Michael Pachter: "On-Disc DLC is plain greed."

[Gahars]

So, analyst Micheal Pachter is kind of a divisive figure around here. Some people don't mind him, others despise him with a burning intensity that rivals the Sun.

Well, he's tackled a pretty controversial subject in a recent episode of his show and... a lot of people here would probably agree with it, actually.

“Yeah, it’s just plain greed,” he said in response to a related question on his show, Pach-Attack. “The answer is that simple. I think that DLC has been so successful that publishers are trying to get a jumpstart and if you put it on the disc it allows them to unlock it when they feel like it.”

...Pachter then spoke on the issue from a consumer’s point of view, suggesting that players who hack discs to access locked DLC early may be entitled to do so since they own the disc.

“The stuff on the disc, some gamers feel entitled to because they bought the disc, so they should have a right to anything that’s on the disc,” he said. “And that’s a dicey one, you actually do own the disc and I think, theoretically, if you could crack the code on the DLC you probably would be allowed to access it without paying. And I’m not even sure that’s stealing because you did, in fact, buy the disc. That’s about as close as you can get to legal piracy.”

Gamesthirst

He also went on say that he believes that the practice of On-Disc DLC will die out because of the collective outcry it stirs up. Seeing how Capcom, one of the most notorious offenders, has recently said it would reconsider its DLC practices, he may very well be on to something there.

So, what do you think? Has he gotten it right for once? Is it just common sense? Or are you just puzzled by the fact that he has his own show at all?

 

[triassic911]

Pachter hits the nail on the head with his statements. He is 100% correct. It IS absolute greed. You already buy the game for $60, which is the disc, so why the FUCK should you pay more to unlock something you already own? There is no other excuse. What ever happened to $5 DLC that added story or maps to the game? Now maps are $15 and story is $15-20. This on-disc DLC bs is just too much.

 

[Zarcon]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?
Nothing besides from being able to cover the former better with good PR. ("We totally made this DLC after we finished the game. We cool right?")

It's not like the game was advertised with the locked content. You were making a decision to buy the game based on what you knew you were getting.
To be perfectly fine in paying for that only to be mad and say it wasn't worth the money due to locked content you found out about afterwards is silly.

I'm kind of sad that on disk DLC is getting so much attention. The focus should be on the rising cost of DLC.
All this will do is get publishers to go back to holding back content and claiming it was made after the game was finished when they release it later again.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

Thanks for telling us something we already ready knew. Who does this guy think he is? The king of the Video Game Industry?

 

[machomuu]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?
Nothing besides from being able to cover the former better with good PR. ("We totally made this DLC after we finished the game. We cool right?")

It's not like the game was advertised with the locked content. You were making a decision to buy the game based on what you knew you were getting.
To be perfectly fine in paying for that only to be mad and say it wasn't worth the money due to locked content you found out about afterwards is silly.

I'm kind of sad that on disk DLC is getting so much attention. The focus should be on the rising cost of DLC.
All this will do is get publishers to go back to holding back content and claiming it was made after the game was finished when they release it later again.

I completely agree, DLC that's released later because it's held from a game is pretty much the same thing as on-disk DLC. It operates the same way, the only difference being that On-disk simply needs to be unlocked, but other than that, they're not that different. CoD 8 announced that they would have $60 worth of maps (which...still to this day boggles my mind as to how anyone actually deems maps to be worth anything, really) before they released the game, and people were happy. However, when Capcom announces that they will have about $3-$4 worth of content that actually adds genuine content and that they would be on the disk, everyone baws. It's sad, really. I don't like On-Disk DLC, either, seriously, it's not that different from various regular DLC.

 

[triassic911]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?
Nothing besides from being able to cover the former better with good PR. ("We totally made this DLC after we finished the game. We cool right?")

It's not like the game was advertised with the locked content. You were making a decision to buy the game based on what you knew you were getting.
To be perfectly fine in paying for that only to be mad and say it wasn't worth the money due to locked content you found out about afterwards is silly.

I'm kind of sad that on disk DLC is getting so much attention. The focus should be on the rising cost of DLC.
All this will do is get publishers to go back to holding back content and claiming it was made after the game was finished when they release it later again.

I completely agree, DLC that's released later because it's held from a game is pretty much the same thing as on-disk DLC. It operates the same way, the only difference being that On-disk simply needs to be unlocked, but other than that, they're not that different. CoD 8 announced that they would have $60 worth of maps (which...still to this day boggles my mind as to how anyone actually deems maps to be worth anything, really) before they released the game, and people were happy. However, when Capcom announces that they will have about $3-$4 worth of content that actually adds genuine content and that they would be on the disk, everyone baws. It's sad, really. I don't like On-Disk DLC, either, seriously, it's not that different from various regular DLC.

The thing about on-disc DLC is that it's not on a server. The DLC has been made as the same time the game was, hence why it's able to be on the disc with the retail game. True, developers may have made DLC before finishing the game and sell it through XBL marketplace/PSN store/etc... but honestly we have no way of knowing. on-disc DLC just demonstrates that companies are willing to charge you a bit more for something you already paid.

 

[machomuu]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?
Nothing besides from being able to cover the former better with good PR. ("We totally made this DLC after we finished the game. We cool right?")

It's not like the game was advertised with the locked content. You were making a decision to buy the game based on what you knew you were getting.
To be perfectly fine in paying for that only to be mad and say it wasn't worth the money due to locked content you found out about afterwards is silly.

I'm kind of sad that on disk DLC is getting so much attention. The focus should be on the rising cost of DLC.
All this will do is get publishers to go back to holding back content and claiming it was made after the game was finished when they release it later again.

I completely agree, DLC that's released later because it's held from a game is pretty much the same thing as on-disk DLC. It operates the same way, the only difference being that On-disk simply needs to be unlocked, but other than that, they're not that different. CoD 8 announced that they would have $60 worth of maps (which...still to this day boggles my mind as to how anyone actually deems maps to be worth anything, really) before they released the game, and people were happy. However, when Capcom announces that they will have about $3-$4 worth of content that actually adds genuine content and that they would be on the disk, everyone baws. It's sad, really. I don't like On-Disk DLC, either, seriously, it's not that different from various regular DLC.

The thing about on-disc DLC is that it's not on a server. The DLC has been made as the same time the game was, hence why it's able to be on the disc with the retail game. True, developers may have made DLC before finishing the game and sell it through XBL marketplace/PSN store/etc... but honestly we have no way of knowing. on-disc DLC just demonstrates that companies are willing to charge you a bit more for something you already paid.

Maybe so, but I'm not so sure the whole "ignorance is bliss" gaming philosophy is a good thing. While on-disc DLC does show that they intentionally left out content, isn't us not caring because it's not sort of encouraging to other publishers/developers to add more DLC and leave more out because the consumer is unsuspecting? Not to mention on-disc is easier to download. Not saying that I like On-Disc, I don't, because it's pretty much as much of a dick move as announcing DLC before you release the game, but I necessarily think that it's too much worse than standard, left our DLC.

 

[Zarcon]

The thing about on-disc DLC is that it's not on a server. The DLC has been made as the same time the game was, hence why it's able to be on the disc with the retail game. True, developers may have made DLC before finishing the game and sell it through XBL marketplace/PSN store/etc... but honestly we have no way of knowing. on-disc DLC just demonstrates that companies are willing to charge you a bit more for something you already paid.

That's the thing though, are we happy as long as we don't know?

And we didn't pay for the on-disc DLC...that sounds really stupid, but bare with me.

Let's say we have Generic Game Quest.
It's advertised as an epic adventure with so and so features.
They show off gameplay footage and have a demo.
Based on all this you decide it's worth the cost of buying it. Say $60.
You enjoy the game and have a blast with it. Completely worth the money you spent.

Now a few days or weeks later you find out that there was additional content locked on the disc.
Are you suddenly mad and saying the game wasn't worth $60?
Because if you are then that's a load of crap.
Are you mad the content will cost additional money?
If so you're just mad at DLC, not the fact that it's on the disc.
The anger is misguided.

Going back to my earlier point, are we happy as long as it's not on the disc and we just don't know?
In that case, if pirates/hackers never dug into the files and revealed content was locked on the disc would it also be fine?
Are consumers just happier when they're ignorant?

Probably not the right topic for that discussion, but an interesting thought.

 

[machomuu]

^I think you should delve further, that's a perfectly relevant argument and those are perfectly relevant points of discussion.

 

[Fear Zoa]

In other words Pachter states obvious facts that have already been established for months now.
I guess its better then his usual baseless bullshit.

 

[DS1]

Going back to my earlier point, are we happy as long as it's not on the disc and we just don't know?
In that case, if pirates/hackers never dug into the files and revealed content was locked on the disc would it also be fine?
Are consumers just happier when they're ignorant?

Yes, they are. Take the retail industry, for example. All goods have an MSRP value (manufacturer's suggested retail price), which are typically marked down considerably at the retailer. For example, a Polo shirt's MSRP might be $60, but the customer will see the item ON SALE!!! for a mere $35. And then with coupons and other incentives, they might score the shirt for $28. You'd think most people would be smart enough to realize that MSRP is a scam, and that fluctuating prices are a scheme to trick people into thinking they are savvy consumers, right?

Well, many retailers have attempted to do away with the BS by implementing "fair standards" or whatever - basically a policy where everything in store is on sale for one price, with no coupons or games or crap. The latest department store to do this (in America) is JC Penny. And guess what? THEY HAVE ALL FAILED... because consumers really do enjoy being ignorant. They'd rather feel like they are getting a deal than know that they are getting a fair price. There is a horrifying amount of data to back this up, so it's always pitiful when company XYZ says they are going to be the trailblazers and not give into the market trends.

And I mean, this really falls into every industry - manufactured pop stars have to keep their boyfriends/girlfriends a secret, because the fans want to keep their delusions alive. Nobody is dumb enough to think that some outrageously hot and rich guy/girl is single and waiting around for the perfect fan... but so long as they don't come out and say it, everything is gravy with the fans, right?

 

[Devin]

My only thing is that DLC, should be what it is..

DownLoadable Content.

People feel cheated if they buy something, and then they have to buy something else that was already included in what they previously bought. I tend to not buy DLC, unless it's really worth it. (With the exception of UMvC 3 on Vita. I bought Jill.) I stand with the previous point that there no way to tell when DLC was made.

 

[Rydian]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?

With the formor, they have to pay the full bandwidth costs to upload it. With on-disk, they don't. It's even MORE of a dick more.

I still fail to see how "Well they could also be greedy a different way" argument excuses them. So fucking what?

 

[MelodieOctavia]

There is a difference between DLC that is in addition to the game you bought, and DLC that should have been in the game in the first place. If it's On Disc, it will most likely be the latter.

 

[yuyuyup]

It's in their interest to have their DLC under a veil of post-release development, whether it's fact or fiction. This can make it seem that content was created after reflecting upon the games post release reception.

 

[DS1]

There is a difference between DLC that is in addition to the game you bought, and DLC that should have been in the game in the first place. If it's On Disc, it will most likely be the latter.

Well... you have to consider used games before you start throwing around common sense like, 'what should be in the game'. A used game sale doesn't make the company any money (remember the whole "buying used is no better than piracy" thing?), but if they lock content on a disc so that each owner has to pay to unlock it, they'll see their money one way or another.

Now we just need to wait for those snappy MBAs to tool around with this model long enough to find that they can sell new games cheaper, knowing that they'll make the same amount off DLC in the long run. ex. game X costs $60 new today, but the company makes $0 off each used copy. If they find that they are making an average of say, $5 off each used copy (through DLC purchases), they might begin to sell new games at $55. And eventually the consumer will be fooled into thinking they've "won", when companies start offering incentives like, "pre-order and get the on-disc DLC free!"

Because honestly, we can sit here and bitch about DLC all day, but I'll bet that half the people complaining don't even buy new games or DLC. On-disc DLC is just giving them another excuse not to spend money on stuff. The other half of people complaining DO buy new stuff, and they probably shell out for DLC as well, rewarding these companies for their poor behavior. And then there's the vast majority of people who don't see it as an issue at all. Those are the super-size me people who will drop an extra 15% on each of their purchases with the promise of getting a little more, whether or not they really want it (ie; all the people who buy every DLC expansion, but never explore half of the content they've paid for). But yeah, if you're complaining and you buy new games, BUT you don't buy DLC, go ahead and pat yourself on the back.

 

[ferofax]

What's the difference between finished DLC purposely held back to sell later and finished DLC locked on the disc to unlock later?
Nothing besides from being able to cover the former better with good PR. ("We totally made this DLC after we finished the game. We cool right?")

It's not like the game was advertised with the locked content. You were making a decision to buy the game based on what you knew you were getting.
To be perfectly fine in paying for that only to be mad and say it wasn't worth the money due to locked content you found out about afterwards is silly.

I'm kind of sad that on disk DLC is getting so much attention. The focus should be on the rising cost of DLC.
All this will do is get publishers to go back to holding back content and claiming it was made after the game was finished when they release it later again.

The problem is that putting locked content on-disc feels like you're purposely holding back something from the customer, whereas downloaded content feels like something really new, like more cherry toppings to an already sizeable cake. It's simple psychology, really. This is regardless of whether or not the content was actually made after the game.

Let me put it this way. You bought cheesecake. You open the box and find it's not just cheesecake in there, but has muffins in the box too. Except I tell you you have to pay for those muffins before you can eat them. You didn't know there were gonna be muffins, but you found out anyway, and now you feel ripped off because you already know there's gonna be muffins since they put it in the box, except you now have to pay extra for it. Does that not feel like a rip-off?

That's where all this animosity is coming from. It doesn't matter that you're making it easier on the consumer to access extra content by including it on the disc. You just can't put something on somebody's plate and expect them to NOT eat it until they pay for it -- they're gonna eat it anyway.

 

[LightyKD]

WOW! What is this? Opposites day? First, representiatives of the MPAA say things I agree with and now Michael Patcher!? WTF???

 

[KingVamp]

WOW! What is this? Opposites day? First, representiatives of the MPAA say things I agree with and now Michael Patcher!? WTF???

Did u not hear? It the end of the world as we know it. ~

 

[Dimensional]

I'm reading the arguments for and against this. Here's the thing. When you purchase a product, your paying for everything it comes with. The physical disc, the case, the game manual, and possibly a registration code to be able to play online. You've paid for what they advertised. However, there is content on the disc you didn't know about. DLC or something. When you paid for the game, the physical disc, you paid for everything on the disc. You paid for all that content already, or else you wouldn't have it on the disc in the first place. Yes, you paid for the game, and got what you wanted, but you also got additional stuff already installed to your system too. That's space that's being taken and could have been used by something else.

And for those who argue that there's plenty of space, so why argue that, it's still using your systems storage space. It doesn't matter whether or not you would have used it for something else, it's the fact that you can't use it anymore without getting rid of the entire game data or paying to use that space that you already own. They are just holding that space for ransom.

So it's a combination that the data is already installed to your system, and the fact that you paid for the disc that shows corporate greed. And that payment for the disc, by definition of economic laws, includes all the content of the disc. All of it. Including the DLC. Only way they could keep it from you is if the DLC wasn't completely on the disc, but then that would still make it feel like a theft unless it was meant to be there to allow users make their own mods for the game, using unused content.