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

[PlantMurderer]

Originally posted by 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

I don't think you understand, let me put it in simple terms.

The supplier, assuming he is a rational actor, will try and assess how he can maximise his profits for his product when setting the price.

Is the calculation made here to set the price optimal? You'd have to look at a massive amount of data to figure it out. But the devs are certainly trying to find that optimum, and I'm quite sure their calculation is closer to the "right" amount than what any of us could come up with.

[Zelakon]

Originally posted by PlantMurderer:

Is the calculation made here to set the price optimal? You'd have to look at a massive amount of data to figure it out. But the devs are certainly trying to find that optimum, and I'm quite sure their calculation is closer to the "right" amount than what any of us could come up with.

Then you'd be wrong, wouldn't you? To assume that a small dev team, even with their publisher's guidance, would be able to look at a set of data and determine the optimum price better than "any of us", whom literally comprise thousands of players, some of which work in financial consultancy and do this for a living..?

[DEMANATI]

Originally posted by PlantMurderer:

Originally posted by DEMANATI:

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

I don't think you understand, let me put it in simple terms.

The supplier, assuming he is a rational actor, will try and assess how he can maximise his profits for his product when setting the price.

Is the calculation made here to set the price optimal? You'd have to look at a massive amount of data to figure it out. But the devs are certainly trying to find that optimum, and I'm quite sure their calculation is closer to the "right" amount than what any of us could come up with.

i understand that the devs would want to make a profit, but they would have to have a reasonable price. $40 for a game of this type and length can't be justified. even they know this which is why the games constantly go on sale and the dlc is at a discount

[PlantMurderer]

Originally posted by DEMANATI:

Originally posted by PlantMurderer:

I don't think you understand, let me put it in simple terms.

The supplier, assuming he is a rational actor, will try and assess how he can maximise his profits for his product when setting the price.

Is the calculation made here to set the price optimal? You'd have to look at a massive amount of data to figure it out. But the devs are certainly trying to find that optimum, and I'm quite sure their calculation is closer to the "right" amount than what any of us could come up with.

i understand that the devs would want to make a profit, but they would have to have a reasonable price. $40 for a game of this type and length can't be justified. even they know this which is why the games constantly go on sale and the dlc is at a discount

Spoken exactly as you would expect from someone with a Skibidi toilet gif as their profile picture.

[JoBo]

Was very happy to pay for the DLC. Totally worth it.

[DoremianCleff]

Videogames aren't commodity. Basic economics don't apply here.
It's a "luxury" item, where price is dictated by developer. They can take market into consideration, but in the end it's their call.
You can argue that for you it wasn't worth it. But many others will get more value out of the thing, based on their personal taste and values.

For example - new areas of the game include new pieces of music. Do you pay for music? Well, here is a value add right there. And drawn sprites in the game are pieces of art, so there should be value, wouldn't there?
The total value i got from both games far exceed the price they asked. I will gladly pay them again, if it means more content and games will be made.

On side note - price range for NES cartrige was 20-40$(maybe 50 even). Most games on the platform are beatable in a single session, making average playtime 1-2 hours. Even on a more advanced platforms like PS1, games would cost anywhere from 20 to 50$ and Castlevania Symphony of the Night has about 11 hours for content. Which i should also add that dollar value back then was a bit higher. Oh look, a 2d action platformer game for 40$ that has less than 12 hours of playtime. On a console capable of 3d graphics which, supposedly, give more value. What a shocker.

[SoFienE]

The first game had free DLC and everyone was praising the devs for the game and for the free DLC as well.
Blasphemous 2 is an amazing game as well and when they announced that it will have paid DLC, most ppl were glad to pay for it as the devs deserve to get paid for their efforts, hell it was discounted at a very decent price when it was released two weeks ago.

most games provide lame DLCs for much higher price, let's just appreciate the devs for their work, even if the update was bugged at launch, most bugs were fixed within the same week, a hotfix the next day and an update for True Torment coming next week.
again, most devs won't bother to fix their games that quickly or listen to the community.

and i think this is just the first DLC and more will be coming soon, it will probably be the same or even bigger than Blasphemous 1 post-release

[[P]etya]

I don't mind paying for the DLC but I find it a bit ironic that Mea Culpa cost money and in terms of quality it was sub-par on release compared to what we got in Blasphemous 1 for free.

[Zelakon]

Originally posted by Petya:

I don't mind paying for the DLC but I find it a bit ironic that Mea Culpa cost money and in terms of quality it was sub-par on release compared to what we got in Blasphemous 1 for free.

This ^^

[DoremianCleff]

First DLC in Blasphemous 1 was NG+ and 4 bosses. There were few general tweaks to the game, but nothing that would change overal game structure, with areas and layouts.

Mea Culpa came with a free update that added a whole new type of obstacles and remastered major parts of the map, added new traversal ability, NG+ and various minor tweaks here and there.

If you are going to make direct comparison to DLC in Blasphemous 1, you should consider changes between released version and first major updates, not just "listed" changes.
Whether it's worth paying for paid part of DLC is up to you, but not including all the free changes into comparison is disengenious.

[DEMANATI]

Originally posted by PlantMurderer:

Originally posted by DEMANATI:

i understand that the devs would want to make a profit, but they would have to have a reasonable price. $40 for a game of this type and length can't be justified. even they know this which is why the games constantly go on sale and the dlc is at a discount

Spoken exactly as you would expect from someone with a Skibidi toilet gif as their profile picture.

is my pfp supposed to be relevant? lmao why go for such a childish come back if you are so confident im wrong?

[f.ultron]

Because even game developers have to eat and pay their bills.

[JolyJew СлаваУкраине]

Originally posted by DoremianCleff:

First DLC in Blasphemous 1 was NG+ and 4 bosses. There were few general tweaks to the game, but nothing that would change overal game structure, with areas and layouts.

Mea Culpa came with a free update that added a whole new type of obstacles and remastered major parts of the map, added new traversal ability, NG+ and various minor tweaks here and there.

If you are going to make direct comparison to DLC in Blasphemous 1, you should consider changes between released version and first major updates, not just "listed" changes.
Whether it's worth paying for paid part of DLC is up to you, but not including all the free changes into comparison is disengenious.

Thx for the explanation.
This + the other info that it was mostly Kickstarter donations that helped to bring the free updates now fully answered my questions.

Im still gonna wait till the bugs are fixed till i buy Mea Culpa, they're really nasty from what I've seen

[DoremianCleff]

Sorry for being presumptious. I failed to aknowledge that some people may have bought the game later, with all the new content already implemented, so the amount of content developers add into the base game isn't obviuous from the get go.

But i am glad you got some helpful information out of it.