Is that what gamers want? I don't recall hearing much about CoD lacking quality in the graphics department. The graphics are typically held in high regard in online reviews. I DO however see a lot of folks complaining about playing a game that has remained the same for a number of iterations.
Warner Bros- "We are losing money because too many people are using Netflix and not buying our dvds" Oh no! what should they do? Call for the end of rentals and used movie sales? or... Warner Bros- "Hey Netflix, delay the rental of new discs and we will grant you more streaming rights and sell to you at bulk discounted rates" Netflix- "Ok" I don't agree with such a deal as it keeps media out of the hands of end users, but it's something Gamestop and pubs could look into. Pubs sell to GS at a larger discount in exchange for some amount of the buyback value of one of their games.
@ ClaudiusCaesar Pubs need to change what they are doing, not used retailers (business is booming) and not end gamers. If they want some of cash, they can try to negotiate mutually beneficial terms with used retailers, which they don't seem to be actively doing. They could change the pricing structure on new releases. Other posters and myself have written about that. Digital distribution pricing must change. Continuously releasing quality products would help. Collaboration within the industry, don't flood the market with new games. Instead of exploring these and/or other options, we get online passes and day one dlc, because they are "losing so much much money " to used game stores ,a.k.a. some of their biggest customers.
@Double_Wide That would be great but having two versions of the same game side by side with one costing less than the other over and over again for various games, would probably cause a jump in the sales of the cheaper version. Not what the pubs want at all. There is no guarantee that the game will sell more because of the two offerings.The cheaper version would have a much lower profit margin. They would want you to purchase the high priced package. It costs say 33% more, but the exclusive content isn't 33% of the game, or representative of the amount of money budgeted to the project. It would have a higher profit margin. People would ask themselves is paying an extra \$10-\$20 today worth experiencing and extra mission or two? Releasing DLC a year after a game is initially released is outside of the relevant life span of most games. 2 is way outside. With MW3 out, you aren't going to see new DLC for Black Ops. I suggested in some earlier post that pubs support games with rich DLC for longer time periods. Keeps ups playing the game, keeps devs working, puts money in everyone's pocket.
@Double_Wide I think I understand where you are coming from and we are kind of on the same page. But Pubs/Sony/MS don't want to give us "more" for your money. I think we all agree that they should. Look at ME3. Buy it new and get the online pass. Standard EA stuff. But no "From Ashes" DLC included, instead it's day one optional purchase, unless you pay extra for the Collector's Edition of course. You pay more, they give more. You pay less (currently) you have the option to buy more. I bought my copy of ME3 regular edition new from GameStop and they included the From Ashes DLC for free on my receipt. I paid the same and GameStop gave me more. The higher priced "special editions" of games tend to sell far less. Would including some exclusive DLC with it help boost sales? Possibly, if enough was included and it felt worth while and not tacked on I think. But Pubs/Sony/MS don't really want to give you anything for free if its worth while and they can sell it later. We all know that games are $59.99 US at release, so asking $79.99 gives the buyer pause. But spending $60 now and $20 later for some DLC may sit a little better. Honestly I wouldn't pay $80+ dollars for a game with exclusive DLC at all. They could offer the game at a lower price point for a non exclusive DLC package like you suggested, but I have a feeling that plan would only succeed in selling more copies of the lower priced version, which would have made all of the exclusive extras a wast of time and money.
@Double_Wide Then you would be alienating the consumers that bought used. Even if they buy a used copy of the game they may still go ahead and buy some DLC, do a few micro-transactions, or grab an online pass. Flat out not allowing them to do so would mos likely discourage the consumer from purchasing future products from you in my opinion. The online pass was a great idea (for pubs - i disagree with tit personally), but GameStop buys extra online passes to include with copies of used games, so no, it's not a particularly effective technique. And for the most part, the free DLC included with new copies of games is nothing to right home about. 2 weapon skins and an outfit aren't going to sway me towards buying a game new if I'm on the fence about it. I think what pubs should be focusing on is how to make you keep a game and less about trying to get someone to buy it new. Increases its longevity and replay value. I'd like to see fewer, higher-quality game releases. With quality DLC release (I would pay for more DLC if I felt it was worth the asking price - DLC for most games is not in my opinion). Pubs aren't going to stop charging extra for stuff. We will see a lot more of that. But if the "stuff" is high quality and doesn't feel like it should have been included in the game in the first place (i.e. damn near all day 1 DLC releases). I think many people would put up the funds to play it.
@Double_Wide Most DLC is not exclusive. It ends up online so that people can buy it and revenue can be generated. They give it to you with a new copy. If you really want to buy the game used, within a month the price wont drop very much. a used copy may be around \$50-\$55 US. Then after buying your online pass for \$10 and the DLC that was included with the new copy for \$5 you have exceeded the new retail price point. That is your incentive to buy new. Re-releasing a game with all DLC included for \$60 is a strategy to get more money out of an aging game while the tile still has some relevance. Mass Effect 2 with DLC on PS3 did not release for \$20. it released at regular retail price or \$60 a year after Mass Effect 2's original release on 360. Waiting for these complications is good for whomever wants to do that, but there is no guarantee that the game you are waiting for will re-release, or, if it does, how long it will take to do so.
Addizzle's comments