How in the Hell did Season Passes, Microtransactions, & overprice DLC took over gaming?

As far as I can remember early last-gen, DLC & Season Passes were somewhat a hit or a miss but with heavy games that focus on MP. most DLC we're awesome to invest money on. Mass Effect's DLC like for Mass Effect 2 we're all great and well develop on all DLC fronts. While I get that Microtransactions generally are always optional but I had no idea it's now a thing to milk gamers now for this gen, it's getting out of hand. I also haven't forgotten about the Horse Armor overprice DLC in Oblivion, major screw-ups by Bethesda. Season Passes costing $50 (or more) is outrages, they used to go around for $20/$30 at most, I didn't even know season passes skyrocket to $50 and up! That's crazy! I remember there was a time when beating is when you'll unlocked something rewarding, not paying to win.

Ask yourself that question and think about it for a minute.

Simple answer is because people buy it

Another answer is because game developers went the sneaky way with it, they used it as "extra" for a bit to get us all used to it and once we got used to the idea and paid happily for it, they stopped doing "extras" and just took out normal main game content

But to be fair a more reasonable answer is the above and piracy. People do not have the same morals when it comes to digital content as they do with physical items even tho both is stealing.

So they fought long and hard with different copy protections only to alienate their paying customers, so instead they now go with Micro-transactions and paid dlc´s , which you can´t really blame them for. They are not in it for anyone´s blue eyes, they are there to make money and pay their staff.

Well games are much more expensive to make then they were before. If you want large diverse games with ever improving graphics then you're going to have to spend more money. Value is a pretty subjective thing as well. People are always going to have different ideas on what constitutes value for their money.

Personally I don't spend any money on microtransactions even with free to play games. If I can't enjoy what I'm playing without feeling the need to spend money on microtransactions then I'll just stop playing the game altogether. I buy my share of Season Passes and dlc but it's always for games where I enjoyed the base game in the first place and for which I want more content to play with. Also just like the games themselves you don't have to buy Season Passes or dlc right away, just wait for it to go on sale and get it then. Season Passes are essentially just a convenient bundle of dlc that is sometimes a little cheaper then buying each piece of dlc separately. Don't feel comfortable buying a Season Pass without knowing how that content will turn out? Just wait for all the dlc for it to get released first then before you buy it.

hard to offset the rising costs of games while competing with rampant piracy, rental services and used game sales. But truthfully, these kinds of things were destined to come about as soon as game consoles began incorporating hard drives. I don't think any of those things (DLC, season passes, etc) are really an issue as long as we continue to get a full game for full price. The real stinker is charging a fee for online play, but we've just accepted that on consoles without much of a fight.

idiots buy them that's why

if no one bought them,they wouldn't be making them

post-release content has always existed, at least for as long as I have been gaming (going on 25+ years now).

we used to call them "expansion packs" and, imo, they were a little more significant but also a little more expensive; I recall paying 20-30 dollars for added content that would only last a few hours, or was kind of a joke (C&C Red Alert: Counterstrike, anyone? Gimme a break, giant ants....)

anyway I don't think DLC is inherently bad, I just think it can be a bit excessive. I would also prefer that developers make the game first without the intent to make DLC, see how the sales are, then make DLC. Or plan on DLC, just don't make it day-one DLC.

Again, it can be taken too far, but DLC is not bad. I have yet to play a game where I feel "Man they should have included that DLC with the original game".

Yeah, they are just milking us for every last dime. I don't like it.

The whole IOS/mobile culture seems to have helped them with the grind or pay policy, seeping that acceptability of mindset into a larger audience.

Unfortantly, it's getting worse as well. You can see from Ubisoft's later Assassins Creed, it has elevated from something largely into the background to being directly put in the menu superseding practically every other game option asking as an obligatory ad anytime the player hits start or escape.

I've seen people say "oh it's optional", but that's nonsense. You only need to look at Battlefield to see it has evolved from team game with sparse weapons into a convoluted unlockathon that acts as a grind pay-wall, or off course, you can pay.

Dues Ex: Manking Divided seems to have taken it one step further.

But as stated above... people buy it. They have been conditioned that way. If you're an older gamer it is quite obviously bullshit.

2 big reasons

1) people buy it

2) publishers (especially AAA publishers) need it. if you think a couple of million people paying 60 bucks for a game is enough to fund them today then that would be a mistake. the cost of development continues to rise and the market is not expanding. so they need to get existing gamers to dig deeper to get the cost back and turn a profit.

the funny thing is that people still complain about the lack of horsepower in modern consoles and we have these ridiculous mid gen refreshes which will just make it worse.

yep. south park did a pretty accurate satire of freemium games a couple of years ago.

my suspicion with micro transactions is they're primarily aimed at kids. friends who are parents of kids in the 10-14 year old bracket are constantly bemoaning the never ending demand for money from their kid(s) so they can buy some skin / upgrade / etc on their console from games like fifa or cod to either keep up with or go one better than their peers. older games are much less susceptible to their lure but at the same time it's basically grooming / conditioning a whole generation of young gamers to accept them as a standard part of gaming culture in the future.

dlc can be a great thing. there's been countless expansions over the years that have been well worth the money and extended the lifespan of a game. it's when base content is removed and resold as dlc or where dlc makes original content redundant wherein the problem lies. fortunately there aren't too many examples of this practice of significance i can think of

I can never find fault with this dude!! lol Just as you have said, DLC is cool and I support in once in a while, but I can get by with the base game.

The Witcher 3 is a perfect example for me, I plan on getting some dlc for it eventually, but I'm having so much fun with the core game, it's not something that I have to have right away.

Because people want this stuff?

I think people look at this stuff in a very sighted matter. DLC and season pass content are created when the game is basically finished (most of the time). If season passes and paid DLC did not exist, then that extra content would not have ever been made. The idea that extra content would be made for free later on or packed into disc at launch is complete insanity. You would have to be living in a fantasy world, the business aspect of such an idea makes no sense in today's market.

Gaming has gone from independent developers to corporations. It is a logical progression.

In my experience, DLC, season pass, etc is almost never worth it.

The "extra content" is usually slapped-together crap like "extra robots! and 30 new types of doors!" for Fallout 4.

Doesn't hold a candle to the base game.

Which if you are patient, wait for sale, grab it for a tenner and try to ignore the obnoxious triangle wanting access to your phone number, so they can sell your information to 8000 chinese marketers for 50 cents.

Game makers used to be people who did it for the love.

Now they're big corporations like EA who answer to the shareholders.

So while the guy who actually codes the game makes 60k, the guys in suits on the top floor make 10x more than that.

That's where all the DLC money goes.

Great another one these self entitled gamer(s) whining when they gaming world does not match their wants.

It a simple thing. Gamers whine when any game is not good enough and it cost money to get try to make them happy. Gamers then whine when companies try to increase the selling price of game. DLC and all that is the best compromised that companies can do with these gamers attitude that there are purely innocent while being bullied by the companies.

Welcome to the forums, or to the internet for that matter.

they need money to make big budget games

Because people are suckers and have been feeding into it. Me, I rarely play games that have DLC, and if they do, I usually buy it because it's almost always a smaller dev who needs all the support they can get.

Because game prices stayed the same 60 for how many years while game development costs rose and devs needed a way to make more money. Of course that doesnt excuse idiotic thinks like horse armor or the 1 time use only praxis kit on deus ex but there are devs that genuinely offer good DLC ( cdProjekt for example) though nowdays those seem to be the minority and most publishers try to milk idiots by selling them the most mundane stuff

Yeah, I think it's just getting too expensive. I mean $120 for a game?

So yeah, it makes sense to me to wait for the complete editions.

Cause people purchase it.

That said I was browsing the steam page before I jumped in here and found something relevant. Dead or Alive 5 is on steam for around 20$ at the time, this with a 50% discount, so the base price is around 40 $. As I scroll down the page I see the available downloadable content for the game. And hold onto your horses cause these are costume dlc.

Fun Theme Set (60% Discount) = 18.23 $

Halloween + Debut Costume set = 54.20 $

Variety Costume set = 61.60 $

I get that these DLC is optional but a Costume set costing 21$ more then the actual game when it's sold at full price. That's pretty high priced if you ask me. But again this is an occurance cause people for some reason purchase them.

@davillain-: Supply and demand coupled with moronic consumers who can't think further ahead than their own nose.

If these things didn't make money they wouldn't exist. They exist because people keep buying them.

The only real thing you can do is vote with your wallet, refuse to buy this shit and make good choices in what games you buy. I outright refuse to buy games day one for this reason. You need to take your time and look for the signs of problems in a game.

If a game does something I don't agree with I won't buy it. Or I'll get it second hand.

Take Deus Ex for example. I loved the original games, the game from 2000 and Human Revolution were fantastic games. Yet Mankind Divided has microtransactions in the main game. For that alone I refuse to buy it new. I'll wait a year or so and buy it cheap second hand.

If more people were careful with their money developers would have to work harder to please us. Which means we'd have less of the gouging tactics.

as someone whose played the game without feeling the need to buy or seeing a single microtransaction pushed down my throat or dangled like a carrot to help me get through part of the game my advice is if you enjoyed the previous games don't let them put you off buying it. you're missing out.

having said that in a year's time the goty / director's cut complete with all dlc will probably be available so it won't be the end of the world if you hang fire. but resist for the right reasons and not preconceptions that quite probably aren't anywhere near as bad as you assume they might be

Because in each new generation of consoles you get millions of new gamers while millions of older games either phase out of gaming, or give it up entirely.

The majority gamer today is one with no real reference point how things used to be. They buy casual games that satisfy them for an hour or two, and they buy DLC and microtransactions because that's not an abnormal thing to them. And it helps that it's much easier for developers to cater to these newcomers, and far more profitable.

it's a nice hypothesis but unfortunately doesn't hold up much as a theory. most articles that research the average age of a gamer nearly always list it as somewhere between 30-35. these are just some of the top results on page one of a google search for "average age of gamers"

http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essential-Facts-2015.pdf // 35 years old

http://www.bigfishgames.com/blog/2015-global-video-game-stats-whos-playing-what-and-why/ // 31 years old

http://www.statisticbrain.com/gamer-demographics-and-statistics/ // 34 years old

As someone mentioned earlier, dlc has always existed. You just used to have to go to a store to pick up your expansion pack. Now most games have them and it's just easier to access it.

It's usually not a big deal. Most games actually do dlc just fine. Some do it great. Like The Witcher 3, and Skyrim/most Bethesda stuff. Sure the little things for the building aspect of Fallout 4 and hearth fire are a bit odd and unnecessary. But you arent forced to buy them. So dont.

Average age tells very little about how long someone has been playing games, what types of games they play, how they play, etc.

Hundreds of millions of middle-aged men and women play got heavily into mobile gaming after the iPhone launched. Millions of senior centers across the country bought a Wii to give their residents an extra activity to enjoy. What does this data tell you about the state of console gaming, and the ubiquity of DLC, microtransactions, and other fees intertwined with buying a console game targeted at the 16-25 demographic?

I mean, the data shows an increase in the average age of gamers... it doesn't tell you a whole lot else though.

the links i referenced list the average amount of time people have been gaming to be at least 13 years, so your claim of them having "no real reference point to how things use to be" again is a nice hypothesis but not grounded in fact. just like your "stats" that the majority of gamers "buy casual games that satisfy them for an hour or two" and that "each new generation of consoles you get millions of new gamers while millions of older games either phase out of gaming, or give it up entirely"

Sorry for the late reply, been busy at work for days but anyways.

I do understand making games are way expensive now then ever, some should at least make there games worth buying then just implanting microtransactions. I too buy very few season passes from last-gen but I always do my research if it's worth buying like Gears of War 3 season pass and it was indeed worth buying it cause I put a lot of hours into Gears of War 3.

I totally agree on paying online is BS and the price increase just to play online is really the problem. Thank goodness for PC/Wii U free online gaming.

I couldn't agree more. Just because it's optional doesn't mean nothing. Microtransactions shouldn't be there in the first place, over time, microtransactions can manipulate the human brain if the game is way too difficult then just trying to beating it yourself and not pay to win.

I do sometimes buy games day one, a game I done my research during it's development simply by following it but I'll also wait for GOTY with all DLC if a game has way too many DLC (looking at you Evolve) then it's GOTY it is and I did that with Mortal Kombat X when GOTY was release. I was gonna buy Makind Divided but the game looks underwhelming despite I like Human Revolution but yeah, that too is going to my GOTY list.

WOW! That never came to my mind, well said.

@Macutchi: No I'm not. The reviews that I've seen haven't exactly been encouraging either. That coupled with the microtransactions turns me off buying the game until it drops in price.

At the very least I'll wait for a good sale.

I might find I enjoy the game but as it stands I'd rather wait six months and get it cheap, than directly fund a full price game with microtransactions. Which whether they are shoved in your face or not I don't agree with and refuse to fund.

A good game is good no matter when you play it and it won't cost as much. Seems like a win win situation to me. This is why I almost never buy games in the first month. Save myself hundreds every year.

@davillain-:

I was tempted to get Human Revolution based on my experience with the previous games but fortunately this time I had a considerable backlog of games and so figured I'd play through that first.

Maybe I'll still enjoy it but at least I'll save myself some money.

I rarely buy extra content unless it's seeming to be a large expansion, in which case I have bought a few Season passes. But to me it's no different to grabbing the better editions of the 128-bit generation, 'new' games with minimal effort.

Example- I know a lot of people on Xbox who bought Ninja Gaiden: Black solely because the original release was broken in almost every way.

Pokémon Emerald, Street Fighter III: Third Strike, Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, Devil May Cry 3: Special Edition are all minor improvements/ tweaks to already existing games, sold at full price. Is that any different to the modern concept of DLC? Not really, only difference is it was physical format.

As for people who buy all the costumes and little things. It's as simple as people are willing to pay, I'm not one of them, but it is a thing. If you think too much over it, you'll only get depressed.

I don't buy DLC, I buy complete edition of the game for a fraction of what it is worth a few months after the release of the complete edition.

I also don't play online so ... I never paid more than 20 for a digital game and I have a hard time paying more for something that isn't in my hand ...

I also remember fondly games with unlockable and cheat code ( NES, SNES and early PSOne )

but it isn't based on any evidence lol. i can do the same thing. 78% of people are wow'd by unsubstantiated facts quoted on the internet. see, it's easy. i'm not saying there's no truth to some aspects of it but those are some rather hefty claims to make without any formal statistics to back them up

Or it could be due to the fact that developers don't know how to manage budgets. Seriously, some of the AAA games spend millions on voice acting talent alone.

As for the topic, people keep buying it, so the companies keep selling it. It's quite stupid, and I scoff at people who spend real money on aesthetic items. You know, you used to be able to unlock skins by playing the game.... But why bother playing for rewards when you can flatout buy them. Also, some of them are ridiculously stupid. Back when I was playing FFXIV, there was a fat moogle mount that cost 30 dollars. THIRTY DOLLARS. How can you justify spending HALF of the cost of the game on a damn mount!? More money than brains, I guess. I don't even care if you are rich and have money to burn. You're an idiot paying that much for a mount.

@JustPlainLucas: I don't know if I'd necessarily see fault with that. Quality voice talent can really raise the quality of a game overall and quality voice talent costs money.

I think about this a lot. Where did it start? When did it start to go down hill...?

If im thinking 360/ps3 generation: I am reminded of horse armor in oblivion, Gears 1 and Cod 4 map packs... somewhere in the 2008 era. I can't remember the first Season Pass. Had to have been COD something, right? COD4 made multiplayer a huge thing on consoles, then every game 'needed' multiplayer. Then development/promo costs went through the roof and sales couldn't keep up. I feel like I should research and do a thesis on this

You were doing so well till the 3rd paragraph. Don't blame the customer, that's crazy. The middle paragraph essentially sums up modern marketing. Give something out, normally cheap at first or optional, get customers hooked on it and then charge them till the cows come home. Modern economics.

Ultimately, it's down to you and others who buy DLC. I don't even buy games that are half arsed, let alone DLC which should have been part of the core gaming experience. If more people moved in that direction, developers and publishers would stop doing this. In fact, the gaming industry is one of the few industries I can even think of where developers get away with false advertising (NMS ahem) and they don't get sued the f up.

Oh well, if you people don't shape up, then just deal with it.

Its really bad in some games I remember playing elder scrolls online and in the beginning you have no horse and if you try to run you run out of energy real quick and have to walk and the only way to get a horse in the early parts of the game is to buy it or just walk all over the open world.

Now they are promoting dlcs even before the game is released, and a lot of these games are a boring grind to progress because they are trying to force you to spend money on microtransactions.