why is the DLC not free?

[JolyJew СлаваУкраине]

excuse me for being a stereotypically greedy jew, but the previous Blasphemous game had all it's major updates released for free, seemingly because the game felt incomplete and needed further content to realize the game's full potential

all 3 major updates added: NG+ with very interesting game modifyers. 8 new bosses 3 new areas, a new ending, lot's of new lore details and a bunch of new upgrades and characters.

i thought the sequel will be released with all these beloved features as well, but nope, it was released incomplete - no NG+ no game modifyers for extra difficulty no 3rd ending, there were barely any difference between the 2 base endings and the lore didn't make sense.

Mea Culpa dlc seems to fix these problems... but at a price? releasing a game with missing features and then selling those features as DLC seems pretty shady to me, especiallyh when said DLC is infested with game breaking bugs, if all the reviews are to be believed

[robertcadav]

You can thank the economy for this one.

[🌷 QueenDiana 🌷]

Yeah... ¿why also Blasphemous 2 it's not a free game also?

[DoremianCleff]

Just because you "felt" some way, doesn't mean it's true. Both games were "done" on release, but they opted to add more into the game. And instead of being appreciative that you get 3 major DLCs for free in first game, you choose to act entitled.

[Zelakon]

Originally posted by DoremianCleff:

Just because you "felt" some way, doesn't mean it's true. Both games were "done" on release, but they opted to add more into the game. And instead of being appreciative that you get 3 major DLCs for free in first game, you choose to act entitled.

It's more that businesses set precedents which affect customer expectations.

If a studio releases a game for free but then charges for its sequel, some entitled people will complain; but if they were to release a game for purchase and then drop the sequel for free, those same people might commend them instead (despite the same amount of money having been exchanged for two products).

[DoremianCleff]

Originally posted by Zelakon:

It's more that businesses set precedents which affect customer expectations.

If a studio releases a game for free but then charges for its sequel, some entitled people will complain; but if they were to release a game for purchase and then drop the sequel for free, those same people might commend them instead (despite the same amount of money having been exchanged for two products).

He implies both games were unfinished, which isn't true. And he soft compares paid DLC to "day 1 dlc" nonsense that plagues AAAA industry.

Nothing about it is customer expectations. It's assumption and entitlement.

Also i think it's a bait thread. The guy got "awards" showcase on his profile, so he might be farming.

[60mph gorilla]

I feel it might be down to how the game sold. Blasphemous 1 had a higher count when launched and since they made a bunch of kick starter goals they could easily make good on that content.

This game however I don't think ever went through a kickstarter right? It sold a bit less than the first game, so the devs have to make their coin back somehow.

[JolyJew СлаваУкраине]

Originally posted by Barf:

I feel it might be down to how the game sold. Blasphemous 1 had a higher count when launched and since they made a bunch of kick starter goals they could easily make good on that content.

This game however I don't think ever went through a kickstarter right? It sold a bit less than the first game, so the devs have to make their coin back somehow.

makes a lot of sense but it still feels many of the features should have been present in the original release of B2.
paying for new levels bosses and weapons is fine but for NG+? true ending? new lore? that's pretty unfair, especially since the amount of new content in the DLC is meager without their inclusion

[DEMANATI]

Originally posted by DoremianCleff:

Just because you "felt" some way, doesn't mean it's true. Both games were "done" on release, but they opted to add more into the game. And instead of being appreciative that you get 3 major DLCs for free in first game, you choose to act entitled.

the base game costs $30 usd. for a 2d pixel game with nothing other than the campaign its wayyyy to expensive. it doesn't even have enough content to justify the price. it should of been free or at least cheaper. it is a buggy mess anyway.

[DoremianCleff]

Originally posted by DEMANATI:

the base game costs $30 usd. for a 2d pixel game with nothing other than the campaign its wayyyy to expensive. it doesn't even have enough content to justify the price. it should of been free or at least cheaper. it is a buggy mess anyway.

Would you pay 70$ if it had a third-person 3d section?

[DEMANATI]

Originally posted by DoremianCleff:

Originally posted by DEMANATI:

the base game costs $30 usd. for a 2d pixel game with nothing other than the campaign its wayyyy to expensive. it doesn't even have enough content to justify the price. it should of been free or at least cheaper. it is a buggy mess anyway.

Would you pay 70$ if it had a third-person 3d section?

Not $70 but i can feel more comfortable paying for a 3d game as opposed to 2d because there is a whole new dimension to the game that needs more work to add. I love the games but im not about to pay full price when the content doesn’t justify it. Its $30, lacks polish and lacks content after beating the game. And whatever content they did add is an extra $10….$40-$50 for a 2d game with the bare minimum 💀 i can buy like 5 open world rpg games with $40. I get they have to make a profit but the price is ridiculous once you realize the value of the game itself. In some aspects its a downgrade from the first game.

[DoremianCleff]

"Nothing to do, after you beat the game" is a "I ate a pizza and there is nothing else left" argument. And now you sit there, drinking complementary ranch dressing without pizza.

You've played the game. You had your fill. Judging games by playhours is a silly evdeavor, because with this argument you can say that a terrible asset flip open world sandbox game has infinite value, because there is no definitive end to the game and it's just keep going. Enjoy your 300+ hours of nothing. And just because you can buy more games for X amount of money, doesn't mean other games not worth their price. There are free games you can play for thousands of hours, but it doesn't mean that a short 3 hours experience have to cost proportionally to the playtime. What would be a price of a 0.03% of playtime over the price of nothing?

The "paid" part of DLC might not be the most amazing of the dlcs ever created, but it came along side a substantial free update, including a bunch of content that remixes the game quite a lot, which i think makes it worth replaying and not just poke around to see new stuff. And "paid" part of DLC is just a small bonus with a lil something something for a developer.

Either way "the value" decided by a developer, because it's a price tag on their work. Assuming their work is worth less based on some perceived value of added dimensions is hella weird.

[Zelakon]

Originally posted by DoremianCleff:

Either way "the value" decided by a developer, because it's a price tag on their work. Assuming their work is worth less based on some perceived value of added dimensions is hella weird.

Whilst what you say makes sense, in this case it falls short, given the inconsistency in value set by this developer. Do I think Blasphemous 2 was worth its price tag, given the length and quality? Yes. Do I think Mea Culpa is worth its price relative to this, given the same criteria? No, not at all.

[DoremianCleff]

I won't disagree that on it's own Mia Culpa doesn't have much content. It still adds a major mechanic with a weapon, which can be used again in future content, but in vacuum, it is a bit lacking. That said, does value of a soundtrack, art book or other extranious things that don't add value to the game worth the price? What worth even is?

As i said before, i view Mia culpa as full package, including free content. The one thing that i am curious about is how they are going to utilize the mechanics of Mia Culpa in future. Is this a one off, will it only appear in paid content or will they make paid content available for everyone when all the DLCs are out.

[PlantMurderer]

ITT: 13 years-old first contact with the concept of supply and demand.

[DEMANATI]

Originally posted by PlantMurderer:

ITT: 13 years-old first contact with the concept of supply and demand.

Theres a difference between supply/demand and overpriced content. The base game is $30, the dlc makes the total price $40. Theres wayyyy more games out there for half the price that offer more content