquisition kind of got me thinking about dlc prices, I myself tend to buy a lot cosmetic dlc made by paradox interactive and those are generally priced at 2 bucks, and I wondered is that oke? Isn?t that too much money for something that doesn?t really add that much to the game.

After thinking it through I decided that yeah I think its oke, while it doesn?t add much what it does add can really enhance the game and make it better.

They could charge you 20$ and cosmetic dlc would still be okay . Why? Because you don't have to buy it and it adds nothing to the game .

That being said , i am personally against DLC , and wouldn't buy any DLC for anything more than free.

 

[Resetti's_Replicas]

I agree with everyone who's said that it's preferable to selling actual advantages. I think it's a foolish waste of money to pay for that but that's just me, I won't get in the way of people who disagree.

 

[Voulan]

That $2 in the US becomes around $5 here in the Aus/NZ region, so I'm absolutely not okay with that. It is ridiculously expensive.

But as other people have pointed out, I can just not buy them. It doesn't make me any happier about the whole thing though.

 

[chozo_hybrid]

Cosmetic stuff should just be in the damn games, especially when it comes to fighting games. It's not like the have a whole world to develop, just some stages to fight on and the characters, I loved being able to unlock stuff in fighting games. Don't really get to do it now.

That $2 in the US becomes around $5 here in the Aus/NZ region, so I'm absolutely not okay with that. It is ridiculously expensive.

But as other people have pointed out, I can just not buy them. It doesn't make me any happier about the whole thing though.

In NZ, 2 USD converts to 2.56 NZD, so not around 5 bucks. But yeah, It's still too much.

 

[Launcelot111]

Considering that a big chunk of the F2P model is based entirely on selling visual upgrades for crazy prices, 2 bucks is pretty reasonable even if it's DLC to a standard retail game. It always shocks me how many people in League of Legends pay out for the $25 Udyr skin.

 

[TehCookie]

I think it's better that cutting off part of the game and selling it. As for is it worth the price, it varies. If it looks good I think it can add a lot to the game, since I replay games and a visual change mixes it up. It also depends on how cool it looks, obviously I wouldn't spend $2 on an ugly design but I'd spend $5 on something I really wanted. Which the only thing I can think of right now is Tales of Xillia Star Driver costumes. I really want that Ginga Bishounen costume for Jude. More than that it would be to expensive for me.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

They can charge whatever they want for it. They could probably make more money if it were cheaper as they would sell more, but it's their business if they want to starve.

Also, "Oke"?

...

 

[Doom972]

They shouldn't charge anything for it. This sort of thing used to be unlockable in games when certain conditions were met (a predecessor of the achievement system).

As a reward, it has a meaning as a part of the game. As a thing that's bought with real money, it's meaningless and distasteful.

 

[BQE]

They shouldn't charge anything for it. This sort of thing used to be unlockable in games when certain conditions were met (a predecessor of the achievement system).

As a reward, it has a meaning as a part of the game. As a thing that's bought with real money, it's meaningless and distasteful.

See I disagree with this sentiment. As far as the question is presented, it's very broad. My answer therefore will encompass free-to-play and buy-to-play games. As far as these kinds of games go, the only solitary cardinal sin is charging money for something that can actually give the player a tangible edge within the game. So the only option left is the cosmetic, and the convenient. While some may argue that the convenient tiptoes fairly close to the line (due to an early advantage in a new game), it's still acceptable as far as I've seen.

The only real option left is the cosmetic. I suppose the most wide-reaching solution is a game that allows cash skins and skins earned by playing only, which I'm seeing more of, but this is really one of the only acceptable situations to most players when it comes to these two business models.

 

[Doom972]

They shouldn't charge anything for it. This sort of thing used to be unlockable in games when certain conditions were met (a predecessor of the achievement system).

As a reward, it has a meaning as a part of the game. As a thing that's bought with real money, it's meaningless and distasteful.

See I disagree with this sentiment. As far as the question is presented, it's very broad. My answer therefore will encompass free-to-play and buy-to-play games. As far as these kinds of games go, the only solitary cardinal sin is charging money for something that can actually give the player a tangible edge within the game. So the only option left is the cosmetic, and the convenient. While some may argue that the convenient tiptoes fairly close to the line (due to an early advantage in a new game), it's still acceptable as far as I've seen.

The only real option left is the cosmetic. I suppose the most wide-reaching solution is a game that allows cash skins and skins earned by playing only, which I'm seeing more of, but this is really one of the only acceptable situations to most players when it comes to these two business models.

There's also a third option of not having this sort of DLC at all. If it doesn't add new content (new levels, quests, etc), it shouldn't be charged for. I see not justification for selling us in-game weapons and outfits - unless the game is free to play of course.

 

[BQE]

They shouldn't charge anything for it. This sort of thing used to be unlockable in games when certain conditions were met (a predecessor of the achievement system).

As a reward, it has a meaning as a part of the game. As a thing that's bought with real money, it's meaningless and distasteful.

See I disagree with this sentiment. As far as the question is presented, it's very broad. My answer therefore will encompass free-to-play and buy-to-play games. As far as these kinds of games go, the only solitary cardinal sin is charging money for something that can actually give the player a tangible edge within the game. So the only option left is the cosmetic, and the convenient. While some may argue that the convenient tiptoes fairly close to the line (due to an early advantage in a new game), it's still acceptable as far as I've seen.

The only real option left is the cosmetic. I suppose the most wide-reaching solution is a game that allows cash skins and skins earned by playing only, which I'm seeing more of, but this is really one of the only acceptable situations to most players when it comes to these two business models.

There's also a third option of not having this sort of DLC at all. If it doesn't add new content (new levels, quests, etc), it shouldn't be charged for. I see not justification for selling us in-game weapons and outfits - unless the game is free to play of course.

You're absolutely correct. I honestly don't purchase DLC for a paid game, be it $30 or $60 or what have you. I think DLC of that nature is as a grievous crime as online passes. Paying for gun skins in Gears of War or things like that infuriates me. I'm still against buying new content for a game I've already purchased and beat, I just won't go back to it for a level or two.

I'll say that when I was late to the Fallout 3 party and bought the game full of DLC, it worked out great, but since I bought New Vegas on release, I don't think I'll ever go back to play DLC. Probably just a personal thing.