By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Dead or Alive 6 has a $93 Season Pass

Tagged games:

Machiavellian on 04 March 2019
Burning Typhoon said:
Machiavellian said:

The locked away DLC that is on the disk I have to say is definitely shady.  If it can be released on the Disk, then it can be added to the main game.  Thats the publisher/Developer pulling a fast one and definitely garbage.

You mean to say disc.  But it's not a shady practice at all.  If a company decides you are going to pay for a particular DLC, you're going to pay for it.  Since that much is known about the content, then the question becomes how to get it to the player.  If they do not have the DLC files locally, they cannot see the DLC.  If I had DLC costumes, I want the person I'm playing against to also see me using it, and not the default.  Since everyone then needs the files, that means they have to be installed on the Hard Disk or be printed directly on the bluray disc.

Most people never complain about having to download DLC to their hard drive, yet that exact same data that is needed becomes a problem when it's on the disc?  That means less data is on the server, less data needs to be downloaded, and it can be made cheaper since it's not taking up as much space on the server.  It means when you're done playing the game, you don't have the entire DLC on your HDD.

If you are not licensed to use the content, you're not licensed to use it.  Regardless of rather or not it's on the disc, that's not how the law works.  Otherwise everyone would buy the physical disc game to get the dlc for free, which wouldn't be fair to anyone who downloaded the game.  Same exact data, just stored in a different spot.

As an end user, think about it-- it makes no difference where it's stored.

Machiavellian said:

If the only thing you can complain about is online lobbies not being there then I would consider that a ding more than being incomplete.  Incomplete would be not having a fully fleshed out character set to play and then charging for the rest via DLC for a full price 60 dollar game.

As for DLC, the company can charge whatever they want for, you vote with your dollars if you believe the price is legit.  There must be someone out there purchasing this stuff for that price or they would never charge it.  I know, I would never purchase it but then again, I barely if ever purchase DLC anyway.  DLC should never be a requirement to enjoy the main game and should always be as it is just more content.  If the DLC is required for continuing or enjoying a game, I do not purchase those products.

Not sure how SF 4 turned out but I did not purchase it until it was complete in my eyes.  I actually enjoyed the seasons for Killer Instinct 

That's not the only thing I can complain about, it's the only thing I chose to mention.  The game has game breaking bugs.  You can fight outside of stage boundaries.  There is no excuse for that.  Bugs happen, but if the game wasn't rushed, that would have been discovered.  Like Yoshimitsu's glitch in Soul Calibur VI.

And yes, the company can charge whatever they want for the DLC. Just like I can call them out for bad consumer business practices, charging more for 60 costumes and 2 characters, than the entire game is worth.  If other companies try this, it's bad.  It's a season pass, mind you.  In 3 months, it's going to be another 93 dollar season pass.

Look at lootboxes, EA, and star wars.  Battlefront 2 is dead.  There will be no battlefront 3.  Yeah, we voted with our wallets.  Now a game is dead.  

So, guys, vote with your wallets.  As if that wasn't what we were going to already do anyway.  Not only am I not buying the DLC, I'm skipping the entire game because of how incompetent this company has been for consumer relations.  And with an acronym like "D.O.A., it can't afford to have something like this happen to it.  This is going to kill the series.  But, at least we voted with our wallets.

Its not bad consumer practice to charge whatever you want.  Instead its just bad business to overprice your product.  The thing is, what you feel is overpriced someone else thinks it acceptable.  The key would be if your opinion is shared with enough consumers to make a difference.

As you state Battlefront 2 is a prime example.  Wrong decisions has consequences but I doubt that another installment of the game will not happen because of lootboxes.  If anything the company just goes back and think of another revenue goal to see if that can work.

As for purchasing the game, i will do as I always do.  When I believe the main game is at a point I like, it will get my money.  I really do not care how much they charge for DLC when the game release because I am never in a hurry to purchase any game.  Usually by the time I am ready, everything will be reduced to a price Point  I consider worth my money.



Around the Network
oniyide on 04 March 2019

imho, i think they know this series doesnt sell big numbers so might as well get as much from the people who do. buy it



Mandalore76 on 04 March 2019
Machiavellian said:
d21lewis said:

I didn't need them. I wanted them. I wanted the "complete experience". When it became too much, I quit. No harm done.

Also, I didn't want anything for free. There was just so much dlc that it began to eclipse the cost of the game. Same with DoA, now. When I bought the first game on PS1, tons of costumes was a selling point. Now, the game seems secondary to the bonus stuff. Sign of the times, I guess. But they have a choice and I have a choice. I choose not to support this at all.

Maybe its just me.  I hardly ever look at DLC because I never buy it.  I purchase pretty much all fighting games because its my first love as far as games go but DLC has never been a thing I cared about.  My first and only concern is the main game is complete.  If that is the case it gets my money.  Any other extra stuff I consider fluff and not worth my time unless its priced right.

My gripe is that I always see gamers complain about developer supporting their game and actually charging for extra content believing it should be free.  The content should not be free because the work creating it isn't free.  Price is another thing and each developer has to pick the right sweet spot for sales.  If the price is too high then the community as a whole is at fault for supporting it.  

The problem is that gamers born pre-2000 know that a lot of the things sold and celebrated as "extras" today are things that were part of the actual games years ago.  Unlockable/hidden characters, alternate costumes, etc.  Those were all in game to be unlocked as a reward for playing.  Today, these things are carved out and sold back to the consumer at additional cost.



Shiken on 04 March 2019

Meanwhile Smash gives us 72 characters out of the box, putting developers like this to shame. Save for a few, fighting games are becoming/have become worse than the FPS map packs and paid skins.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Machiavellian on 04 March 2019
Mandalore76 said:
Machiavellian said:

Maybe its just me.  I hardly ever look at DLC because I never buy it.  I purchase pretty much all fighting games because its my first love as far as games go but DLC has never been a thing I cared about.  My first and only concern is the main game is complete.  If that is the case it gets my money.  Any other extra stuff I consider fluff and not worth my time unless its priced right.

My gripe is that I always see gamers complain about developer supporting their game and actually charging for extra content believing it should be free.  The content should not be free because the work creating it isn't free.  Price is another thing and each developer has to pick the right sweet spot for sales.  If the price is too high then the community as a whole is at fault for supporting it.  

The problem is that gamers born pre-2000 know that a lot of the things sold and celebrated as "extras" today are things that were part of the actual games years ago.  Unlockable/hidden characters, alternate costumes, etc.  Those were all in game to be unlocked as a reward for playing.  Today, these things are carved out and sold back to the consumer at additional cost.

Even back in the day and I have been playing games before Doom, there were Add on sold for the main games.  I do agree developers use to give away content for free back in the day but then they found out that was a problem.  When you give away content you work on for free then the expectations as we see in this thread is that developers should always give away content for free.  Gamers become entitled believing every developer can sustain this model and when you do want to sell content, they get an attitude and get all upset.  Also back in the day, the cost of a developer per head was not as expensive nor the amount of hours it take to develop, QA and test content (so many bugs back then).

I believe the reason issue if we are discussing this game is how you price your extra content, not that extra content should be free.  Most developers probably do not have a say so much in this process but the publisher instead.  Even then, if they really want to maximize purchases, doing incentives that promote customers to purchase the content is always a good move.  Something along the lines like if you bought 3 DLC for our games you get the next one free, stuff along those lines.  I guess it would be easier if these companies had their own store to do those things but not sure if PSN and XBL allows such models.



Around the Network
Neodegenerate on 04 March 2019
Mandalore76 said:
Machiavellian said:

Maybe its just me.  I hardly ever look at DLC because I never buy it.  I purchase pretty much all fighting games because its my first love as far as games go but DLC has never been a thing I cared about.  My first and only concern is the main game is complete.  If that is the case it gets my money.  Any other extra stuff I consider fluff and not worth my time unless its priced right.

My gripe is that I always see gamers complain about developer supporting their game and actually charging for extra content believing it should be free.  The content should not be free because the work creating it isn't free.  Price is another thing and each developer has to pick the right sweet spot for sales.  If the price is too high then the community as a whole is at fault for supporting it.  

The problem is that gamers born pre-2000 know that a lot of the things sold and celebrated as "extras" today are things that were part of the actual games years ago.  Unlockable/hidden characters, alternate costumes, etc.  Those were all in game to be unlocked as a reward for playing.  Today, these things are carved out and sold back to the consumer at additional cost.

Show me a pre-2000 fighting game that had 20+ characters and 20+ costumes for each that retailed for what would be the equivalent of 60 dollars today.  You can't.

Also, to say that additional characters -  that in some cases are being added to a game years later - are "carved out" is a bit disingenuous.  Especially when you also consider that player retention - now required based on increased development time - is an issue with the used game market as it is today.

Fact is that game development is more expensive today, things take longer, and in some cases they are selling the games today for less than they did in yesteryear.  I recall the original Killer Instinct on SNES costing $70 which adjusting for inflation is about $118 today.

Is the practice a bit silly?  Sure.  Would you rather them start charging $100 for the base game and not adding DLC?  I sure wouldn't.

Last edited by Neodegenerate - on 04 March 2019

Cerebralbore101 on 04 March 2019
Hiku said:

That is a lot of money for content that is primarily unknown to the consumer at the time of purchase.
Most of the costs seem to be attributed to costumes though, so it feels like an easy skip. But they must be making good money on costumes, so there will probably be plenty of people who pay for this, sadly.

Cerebralbore101 said: 
I hate this trend in fighting games. MK 11 has 18 confirmed characters for the main game plus 6 more for the season pass. So they've basically locked a quarter of the game behind DLC, when these 6 characters could have come out with the base game. It's nothing but content carving. 

If they want me to buy their game on release they need to make sure it is complete on release. If games in other genres did this then 10 hours of content out of a 40 hour game would be locked to a "season pass". 

I don't mind expansions, that's fine. But if your "extra content" is ready to be released six months after launch or earlier, then that reeks of content carving.

Though while it's fully understandable why situations like that are suspicious, there are situations where it is not financially or physically viable for that content to be produced many months after release.
The reason for that is because even when it comes to internal development teams, and especially when talent is contracted from the outside, they can't always just sit around on the same project for months/years after the game has been finished. They have other projects they're supposed to move on to, leaving the remaining team that can stay for an extended time as a skeleton crew of its former self.

The saying 'time is money' is applicable here.
Publishers can invest the DLC budget during the initial game development period, to get that same work done during that time period, while they still have access to all the key designers and artists, etc.

That's just poor management though. If somebody is working on a AAA game they shouldn't be a short term contracted employee to begin with. People that went to school for 4 years for game development shouldn't be hired out on a 6 month to yearly contract. They've worked way too hard to have to worry about their next job every six months to a year. 



Burning Typhoon on 04 March 2019
Shiken said:

Meanwhile Smash gives us 72 characters out of the box, putting developers like this to shame. Save for a few, fighting games are becoming/have become worse than the FPS map packs and paid skins.

That is not at all a fair comparison.  One character in dead or alive 6 has more unique animations and attacks than 2/3rds of that 72 character roster. 



Shiken on 04 March 2019
Burning Typhoon said:
Shiken said:

Meanwhile Smash gives us 72 characters out of the box, putting developers like this to shame. Save for a few, fighting games are becoming/have become worse than the FPS map packs and paid skins.

That is not at all a fair comparison.  One character in dead or alive 6 has more unique animations and attacks than 2/3rds of that 72 character roster. 

Smash also has a 30 plus hour single player mode with a crap ton more interactive stages to fight in.  The comparison is completely fair and again, it puts these devs to shame.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

Burning Typhoon on 04 March 2019
Shiken said:
Burning Typhoon said:

That is not at all a fair comparison.  One character in dead or alive 6 has more unique animations and attacks than 2/3rds of that 72 character roster. 

Smash also has a 30 plus hour single player mode with a crap ton more interactive stages to fight in.  The comparison is completely fair and again, it puts these devs to shame.

I own smash, and I refuse to buy DoA6.  What's your point? I didn't say smash wasn't better, I'm saying the quantity of the fighters has nothing to do with why DoA is bad.  By that logic, Tobal 2 is better than smash because it has 200 characters.  I certainly wouldn't put Smash brothers ahead of Tekken 7.  Your exact words were, "Meanwhile Smash gives us 72 characters out of the box, putting developers like this to shame."  As if to say it was only about character counts.  And, the characters are locked.  They're not paid DLC, but, after coming off Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, 6, 7, Marvel Vs. Capcom 2 HD, Mortal Kombat X and a few other fighters, having to unlock characters is tedious.  On steam, i've dumped 305 hours into Tekken 7.  I want to play the game, not do silly tasks I wouldn't have done if not for unlocking the character.

I have DoA5, on PS3, PS4 and PC.  The game was good, apart from the exact same DLC model DoA6 is doing.  I got Smash, and the limited amount of attacks in that game is really off-putting.  I put at least 7 hours into that game.  I understand what it is, but it's not a traditional fighter by any means.  I'd probably like it more than smash, but I refuse to support the game like this.  I'll wait for Ultimate and evaluate if it's worth the purchase.