Bethesda Charging $2.50 For Horse Armor?

[gersson]

.......

 

[emory]

<snip>
costs $400 to play xbox360, costs 2k to play pc, ergo, pc more expensive then xbox360
<snip>

Sorry I dont feel like quoting you exactly, but if you have any issues with the accuracy of my summary, I will gladly fix it.

1. Upgrading from morrowind to oblivion cost me the cost of a new vid card basically. For an xbox user, that cost them a new xbox. Price change?
me - 300ish
xbox user - 300-400ish

2. If I instead spent that 300-400 on a xbox 360 to escape the ever escalating upgrade problem, I would be able to play on my 20 some inch tv at 320x240. Instead, I play on my monitor at 1650x1080. Cost of the display device?
me - 300some
xbox user - 700? 1000? 2000? up?

conclusion-
Please look at all sides of the issue before you make a random assumption that because an xbox costs 400 and a pc cost you 2k that you receive an equal play experiance on both. Furthermore, I beg that all of you in the future stop this rediculous one costs less then the other debate. In the end, the cost of playing oblivion was the cost of what you paid to play oblivion. Saying that playing oblivion on the xbox costs you 460 bucks because xbox = 400, oblivion = 60 is like saying driving to the store costs me price of car + price of gas + price of road + price of drivers ed + ... + everything else = bazillions

Secondly, and more pertanent to the debate at hand,
The issue here in my mind is one of compitition. This creates a incentive for bethesda to create mods that they can sell for a profit. What happens however when someone comes along and creates a significantly similar mod after the fact, or even more troubling, before the fact? Will bethesda be competing with thier mod community?

Go to the mod forums now and you might find a debate on why there is no 3ds max exporter for the model format that is used by oblivion. As it stands, horse armor CANT be made by the mod community because they cant export models into oblivion. This might be due to liscensing issues and a whole host of other problems, but perhaps it is because it allows them a monopoly on model content.

finally,

To get such large textures that this game demands, you'd need a physical version of whatever it is you're texturing. Considering the fact that I'm a former horse owner and never, at any time, own horse-armor, it may be difficult to acquire such a physical specimen.

Well, I sure am glad that bethesda had that suit of elven horse armor sitting around to use for the texture. And really, we should be paying them far more for this game: just think of the dangers they faced opening a portal to oblivion to grab the textures!!!

 

[qkool]

I don't see what everybody's getting riled up about. It's not like they're charging your card an extra $2.50 without your permission.

I think buying a soda in a movie theatre for $4 when you can get it in a store for 60 cents is a rip off... so I don't buy it. I don't make 5 pages worth of posts in a forum to complain against movie theatres.

Bethesda has every right to post up a horse armor mod for $2.50, just as they have every right to post up a horse armor mod for $100, just as you have every right to simply not click "purchase."

Take it easy folks, I felt what they gave me in the box was worth $49.99 so I paid $49.99 for it. I don't feel ripped off because they're selling horse armor for $2.50, because I'm not paying for it.

And please don't use the excuse "they should have given it to us for free from the start" because that's just dumb. They gave us everything they claimed they would give us, and just because one of their devs took a little home time to whip up some new textures and decided to post it up on the marketplace doesn't mean we can bash their whole company.

No company, I don't care how big, or small, is "required" to give away anything for free. That's the point of capitalism.

I like to add that there's an inherent problem of only voting with our wallet and keeping quiet as to why we won't buy the product. You see, if the armor doesn't sell, that would send a message to them, but the message is unlcear, shrouded as of what made it fail -- what's the reason behind its failure. Could it be the price? The texture? The delivery? Who knows. By complaining about the problem, and explaining why it is a problem, we are being constructive. We are telling them what we want and why their product fails in our eyes. Since these complaints are constructive ( most of them for the matter ), we automatically remove ourselves from the run-of-the-mill obsessive whiner who would whine about anything and everything w/o reason.

Now, 2.50 may not sound like much. I will agree to that, but what's stopping them from pricing the next "Better shield textures" for 4.50, then 7.50? We need to stop this before it starts, before companies start gauging us of our money.

Express your concern, then vote with your wallet, so that they know why you voted the way you did.

 

[JethroXP]

Sorry I dont feel like quoting you exactly, but if you have any issues with the accuracy of my summary, I will gladly fix it.

No worries, I'd say you made a valid summary of my point.

1. Upgrading from morrowind to oblivion cost me the cost of a new vid card basically. For an xbox user, that cost them a new xbox. Price change?
me - 300ish
xbox user - 300-400ish

So what you are saying is that it a wash? Roughly the same expense.

2. If I instead spent that 300-400 on a xbox 360 to escape the ever escalating upgrade problem, I would be able to play on my 20 some inch tv at 320x240. Instead, I play on my monitor at 1650x1080. Cost of the display device?
me - 300some
xbox user - 700? 1000? 2000? up?

320x240? Where did you get that number? The Xbox360 doesn't even go that low. Minimum is 640x480 for a standard def TV, but since you are quoting TV prices as high as $2000 you must be including HD sets, on which the Xbox360 can display at 1280x720 and 1920x1080. My own is running at 1920x1080 and my 51'' HDTV was $1499 two years ago. I'm glad we had this discussion, because you were clearly mis-informed.

conclusion-
Please look at all sides of the issue before you make a random assumption that because an xbox costs 400 and a pc cost you 2k that you receive an equal play experiance on both.

I'd suggest you do the same, as well as check your facts. I maintain that my post was neither random, nor based on assumption.

 

[emory]

So what you are saying is that it a wash? Roughly the same expense.

Yup, basically

320x240? Where did you get that number? The Xbox360 doesn't even go that low. Minimum is 640x460 for a standard def TV, but since you are quoting TV prices as high as $2000 you must be including HD sets, on which the Xbox360 can display at 1280x720 and 1920x1080. My own is running at 1920x1080 and my 51'' HDTV was $1499 two years ago. I'm glad we had this discussion, because you were clearly mis-informed.

Sorry, I should have made my self more clear.
320x240 is the non-interlaced resolution - I am unclear on the exact term for standard def tv in this wacky word of HD.

My main point is that your HDTV cost you 1500, and your Xbox cost you 400, therefore, your total equipment cost is 1900. Unless you play oblivion on your pc using your tv, the cost of monitors that have high res is much lower.

Therefore, stating that the xbox costs so much less is a fallacy.

I'd suggest you do the same, as well as check your facts. I maintain that my post was neither random, nor based on assumption.

I hope that I cleared up some of my facts. The random assumption part was not based upon the factual portions of your post. Rather, I address the fact that just buying the xbox does not increase the quality of my play to 2k computer levels. But, as you said, that does not mean a computer is a superior device for playing games - the xbox has far less config tweaking and general hassle.

 

[JethroXP]

Sorry, I should have made my self more clear.
320x240 is the non-interlaced resolution - I am unclear on the exact term for standard def tv in this wacky word of HD.

Actually no, it's not. The Xbox360 can display the following:

480i
480p
720p
1080i

Some might argue that 480i is really 640x240, but the fact is your eye sees 640x480, it's just that the screen is vertically refreshed 240 lines at a time, but there are 480 lines. Same with 1080i, some people claim it's really just 1920x540, but there are 1080 vertical lines, just half of them being refreshed at a time.

My main point is that your HDTV cost you 1500, and your Xbox cost you 400, therefore, your total equipment cost is 1900. Unless you play oblivion on your pc using your tv, the cost of monitors that have high res is much lower.

Therefore, stating that the xbox costs so much less is a fallacy.

I don't agree. I didn't purchase my HDTV solely to play Xbox360. As I mentioned, I bought it two years ago, so the price never factored in to my Xbox360. I did however purchase my computer monitor solely for use with my PC, regardless of whether it was to play games or not. However I wasn't adding the cost of the monitor in to the cost of the PC, so this whole topic is irrelevant. I was comparing a $2000 gaming PC to a $400 console. I never mention Monitors or TVs.

I hope that I cleared up some of my facts. The random assumption part was not based upon the factual portions of your post. Rather, I address the fact that just buying the xbox does not increase the quality of my play to 2k computer levels. But, as you said, that does not mean a computer is a superior device for playing games - the xbox has far less config tweaking and general hassle.

I still think you don't have a good grasp of TV screen resolutions, and I think that tossing monitors and TVs into the mix muddies the water, because where do you stop? You need an operating system for you PC, but you don't for a console. You need a desk and chair for PC, but a couch and coffee table for console. There are simply far too many externalities to make an apples-to-apples comparison, which is why I compared only the core components, the console and the PC.

And I'm not suggesting that quality of gaming on a console is better than a PC. I was making the point that money and time spent on a console is better utilized than on a gaming PC, even with games costing 20% more, because the investment in the console is far less than a comparable gaming PC, and because the console is basically a gaming appliance, so there are far fewer time consuming hassles to get in-between you and your gaming as compared to a PC.

 

[emory]

Actually no, it's not. The Xbox360 can display the following:

480i
480p
720p
1080i

Some might argue that 480i is really 640x240, but the fact is your eye sees 640x480, it's just that the screen is vertically refreshed 240 lines at a time, but there are 480 lines. Same with 1080i, some people claim it's really just 1920x540, but there are 1080 vertical lines, just half of them being refreshed at a time.

Thanks, i should have said 640x240 or 480 - either way, thats what I would be playing with were I to buy an xbox360

I don't agree. I didn't purchase my HDTV solely to play Xbox360. As I mentioned, I bought it two years ago, so the price never factored in to my Xbox360. I did however purchase my computer monitor solely for use with my PC, regardless of whether it was to play games or not. However I wasn't adding the cost of the monitor in to the cost of the PC, so this whole topic is irrelevant. I was comparing a $2000 gaming PC to a $400 console. I never mention Monitors or TVs.

And I didnt buy my computer to play oblivion.

I still think you don't have a good grasp of TV screen resolutions, and I think that tossing monitors and TVs into the mix muddies the water, because where do you stop? You need an operating system for you PC, but you don't for a console. You need a desk and chair for PC, but a couch and coffee table for console. There are simply far too many externalities to make an apples-to-apples comparison, which is why I compared only the core components, the console and the PC.

This is the random assumptions I spoke of earlier - How do you prorate the cost of your tv over oblivion vs non oblivion time? How do I justify the cost of my computer when I also use it for work/school/etc? And how is a display a non essential component? You can play a xbox sitting on the floor, same with a PC but you have to see it. And playing it on my current tv would give me results similar to sliding the resolution to minimum on my PC - not optimal for the cost of 400!
This debate is silly for the very reasons you are pointing out - and this apples to apples comparison is what you did before.

And I'm not suggesting that quality of gaming on a console is better than a PC. I was making the point that money and time spent on a console is better utilized than on a gaming PC, even with games costing 20% more, because the investment in the console is far less than a comparable gaming PC, and because the console is basically a gaming appliance, so there are far fewer time consuming hassles to get in-between you and your gaming as compared to a PC.

And my point is that this is only true if you already own the equipment required to make the XBox perform at the same level as the PC ie, high resolution display. All the horsepower in the world doesnt make the xbox360 look good on a bad TV.

 

[Sabrewulf165]

I'd consider paying $2.50 or even maybe a little more for a lifetime subscription to post-release content if I thought it would improve the quality and frequency of release of such content, but no way in hell would I pay any amount of money for something as trivial as two sets of horse armor or even a full quest.

I'm sure most of you haven't forgotten that Bethesda gave this stuff away for free with Morrowind. Sorry, but once you open the pandora's box of free official add-ons, you can't close it again. I'll pay $30 for a full expansion with dozens of new items, quests, locations, and NPCs. I will not pay $30 for a dozen insignificant plugins.

In the case of this stupid horse armor, I wouldn't even be bothered to pirate it. Not worth the time, effort, or bandwidth.

 

[JethroXP]

And I didnt buy my computer to play oblivion.

I agree. I didn't build my gaming PC for any one particular game, nor do I have an Xbox360 for any one particular game. This "sidebar" discussion we are having in an Oblivion thread shouldn't be misconstrued to be a comparison of Oblivion on the PC vs. a Console. All of my comparisons were indended to be general, applying to "Gaming" vs. a specific game.

This is the random assumptions I spoke of earlier - How do you prorate the cost of your tv over oblivion vs non oblivion time? How do I justify the cost of my computer when I also use it for work/school/etc? And how is a display a non essential component? You can play a xbox sitting on the floor, same with a PC but you have to see it. And playing it on my current tv would give me results similar to sliding the resolution to minimum on my PC - not optimal for the cost of 400!
This debate is silly for the very reasons you are pointing out - and this apples to apples comparison is what you did before.

See that's just it, I'm trying to keep this narrowly focused to gaming. That's why I'm not talking about laptops, or PCs in general, I'm talking about gaming PCs. Yes, I use my gaming PC for more than just gaming. But I spent the money on the specific components I used when building it with only gaming in mind, not how much better using Excel and Powerpoint would be. Therefore I spent $2000 on a gaming machine, the fact that it can do other things is gravy. This whole discussion we are having is about gaming, not TVs, or Monitors, or what else you can do with your PC. Keeping it narrowly focus does allow an apples to apples comparison.

And my point is that this is only true if you already own the equipment required to make the XBox perform at the same level as the PC ie, high resolution display. All the horsepower in the world doesnt make the xbox360 look good on a bad TV.

Agreed. And I know that purchases of Xbox360's have also driven purchases of HDTVs, obviously driving the total cost up. But those HDTVs aren't required (though admittedly I wouldn't want to play without one) and they are useful for more than just gaming, so again I don't think it's fair to add it in, because for some people it's true they will spent the money, but others won't, or like me long ago already did.

And again, I'm not bashing PC gaming. I'm simply extoling the virtues of an appliance vs. more general purpose hardware. I feel that with the Xbox360, I can finally break my cycle of endless, and expensive, annual updates to my PC to keep it on the cutting edge of PC gaming. The amount of horsepower I have in my PC is mostly wasted on just about everything I do with it except gaming. So if a $400 console helps me break the cycle of $500-$1000 worth of annual PC updates, and the downside is that I have to pay $10 more per game, I still think I'm coming out ahead.

 

[HardOCP News]

Well, the numbers will come out soon enough and end this discussion one way or the other. Having said that, something tells me that this will end up being a big success for Bethesda and we will see more of it in the future...let's all just hope we see MORE content for the $$.

Had this been a completely new armor set or character pack that changed the look of your current armor into something cool (matching armor for the horse) with a quest attached to it, this would've been much easier for everyone to swallow. No in game advantage other than you had 20 different armor styles to chose from to change your existing armor into and....like I said, maybe a quest to go along with it to make it fun.

SO...to the crew at Bethesda...more content for the coin, that is all we ask.


To all of us here in the forums...this might be a perfect example of people who don't like something complain the most (heh...me ) and make big waves (forum waves) people that have no problem with it aren't saying a word and snapping up the additional content at 200 points. And...I think the numbers are going to prove that.

Oh well, all of us who weren't thrilled with this need to let it die and refocus our energy on hammering the "MORE CONTENT FOR YOUR COIN" mantra to game devs.


or I'm whacked out of my melon...

 

[emory]

I agree. I didn't build my gaming PC for any one particular game, nor do I have an Xbox360 for any one particular game. This "sidebar" discussion we are having in an Oblivion thread shouldn't be misconstrued to be a comparison of Oblivion on the PC vs. a Console. All of my comparisons were indended to be general, applying to "Gaming" vs. a specific game.

Yup, I just use oblivion as an example because I have no experiance with other bigname titles such as COD2.

See that's just it, I'm trying to keep this narrowly focused to gaming. That's why I'm not talking about laptops, or PCs in general, I'm talking about gaming PCs. Yes, I use my gaming PC for more than just gaming. But I spent the money on the specific components I used when building it with only gaming in mind, not how much better using Excel and Powerpoint would be. Therefore I spent $2000 on a gaming machine, the fact that it can do other things is gravy. This whole discussion we are having is about gaming, not TVs, or Monitors, or what else you can do with your PC. Keeping it narrowly focus does allow an apples to apples comparison.

But I dont think this is a true apples to apples comparison with out including display. The bare essentials needed to play a game with an xbox is xbox + display. Same with computer, you must have a monitor to play a game. The problem is that the displays are for two different applications and therefore have different specifications (size of TV built for watching from greater then a few feet away - increases cost, etc). We cant make a valid apples to apples comparison without making a few assumptions - the assumptions we make vary.

Agreed. And I know that purchases of Xbox360's have also driven purchases of HDTVs, obviously driving the total cost up. But those HDTVs aren't required (though admittedly I wouldn't want to play without one) and they are useful for more than just gaming, so again I don't think it's fair to add it in, because for some people it's true they will spent the money, but others won't, or like me long ago already did.

What I really am trying to say is that to have an equal experiance playing a game on an xbox360 or PC, I must have an HDTV for the increase in visual fidelity. For me, that means that the cost of oblivion, or any game, on the xbox360 includes an initial purchase that is near 2000 dollars, just like it would be on a PC if you started from scratch.

And ya, the upgrade cycle for computers is getting more and more insane. Just wait for the physics cards

 

[Kendrak]

I'm on a PC, but if they had a wepons pack that placed some nice wepons in the game i'd pay a few extra bucks for it. Horse armor..... meh, dont think so.

 

[JSC450]

Thank you for proving my point, which is that the games are $40-$70, not $60-$70. Telling me how much they are on other platforms isn't really relevant to this discussion.

Dude, those games suckass and no one wants them and thats why they're $40. and yes telling you how much they are on pc compared to 360 IS relevant, because console gamers get raped on the price.

What fraction of a game's cost is that, compared to development? Probably not much, especially now.

Alot actually, ever check the prices between NEOGEO carts and discs?

Yes, I am telling you that Kabuki Warriors was worth $54 to the people who bought it. Rational people make rational decisions, and it's not a rational decision to spend $54 on something that's worth $10 to you. Further, nearly everyone not in a mental institution makes rational choices. Was their rational decision perhaps based on flawed information? I'd hope so.

Is it worth $54 to me? Surely not, since I know it's a terrible game. But assigning universal values to items with varying appeal to people is nonsensical. One man's trash is another's treasure, remember? Unsurprisingly, you'll find more-universally-appealing games sell better at the same price point, because more people will do the math in their heads, and then actually buy the game. Ergo, developers still have strong incentive to make their games as good as possible, ESPECIALLY at higher price points, since bad games will get punished more.

-Erwos

laff, WRONG. Kabuki Warriors wasnt worth jack to ANYONE, i DEFY you to show me someone who actually enjoyed that POS. They knowingly ripped off the people who bought that game. They knew it was garbage, and they didnt even bother finishing the game before they shipped it. They were cashing in on the launch of a new console all while driving their company into the ground. I bought a UFC title from Crave before because I'm a HUGE MMA fan, and the UFC game flat out sucked. they'll never get another penny from me, but the fact is, those 2 games were not worth $54 retail no matter what anyone says.

Whats the incentive for devs to make good games when they can pull a "Crave Entertainment" and dick you over and there isnt shit you can do about it? I guess you wouldn't mind paying for "TES5: all your money are belong to us", popping it in only to find that there is nothing there but the start menu... yea... its a radical new publishing technique, those menus cost big bucks to make, and thats all $60 gets you. then they'll release a few quests in exchange for some "micro transactions" once they've sold enough start menus to afford the cost of textures. but OH, you want NPCs or some kind of interaction? not until enough textures are sold! But 1st things 1st, theyre going to rape you with some $2.50 horse armor to begin the break in process.

 

[JethroXP]

Well, the numbers will come out soon enough and end this discussion one way or the other. Having said that, something tells me that this will end up being a big success for Bethesda and we will see more of it in the future...let's all just hope we see MORE content for the $$.

Had this been a completely new armor set or character pack that changed the look of your current armor into something cool (matching armor for the horse) with a quest attached to it, this would've been much easier for everyone to swallow. No in game advantage other than you had 20 different armor styles to chose from to change your existing armor into and....like I said, maybe a quest to go along with it to make it fun.

SO...to the crew at Bethesda...more content for the coin, that is all we ask.


To all of us here in the forums...this might be a perfect example of people who don't like something complain the most (heh...me ) and make big waves (forum waves) people that have no problem with it aren't saying a word and snapping up the additional content at 200 points. And...I think the numbers are going to prove that.

Oh well, all of us who weren't thrilled with this need to let it die and refocus our energy on hammering the "MORE CONTENT FOR YOUR COIN" mantra to game devs.


or I'm whacked out of my melon...

I think a lot of the angst around this particular fee-based download may actually be due to the naming of it. They called it armor, when it's really just a skin. There are similar downloads on XBL for Kameo, also costing 200 Points (which according to the developers is how they chose to price this), that drew no such complaints because they were listed as new "outfits" for Kameo to wear. Perhaps the lesson here is that it's all in how you present it.

 

[Rich Tate]

I think a lot of the angst around this particular fee-based download may actually be due to the naming of it. They called it armor, when it's really just a skin. There are similar downloads on XBL for Kameo, also costing 200 Points (which according to the developers is how they chose to price this), that drew no such complaints because they were listed as new "outfits" for Kameo to wear. Perhaps the lesson here is that it's all in how you present it.

A very excellent point. How you package the goods often determines how it sells.

I also agree that it's certainly a couple bucks or points towards a skin basically, maybe if it was called that or actually helped horsey smite the demons when he got miffed we wouldn't even be arguing this one.

I see both sides of the coin on this one, but really don't see a problem here. If they continue to make content in small buyable chunks, it's also like an on demand expansion pack. Pick what you want, leave out what you hate. I think we can all agree that would be a pretty cool formula.

You never know, this could merely be a test of the waters for further ventures in this area.

Stay tuned...

 

[K600]

The problem is that this is all content that should've been in the game to begin with. We're not talking about a mod that adds significant content to the game; we're talking about something that, by all indications, was intentionally held back so that it would be offered at a fee later.

That's the biggest complaint and I think it's easily the most valid. What's to stop them from shipping us shells in the future and having us buy everything else seperate?

 

[JethroXP]

What's to stop them from shipping us shells in the future and having us buy everything else seperate?

Probably the knowledge that no one would buy it.

 

[Rich Tate]

The problem is that this is all content that should've been in the game to begin with.

What rule is there that says it needed to be included in the game? How do you know that this isn't actually some new content made simply to test this market?

BF does it with their mini expansions, for all we know they could be testing a new model.

I understand your point totally, but I think to be fair we should always look at both sides of the coin.

There is surely information there that we, as the consumer, aren't privy to.

I agree it is a completely useless game item that has no merit other than horsey looking cool. I see the point that it is more a bad marketing term persay, I don't get the "Well it should've been in the game." thing. The game has plenty of content as is. If they want to release mini mods or mini expansions I say more power too them. We can tell them if we don't like it with our points/dollars.

I think the 50.00 I paid for a 200+ hour game is mighty fair. Compare that to the 50.00 we spend for a 12 hour game. Lotta value there in my eyes.

But then again, I'm just as crazy as Steve.

 

[K600]

Probably the knowledge that no one would buy it.

There's obviously enough people buying it to make them think they can get away with charging $2.50 for a damned skin.

What rule is there that says it needed to be included in the game?

What rule is there that says anything needed to be included in the game? Saying that there is "plenty of content in the game" is basically justifying the fact that they're not giving you everything that was originally thought to be in the package (This skin, for example, was shown quite some time ago in previews).

 

[JethroXP]

There's obviously enough people buying it to make them think they can get away with charging $2.50 for a damned skin.

Yes, and there is a world of difference between a single optional skin, and the scenario you painted with an emtpy shell that must be fully populated with paid items. It's a huge stretch to go from providing optional content for a fee to then assume that essential game elements will be fee based (outside of the originaly game purchase).

What rule is there that says anything needed to be included in the game? Saying that there is "plenty of content in the game" is basically justifying the fact that they're not giving you everything that was originally thought to be in the package (This skin, for example, was shown quite some time ago in previews).

So does that mean that anytime a screenshot of a pre-release game contains some item that isn't in the final game we can cry foul and claim that we were cheated? Please, we are talking about a skin, a piece of art that in no way, shape, or form has any material impact on the game itself.

I'm curious, given the uproar over this, how people would respond to what is clearly very popular in Asia. Free games that make their money from in-game micropayments. In these cases the paid content can and does have an impact on the game, including multiplayer games. However there is no up front cost to the consumer for the game itself. Would you feel cheated in that case too?

 

[Charles]

The problem is that this is all content that should've been in the game to begin with. We're not talking about a mod that adds significant content to the game; we're talking about something that, by all indications, was intentionally held back so that it would be offered at a fee later.

That's the biggest complaint and I think it's easily the most valid. What's to stop them from shipping us shells in the future and having us buy everything else seperate?

... what about pokemon red/blue/turquoise/magenta/cyan/etc. They literally released multiple color versions of the pokemon game AT THE SAME TIME. In fact, you had to buy both and trade yourself/with other people in order to get all the pokemon and unlock certain things.

There's nothing wrong with that. If somebody makes enough game content worth two games, they have all the right to sell it as two games.

They made all three lord of the rings movies at the same time, and I don't hear anybody complaining about how they "held back the last two."

Games cost so much to make now, I'm surprised they aren't selling each disc for $100+

 

[Charles]

Well, I sure am glad that bethesda had that suit of elven horse armor sitting around to use for the texture. And really, we should be paying them far more for this game: just think of the dangers they faced opening a portal to oblivion to grab the textures!!!

Read the rest of my post

Also, a lot of cg materials are drawn from real-world models sculpted by artists, so yes they often do have to have a physical version, not necessarily direct from Oblivion

 

[Charles]

Dang it... where's my trout I use for smacking? You're using this stupid argument that competition will drive game quality up. That's never, ever been true in the gaming industry. Good Lord. When everyone and their neighbor's dog was making games in 1984, they were churning out so much crap it caused the biggest crash in the history of electronic video games. Just because you have elventy billion people making games, doesn't mean that quality is going to automatically happens. I mean, Quaker Friggin' Oats was making Atari games and if that isn't everyone I don't know what is.

It isn't true for the movie industry (lots of people making movies and they all suck), lots of people making music (and they all suck) and there's 300 channels of television (and almost all that sucks).

Then this point about $2.50 driving people to make more video games. That only works if people are willing to fork over the money, and so far this move has caused more bitching and complaints that I don't see why anyone else would follow this move. Gamers aren't stupid. We've been trained to expect fairly decent expansion packs that we are willing to pay for. It's a model that works and is lucrative for the industry. Why mess with something that works in the name of greed?

Lastly, piracy is a non sequitor. As a developer, I never worried about it and I frankly don't know of a lot of other developers that really care all that much. There's no relation between piracy and Bethesda's selling horse armor.

Actually that's always been true in the gaming industry. This is why some games end up in the bargain bin for $5 a month after their release, and other games (i.e. Guild Wars) are still $49.99 over a year after their initial release. Sure bad games still come out, but we don't buy their games and they go under. If we had nothing BUT bad games, we'd have no choice but to buy them since there's nothing better. If you think that's illogical, I'm sure all of us own at least one crappy game that we bought during a famine season of bad games.

And yes, it is also true for the movie industry and the music industry, and every other industry. If you claim it doesn't work, then you're claiming capitalism itself doesn't work, and trust me I'd rather get products sold in a capitalist country than a communist country (first hand experience in both cases). There's a reason why China has put out less than a dozen big-screen worthy movies (and I am a fan of Chinese movies) while America has made thousands of internationally acclaimed films.

As for piracy not being an issue to developers. Of course it's not an issue to developers. We don't actually "see" the results of piracy except through lower pay, fewer jobs, etc. It's more important to the people above us and I guarantee you there's some trickle down effect. It's difficult to stick a number on the effect, but to say it has NO effect when companies like Starforce exist solely to combat it, is ridiculous.

 

[JSC450]

I think a lot of the angst around this particular fee-based download may actually be due to the naming of it. They called it armor, when it's really just a skin. There are similar downloads on XBL for Kameo, also costing 200 Points (which according to the developers is how they chose to price this), that drew no such complaints because they were listed as new "outfits" for Kameo to wear. Perhaps the lesson here is that it's all in how you present it.

Does anyone know how well the kameo thing sold? I would think that, when you use the outfit, its always there on screen, making it seem like its worth 200 points, but an armor skin for a horse that you rarely see? And what if the horse dies? as far as i know, once a horse dies you have to buy a new one. has anyone tested it yet?

 

[M4rk]

Well, ignoring all the posts before me, I'll just state my humle opinion...

You don't have to download this. If you don't download it, you don't have to pay for it. Problem solved.

So why are people so angry? Bethesda isn't forcing anyone to buy anying. It's optional, not mandatory. People are freaking out like they're being held at gunpoint...

 

[samduhman]

Emory, your talking to a wall. jethroxp is an obvious XBox 360 FAN BOY promoting his recent purchase. Forget about reasoning with him, everything you say will be wrong. He forgets the majority of us here already have mid to high end pcs that will already run Oblivion. For some a simple upgrade is all it will take to run it. NOT $2000. No he'd rather tell everyone to go out and buy the XBOX 360, Oblivion and an HDTV (because he doesn't realize most people don't have one yet!) and thats the better deal. I have an HDTV but Im not going to go buy an XBOX 360 so I can play Oblivion when the game will be better on the PC in the long run. There's already a textures mod out that improves the quality of the pc graphics. Plus the UI mod.

Thanks, i should have said 640x240 or 480 - either way, thats what I would be playing with were I to buy an xbox360


And I didnt buy my computer to play oblivion.


This is the random assumptions I spoke of earlier - How do you prorate the cost of your tv over oblivion vs non oblivion time? How do I justify the cost of my computer when I also use it for work/school/etc? And how is a display a non essential component? You can play a xbox sitting on the floor, same with a PC but you have to see it. And playing it on my current tv would give me results similar to sliding the resolution to minimum on my PC - not optimal for the cost of 400!
This debate is silly for the very reasons you are pointing out - and this apples to apples comparison is what you did before.


And my point is that this is only true if you already own the equipment required to make the XBox perform at the same level as the PC ie, high resolution display. All the horsepower in the world doesnt make the xbox360 look good on a bad TV.

 

[samduhman]

Well, ignoring all the posts before me, I'll just state my humle opinion...

You don't have to download this. If you don't download it, you don't have to pay for it. Problem solved.

So why are people so angry? Bethesda isn't forcing anyone to buy anying. It's optional, not mandatory. People are freaking out like they're being held at gunpoint...

Agreed. Im a little peeved but I do whats needed and vote with my wallet. Its those who will buy it that ruin it for everyone else by giving in to the man. First Valve and now Bethesda. You people with disposable incomes need to get a reality check and stop hosing it up for everyone. Stuff like this used to be free and to keep it that way you need not to be tempted and buy it when they try scemes like this.

 

[erwos]

Dude, those games suckass and no one wants them and thats why they're $40. and yes telling you how much they are on pc compared to 360 IS relevant, because console gamers get raped on the price.

It's not relevant to the conversation, because an Xbox 360 and a PC aren't direct substitutes. There are different costs associated with them, and different licensing structures.

Alot actually, ever check the prices between NEOGEO carts and discs?

This analogy is fundamentally flawed, because the Neo Geo was not a mass-market, consumer-oriented home system (in the sense that high-end home theater gear isn't, either). A counter-point: the prices of N64 games were not necessarily higher than Playstation games.

laff, WRONG. Kabuki Warriors wasnt worth jack to ANYONE, i DEFY you to show me someone who actually enjoyed that POS. They knowingly ripped off the people who bought that game. They knew it was garbage, and they didnt even bother finishing the game before they shipped it. They were cashing in on the launch of a new console all while driving their company into the ground. I bought a UFC title from Crave before because I'm a HUGE MMA fan, and the UFC game flat out sucked. they'll never get another penny from me, but the fact is, those 2 games were not worth $54 retail no matter what anyone says.

The reviewer at GamePro gave Kabuki Warriors 3.5 out of 5 stars. That's not a terrible rating. I have logically disproved your point (theorem: "no one liked Kabuki Warriors" (universal) negation: "here's someone who did" (instantiation)). If you don't understand that, take some discrete math.

And you only proved my point - you thought because the game was associated UFC (a good thing, in your eyes), the game itself would be good. You were working with flawed information, but the decision you made was rational - this is simple microeconomics. Is that any more clear?

Whats the incentive for devs to make good games when they can pull a "Crave Entertainment" and dick you over and there isnt shit you can do about it? I guess you wouldn't mind paying for "TES5: all your money are belong to us", popping it in only to find that there is nothing there but the start menu... yea... its a radical new publishing technique, those menus cost big bucks to make, and thats all $60 gets you. then they'll release a few quests in exchange for some "micro transactions" once they've sold enough start menus to afford the cost of textures. but OH, you want NPCs or some kind of interaction? not until enough textures are sold! But 1st things 1st, theyre going to rape you with some $2.50 horse armor to begin the break in process.

Your argument has a big hole in it: don't you think game reviewers might, you know, note that the game sucks without all these paid add-ons? I remember how they absolutely tore apart SiN for being buggy out of the box, and it killed the game's sales, even though after some patching it was quite good.

If the content on the game's DVD isn't worth $60 to you, DON'T BUY IT. If you aren't sure, DO SOME RESEARCH. No one is forcing you to pre-order the game, or pick it up on release day.

If a developer starts screwing consumers, another developer will step in to fill the void. That's a market economy, and there's certainly not a monopoly or oligopoly in the console publishing business.

-Erwos

 

[steviep]

I'm going to have to agree with K600 on this one
The point isn't the cost, the point isn't even the fact that it's paid content.

I don't feel like typing the rant again, so read this
http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1029254077

 

[JethroXP]

Emory, your talking to a wall. jethroxp is an obvious XBox 360 FAN BOY promoting his recent purchase. Forget about reasoning with him, everything you say will be wrong. He forgets the majority of us here already have mid to high end pcs that will already run Oblivion. For some a simple upgrade is all it will take to run it. NOT $2000. No he'd rather tell everyone to go out and buy the XBOX 360, Oblivion and an HDTV (because he doesn't realize most people don't have one yet!) and thats the better deal. I have an HDTV but Im not going to go buy an XBOX 360 so I can play Oblivion when the game will be better on the PC in the long run. There's already a textures mod out that improves the quality of the pc graphics. Plus the UI mod.

Lol, ok, I guess I'm the "wall" now . I know who I'm talking to here. I know that [H] readers are PC gamers, and generally folks on the bleeding edge with very high-end rigs. Perhaps you missed the parts of my posts where I mention "I'm not bashing PC gaming" or "I don't own, nor have ever played Oblivion".

Clearly you weren't reading my posts because in them I was talking about my experience with COD2, which is the only game that I own on *both* Xbox360 and PC. That experience opened my eyes to the convenience of consoles vs. PCs for gaming, because it's an appliance vs. general purpose hardware. That doesn't mean PC gaming is bad and that everyone should run out an purchase a console. It just means that for me, personally, not you or anyone else, I've come to the conclusion that I no longer have to feed my annual PC upgrade budget with $500-$1000 per year just to keep my gaming PC on the range of "high-end". As I mentioned, the horsepower I have in my PC is there for gaming, and is mostly wasted on everything else I do except gaming. So if I no longer feel compelled to spend up to $1000 a year on updated gaming hardware for my PC, then paying an extra $10 per title for console games is no problem because I'm still coming out ahead.

Seriously, if you are going to start name calling and bashing me for my posts, at least try reading them.

 

[BladeMrk]

I really don't see what all the fuss is about this horse armour, if you don't want it - don't buy it. as simple as. It's not like it actually does anything either, it's purely cosmetic...
I do think $2 (~£1) is too much for it though (on either PC or 360).


I've only got a 6600GTOC card in my system so Oblivion on my PC would be limited to a res of 800x600 to get a decent framerate (see bit-tech.net's coverage of Oblivion running on several vid cards), and with DX10 cards around the corner anyway it's just not worth upgrading it for a while, so playing Oblivion on the 360 is the only option for me If I want decent graphics/framerates at this moment in time. And not everyone with a 360 has or needs a HDTV to enjoy games on it (although it would be nice )

 

[TheToE!]

To everyone who said they are "testing the waters"..thats 100% correct. They are going to see what they can get away with. You cant say that you didnt see this coming though. My problem is that PC gaming could start to lose some of its appeal because of stuff like this, considering that getting free updates was a major perk of PC gaming. It seems to me that extra free content ( community made or otherwise ) would keep sales of a game up, even after the initial hype had died down. I still pay Neverwinter Nights because of this, and got several buddies to go out and buy the diamond pack years after NWN came out. I dont like the idea of all this "nickel and dime" business right off the bat. I will always pay for quality content, but I'll be damned if I take part in this marketing stunt.

 

[biggles]

Well, ignoring all the posts before me, I'll just state my humle opinion...

You don't have to download this. If you don't download it, you don't have to pay for it. Problem solved.

So why are people so angry? Bethesda isn't forcing anyone to buy anying. It's optional, not mandatory. People are freaking out like they're being held at gunpoint...

If a product is offered for sale and it is simply too expensive, that is what we all do: we do not buy the product, no comments necessary. If the product is outrageousely expensive in relation to its value, people are offended. The horsey armor idea is the latter, hence the emotional reaction.

 

[JSC450]

It's not relevant to the conversation, because an Xbox 360 and a PC aren't direct substitutes. There are different costs associated with them, and different licensing structures.

If a game is made on the xbox/X360, and ported to the pc, why does the xbox/X360 version cost more after all the expenses and time it takes to port it to PC?

This analogy is fundamentally flawed, because the Neo Geo was not a mass-market, consumer-oriented home system (in the sense that high-end home theater gear isn't, either). A counter-point: the prices of N64 games were not necessarily higher than Playstation games.

The fact is Neo-Geo was on the market, and carts were ridiculously expensive compared to their disc counterparts. If they were made today though, the gap wouldnt be as big, but the discs would still be cheaper.

The reviewer at GamePro gave Kabuki Warriors 3.5 out of 5 stars. That's not a terrible rating. I have logically disproved your point (theorem: "no one liked Kabuki Warriors" (universal) negation: "here's someone who did" (instantiation)). If you don't understand that, take some discrete math.

Disprove this, anyone who paid for Kabuki Warriors, did not like it. Also, you know damn well no one goes by magazine/website "star/point" reviews. that dude could have been so over joyed that he got himself an xbox, it spilled into his scoring of the game.

And you only proved my point - you thought because the game was associated UFC (a good thing, in your eyes), the game itself would be good. You were working with flawed information, but the decision you made was rational - this is simple microeconomics. Is that any more clear?

No, you misinterpreted. UFC was a niche title. Theres a better chance that I will like the game more then joe blow since im an avid MMA fan. Well not only did joe blow dislike the game, they couldn't even release it with a level of quality a blinded diehard fan would like. If you cant seal that deal, you know your game is garbage.

Your argument has a big hole in it: don't you think game reviewers might, you know, note that the game sucks without all these paid add-ons? I remember how they absolutely tore apart SiN for being buggy out of the box, and it killed the game's sales, even though after some patching it was quite good.

Depends on how many moneyhats said reviewer is recieving. you give me enough money and ill say the superman games are the best damn games on earth, period.

If the content on the game's DVD isn't worth $60 to you, DON'T BUY IT. If you aren't sure, DO SOME RESEARCH. No one is forcing you to pre-order the game, or pick it up on release day.

I'll check out a game if it looks like it could be good. Ever play gunvalkyrie? picked it up on a whim, very hard, very rewarding, just like ninja gaiden, worth its initial cost, and worth a spot in gamers libraries. TES4 on the other hand, 3 more quest lines and ill unload it at gamestop or ebay.

If a developer starts screwing consumers, another developer will step in to fill the void. That's a market economy, and there's certainly not a monopoly or oligopoly in the console publishing business.

I think most people believe the marketplace is a monopoly right now... Gamers were supposed to be able to make things like character costumes and car paint jobs and sell them on the marketplace... but where is that? where are the tools to make that happen? all i've seen are established game companies selling their wares there. Most people have the notion that if they can make something cool and people like it, they can sell it for a few bucks on live. how much you want to bet all they'll get is additional marketplace points when game companys get actual cash for selling similiar things? if that were to happen, what big word would be used to describe that?

 

[JSC450]

To everyone who said they are "testing the waters"..thats 100% correct.

Right, we hope everyone knows that, and they expect some kind of feedback... those saying "shut up and dont buy it if you dont like it and quit your whining" don't seem to get the point. the devs want us to voice our opinions (which isn't whining, btw) to help them out, which is great. the problem is, you get those "shut up and don't buy it if you don't like it" people who are on the fence and wont pick a side.... That dosen't help anyone and will probably prolong the process of fair pricing on the marketplace.

 

[JethroXP]

Right, we hope everyone knows that, and they expect some kind of feedback... those saying "shut up and dont buy it if you dont like it and quit your whining" don't seem to get the point. the devs want us to voice our opinions (which isn't whining, btw) to help them out, which is great. the problem is, you get those "shut up and don't buy it if you don't like it" people who are on the fence and wont pick a side.... That dosen't help anyone and will probably prolong the process of fair pricing on the marketplace.

The most important feedback for the devs is the direct feedback they get from looking at the number of potential customers (all Oblivion owners) divided by the number of people purchasing the content. This is called the "Attach Rate". The Devs don't need to scour through every message board like this one looking for validation or criticism of their plan. They have all the data they need to make a business decision about what to do next time. If the attach rate is high enough, you can be sure you'll be seeing more of this.

 

[erwos]

If a game is made on the xbox/X360, and ported to the pc, why does the xbox/X360 version cost more after all the expenses and time it takes to port it to PC?

Maybe because X% of the cost goes to Microsoft for the Xbox 360 version? Maybe they thought the 360 market would stand a higher price? Maybe it was developed at the same time, and you're incorrect about "porting to the PC"?

The fact is Neo-Geo was on the market, and carts were ridiculously expensive compared to their disc counterparts. If they were made today though, the gap wouldnt be as big, but the discs would still be cheaper.

Yes, but you're ignoring the way game development costs have risen. If it costs half as much to produce a unit, but ten times as much in development, you still need to sell 5x as much game to just break even - or raise the price a bit.

Disprove this, anyone who paid for Kabuki Warriors, did not like it. Also, you know damn well no one goes by magazine/website "star/point" reviews. that dude could have been so over joyed that he got himself an xbox, it spilled into his scoring of the game.

I could care less whether he paid for it - you hate a bad game regardless of how much you paid for it. I mean, it's not as if you see a terrible movie on TV, and call it average because it was free, right? As for your maligning the reviewer, whom you've never met or anything, that's pretty childish.

No, you misinterpreted. UFC was a niche title. Theres a better chance that I will like the game more then joe blow since im an avid MMA fan. Well not only did joe blow dislike the game, they couldn't even release it with a level of quality a blinded diehard fan would like. If you cant seal that deal, you know your game is garbage.

I'm not sure I misinterpreted - you had flawed information ("I love UFC, so I will love this game"), and reality was different ("the game is so awful that even I can't stand it").

Depends on how many moneyhats said reviewer is recieving. you give me enough money and ill say the superman games are the best damn games on earth, period.

You've let us know you have are dishonest and have no integrity, provided the sum is correct. This isn't going well for you.

I think most people believe the marketplace is a monopoly right now... Gamers were supposed to be able to make things like character costumes and car paint jobs and sell them on the marketplace... but where is that? where are the tools to make that happen? all i've seen are established game companies selling their wares there. Most people have the notion that if they can make something cool and people like it, they can sell it for a few bucks on live. how much you want to bet all they'll get is additional marketplace points when game companys get actual cash for selling similiar things? if that were to happen, what big word would be used to describe that?

Obviously, your conception of marketplace didn't come into being. You'll need to deal with this new reality, not complain about a future that never was.

-Erwos

 

[emory]

I think most people believe the marketplace is a monopoly right now... Gamers were supposed to be able to make things like character costumes and car paint jobs and sell them on the marketplace... but where is that? where are the tools to make that happen? all i've seen are established game companies selling their wares there. Most people have the notion that if they can make something cool and people like it, they can sell it for a few bucks on live. how much you want to bet all they'll get is additional marketplace points when game companys get actual cash for selling similiar things? if that were to happen, what big word would be used to describe that?

Just to preface, I do not own an xbox360 and dont know how the marketplace operates beyond basic principles.

I think that it would be a great idea if MS allowed people to upload skins, images, and other items to change the look and feel of the xbox, that would be fine. But MS, without some hefty liscense agreements, might run into a lot of issues telling devs that they will sell people's mods and game enhancements on live. The problem is that the customers creating game mods have no right to any profit. They are using tools created by the game developers that are provided free for non-profit use. The EULA of the tes construction kit for example says that any mods created are property of Bethesda and can not be sold. So, only if the developer decides to start posting user made mods on live for free, you wont see any ability for customers to upload thiers unless microsoft wants to undercut thier business...

 

[WorldRunner]

Just to preface, I do not own an xbox360 and dont know how the marketplace operates beyond basic principles.

I think that it would be a great idea if MS allowed people to upload skins, images, and other items to change the look and feel of the xbox, that would be fine. But MS, without some hefty liscense agreements, might run into a lot of issues telling devs that they will sell people's mods and game enhancements on live. The problem is that the customers creating game mods have no right to any profit. They are using tools created by the game developers that are provided free for non-profit use. The EULA of the tes construction kit for example says that any mods created are property of Bethesda and can not be sold. So, only if the developer decides to start posting user made mods on live for free, you wont see any ability for customers to upload thiers unless microsoft wants to undercut thier business...

If they're going to do that it should be through MS's website for Media center PC only. More motivation to get a MCPC. I don't want to sort through all the garbage that'd be on there with a console.

 

[JSC450]

Maybe because X% of the cost goes to Microsoft for the Xbox 360 version? Maybe they thought the 360 market would stand a higher price? Maybe it was developed at the same time, and you're incorrect about "porting to the PC"?

How am I incorrect? Wasnt Halo made for Xbox and ported to PC? wasnt Fable also? and Oblivion?

Yes, but you're ignoring the way game development costs have risen. If it costs half as much to produce a unit, but ten times as much in development, you still need to sell 5x as much game to just break even - or raise the price a bit.

You are ignoring the majority of the games out there... you think it costs Halo money to make a SNK vs Marvel game? Theres more filler out there then quality games man.

I could care less whether he paid for it - you hate a bad game regardless of how much you paid for it. I mean, it's not as if you see a terrible movie on TV, and call it average because it was free, right? As for your maligning the reviewer, whom you've never met or anything, that's pretty childish.

Gamespot gave it 1.4 out of 10. gameinformer gave it 1/2 out of 10. You want some more numbers, or are you ready to tell me Kabuki Warriors wasnt worth the media it was published on? And according to those numbers, turns out im probably right about that reviewer. Its childish to think people dont kiss ass to keep business coming in.

I'm not sure I misinterpreted - you had flawed information ("I love UFC, so I will love this game"), and reality was different ("the game is so awful that even I can't stand it").

You can spin it anyway you want... your good at it, but the game is almost at kabuki warrior level suckness.

You've let us know you have are dishonest and have no integrity, provided the sum is correct. This isn't going well for you.

Things are going fine for me, and thats what your kabuki warriors reviewer did, why dont you write him and tell him what you told me. k thx gg no re.

Obviously, your conception of marketplace didn't come into being. You'll need to deal with this new reality, not complain about a future that never was.

I wont have to deal with anything, its MS who will feel the backlash when people start wondering wtf is going on. you dont make a bolster like they did and not deliver without some sort of explaination. it wont be industry people like your KW reviewer who pushes the issue though, theyll be in the background counting up their moneyhats because they dont have the balls to ask real questions like Dan Hsu in his Peter Moore interview.