I wish more studios did it, and that they'd go further. To me this is about the most customer friendly practice going. Those costs are passed on (in the form of a paid DLC) to the people who actually want it (and only those who actually want it.) Making Blood & Gore incurs costs as it takes time, money and resources.
You're a customer who (presumably) does want Blood & Gore. I'm a customer who doesn't want Blood & Gore. Originally posted by ^7ja^1co:That is a dodgy practise, very customer unfriendly.
Yes they'll be making a profit (because that's how work usually works, you don't charge less than costs and you hopefully make something extra for your work,) but it's not really "free real estate." It costs money because it costs them money to make. In games with Blood & Gore that budget comes out of the core game budget (meaning everyone who buys it pays regardless of if they want it,) but in this case it's coming out of a separate DLC budget provided by sales of the DLC (meaning only those that want it pay for it.)Ģ. They actually have to do the work to make the Blood & Gore, work that only gets done if it's being paid for. Lower rating = more sales and post release monetization = more sales.Ī good round up, I'd just like to add a couple of clarifications.ġ. Removing the gore and charging extra for it post release allows them this loop hole.Ģ - They can charge another $3 and people will buy it. If they included the blood and gore it would need to be a "Mature" or "PEGI 18" rated game. They do this for 2 main reasons ġ - By not including blood and gore into the base game they can slap a "Teen" or "PEGI 12" rating on the proverbial 'box'. CA always release the blood DLC a couple months after the initial release of the game, in the US market it is always priced $2.99. Originally posted by 오소리 Badger:Just to reiterate what Welsh Dragon already stated.
0 kommentar(er)
