The Parity Clause is dead, long live the Parity Clause!

[binary solo]

endimion said:

binary solo said:

endimion said:
@oniyide
Simple i buy something for 60 bucks day one with no dlc on 360... A year later on PS a guy buys day 1 for 60 bucks the same game with all DLC hell god damn yes it is a sweet addition FOR FREE to the game....

Different exemple you buy a Ferrari day 1 in USA for X dollars... A year later Antonio buys the same Ferrari day 1 in Italy with 1 year free gas (like you already consumed)for the same price.... That's no addition right ???

That's a terrible analogy. The day the game releases on the 2nd platform the retail value on the original platform has dropped. So if you expect the person who owns the second platform to pay the day 1 price of the first platform then there should be more value in the product because they are paying more than the current market price. A new Ferrari of the same model will cost the same one year later as it did the day it first rolled off the production line. The perceived value of a new game drops with time, the perceived value of a new Ferarri does not.

There is no reason, in the case of Mass Effect 2, why EA couldn't have released a GOTY version of the game for X360 and PC with all the same DLC as the PS3 version got for $60. Indeed GOTY versions of GOTY winning games are often released a year or so after launch with the main DLC thrown in for the original launch price. Just like every platform is getting for Destiny very soon. No one seems to have a beef with GOTY versions of games releasing, even thoguh the poor schmos who bought the game day 1 had to fork over extra cash to get all that DLC, which is coming to the people who were patient with the original game at the original launch price.

hell no it won't as soon as you turn the key and drive off it already has lost a shit ton of value... Even a damn Ferrari... And no its not more than the current market price... Since there isn't a PS3 market the day before....
two different platform two different markets can't correlate price of same game over time just because it suits you... When ME2 released at $60 it had more content for the same amount of money day one on PS3 than Xb360... Can't deny just look at the box... So yeah Sony does the same in many cases than MS... Case closed...

and yeah Ferrari might have been a bad choice in brand... Use fiat punto then

You missed the entire point. A NEW Ferrari, or Fiat Punto today and a NEW Ferrari or Fiat Punto in a year's time will cost the same. It has nothing to do with the used car value. Not so with a game, a NEW game today will be 30%-50% more expensive than the same NEW game next year. And you're wrong about platform, the market still operates the same. If EA was just going to release the vanilla ME2 on PS3 for $60 no one would have bought it, because ME2 on 360 was selling for $40 or even $30. GAMERS not Sony would have given EA the middle finger and EA would have failed to expand the franchise into a new market segment. Their choice was to release ME2 on PS3 at $40, or add some content to make gamers feel like its worth their while to buy this year old game for $60. The decision was a totally market driven one, they knew that to stimulate the PS3 market they needed to incentivise buying the game in some way, price or content are the only way. Perhaps the motion comic was an extra Sony negotiated, because Bioware could have just done something really simple to get you to make some choices, just a voice over with screenshots from ME would have been enough, though perhaps MS might have blocked the use of images from ME.

You can see with several games released on PS3 after they were released on 360 that Sony did not insist on extras where the game at launch was the complete package, I think maybe the only thing Sony wanted was something that looked a tad bit better, or ran a wee bit smoother. So what they really insisted on was a high quality port, not an unreasonable request. So the only time you could say Sony insisted on extras was when extras already existed that could be packaged into the game. So there is a difference between what seems to have been Sony's approach to late ports and MS's "we want something special" approach, which seems to mean indies gotta make extra content that doesn't currently exist. I am not aware of Sony ever insisting on that, but there might be examples of which I'm not aware.