What's new

Do you think the DLC price is fair?

Is Kombat Pack 1 worth $40?


  • Total voters
    54

ZeroSymbolic

Motor City Warrior
The Kombat Pack was $40. We expect at least 3 of them I believe, so that is 40*3=$120 + the original $60 for the base game. So that's $180.

In a few years they will release a Komplete Edition that includes everything. Do you think it will cost $180 when it comes out? Me neither, so my answer is no.

Alternatively, would you buy a game off the shelf for $180? No because you'd feel like a dope.
 

Dankster Morgan

It is better this way
there is no fair dlc pricing when it comes down to fighting games.
when you compare what you get with the base game to the dlc its always way to overblown.
This is probably accurate. I just honestly can't see a fighting game character being worth more than $3 at the maximum. Like the absolute maxiumum.
 

Dankster Morgan

It is better this way
The Kombat Pack was $40. We expect at least 3 of them I believe, so that is 40*3=$120 + the original $60 for the base game. So that's $180.

In a few years they will release a Komplete Edition that includes everything. Do you think it will cost $180 when it comes out? Me neither, so my answer is no.
hahaha yeah I didn't even fucking think about KP2, people will gladly pay the price of a full game for what will then amount to like 12 characters. yikes.
 

Zviko

Warrior
I was just going to vote "No" and was not going to comment, but out of all of the shitty practices game companies make nowadays this is one of the worst. Not betas and stuff, that's great, but the one week early access is such bullcrap. If the content is ready for people to use the 4 of April, then it was planned to be made on that date, and it was planned to be ready for release for that day. They are just releasing late for the people who don't pay, it's faked exclusivity. You are just paying because an executive had the -brillant- idea of saying "lets make people pay extra to get this on release date, but let's word it differently so they'll do it anyway".
Well yeah, that's marketing. But from customers' perspective, if I have money and know what I'm getting and can't wait to play it then why not. I'm happy with what I bought and they are happy with their extra $. Win-win. Also, since you mentioned companies in general, some even give discounts for Deluxe editions if you played the previous game of the series.
 

chud_munson

Apprentice
I'm coming at this question from two angles.

One, I thing the only calculation that makes sense is whether each person would value the entertainment hours they got at $40. I've played quite a bit with the DLC characters and am fortunate enough to not be in a tight financial spot, so for me the value was right. This is also one of my favorite franchises, so that factors into that calculation for me too.

Then there's the ethical point. I don't think it's fair to look at all a game's DLC, price it, and say "I would never pay that much for a game". Games today are way different than they were when the price for a game was more or less established. When I was a kid, I paid $60 for a game, and if it sucked it sucked. No DLC, no patches, the game just was the way it was. At that time, devs worked on the game, released it, and then moved on to the next thing. Games today are much closer to services in that a dev team is onhand to provide support for that same game for sometimes many years. You can't expect them to do that for free. If you view many games as being closer to services, which is what they are, the concept of DLC is much less predatory. If you really still don't like the idea of continuing to pay for content of the game you bought, you're also free to just buy the base game on the merit of whether it's worth the full price of the game.

So, yes.
 

xKMMx

Banned
I personally think the kombat pack is over priced. But the per character price for each DLC is something Im willing to pay because some of these characters I like and others I don't. After seeing Terminator I was happy as a pig in shit I didn't pay upfront for the Kombat pack.
I just hope that the Jacqui "Spawn" skin will at some point be available for non KP owners because its the best alternate skin in the game in my opinion.
 

Blade4693

VIVIVI
Sure but what I am not sure of is why content I paid for is still being withheld from me. Talking about a few remaining gear and skins for Spawn. I have done countless amounts of towers that say you get skins/gear and have been getting nothing but augments for like 2 weeks now. So many I am getting duplicate augments.

Idk, I know it's not really what this thread is about but it's starting to get kind of annoying.

EDIT - Might as well actually contribute to the thread. Anyway as looney as it sounds I would have paid $40 for Spawn alone lol so yeah I would say it was worth it for me. I got a lot of playtime out of Shang, Joker, Sindel, and Spawn now. Even Nightwolf at first. The only one that kind of came and went was Terminator but again since I was so happy with the rest of the pack im not going to complain about him too much.
 
Last edited:

Second Saint

A man with too many names.
Friendly reminder that DLC is the only reason that the base cost of games hasn't risen at all in 20 years. You can either have $60 and a choice or $90 and no choice. I remember buying games in 2001 for $60 and that's $87.96 in today's dollars.
 

appo

º°˜¨EU¨˜°º
Friendly reminder that DLC is the only reason that the base cost of games hasn't risen at all in 20 years. You can either have $60 and a choice or $90 and no choice. I remember buying games in 2001 for $60 and that's $87.96 in today's dollars.
thats nonsense. how do you explain then all the games which dont even cost 60 bucks in the first place and dont have dlc´s ?
point is not even that dlc´s exist, its the price for it we discuss about here...
 

Marinjuana

Up rock incoming, ETA 5 minutes
Friendly reminder that DLC is the only reason that the base cost of games hasn't risen at all in 20 years. You can either have $60 and a choice or $90 and no choice. I remember buying games in 2001 for $60 and that's $87.96 in today's dollars.
What console were you buying games on in 2001 for 60$? I don't think that became the industry standard until Xbox 360. The prices fluctuated for a long time though(with consoles as well), a lot of older consoles had even more expensive games.

I think people's gripes are more about content than the nature of DLC though.
 

Art Lean

Kombatant
I'm coming at this question from two angles.

One, I thing the only calculation that makes sense is whether each person would value the entertainment hours they got at $40. I've played quite a bit with the DLC characters and am fortunate enough to not be in a tight financial spot, so for me the value was right. This is also one of my favorite franchises, so that factors into that calculation for me too.

Then there's the ethical point. I don't think it's fair to look at all a game's DLC, price it, and say "I would never pay that much for a game". Games today are way different than they were when the price for a game was more or less established. When I was a kid, I paid $60 for a game, and if it sucked it sucked. No DLC, no patches, the game just was the way it was. At that time, devs worked on the game, released it, and then moved on to the next thing. Games today are much closer to services in that a dev team is onhand to provide support for that same game for sometimes many years. You can't expect them to do that for free. If you view many games as being closer to services, which is what they are, the concept of DLC is much less predatory. If you really still don't like the idea of continuing to pay for content of the game you bought, you're also free to just buy the base game on the merit of whether it's worth the full price of the game.

So, yes.
100% totally agree on both points.

On the first point, do we not remember how during the SNES/Megadrive (Genesis) era, that often some places were selling games like Super Street Fighter 2 for around £60??? If you were crazy enough to own a Neo Geo, games were £120 a pop. I remember getting MK3 for the SNES for £49.99. And money was worth a lot more 25 years ago! Regular editions of games don't cost that nowadays, they're usually in the realms of £39.99. Yes, there's £60+ versions with extra content, but that's optional and it's supported long down the line with updates, DLC and fixes.

On the second point, as grown adults, I'm sure we've all wasted much more money on one single night on the town with drinks (especially if you bought a round for friends or treated a date) and taxis and whatever and that's just one single night out. Hell I stupidly took a girl out on a date in December that seemed to be going great; I'd never go for a first date for dinner, it's got too much weight and worry and expectations to it (for both parties), but if it's all going well just for a few drinks, you've been laughing, smiling and connecting and then drop "hey shall we get something to eat whilst we're here? My treat?" figure you're in the good zone if they want to stay and join you. She obliged, we laughed, joked, had a great meal, got on great, she said she wanted to go out again, whilst dinner and drinks cost me fucking £110 (we were in a nice place)... so whatever, it's all good because it's all priceless in the pursuit of love.

Did I get a second date? Or a reason? No. Oh and the taxi home was nearly £20 too. £130 to feel like a twat basically. I've dated a lot, pretty good at reading the person I'm with; that literally stung financially and insultingly, felt an utter mug.

I bought MK 11 Premium Edition for a £66.66 pre-order and I've been enjoying it for almost a year now. It was there for me like an old best friend when I had my heart broken last year by the love of my life (hence why I've been back on the rotten dating scene... which needless to say is rather impossible now!). Spent around £5.00 getting Kold War Skarlet in proper DLC version (rather than the Premium Store version that's specific to your profile), bought the few little packs of skins that weren't in the Kombat Pack, and maybe bought 3 rounds of the cheapest Time Krystals when I desperately wanted something in the store. Probably spent around £100 in total on the game... and it's still there for me a year later, still giving me new content, as part of a franchise I've loved for 28 years, that over the last 49 weeks amounts to little over £2 a week... hell I spend more than that weekly on my son's Haribo that I don't even want him eating anyway.

That date that cost me even more than that (without even originally intending it to) was one night, no memories worth keeping and nothing more than an exercise is pointlessness; just get to enjoy knowing I wasted my time, money and effort on someone who was faking it the whole time. Thanks again Tinder.

Sorry for the rant, not trying to be self-absorbed, just mean it from the perspective that we've all probably wasted more than the cost of MK11 on silly adult follies without caring, and all its all acceptable collateral damage for a simple night out, be it for a good or bad reason but that's besides the point, and we've likely all done them and never thought twice about it.

I can honestly and quite sadly justify most purchases with "yeah, well, how much did I waste on beer last week, and for what? Nothing other than a bad head, antagonising my IBS and a big wee in the middle of the night?" If it costs less than a pint of beer at my local pub, I probably won't care in paying that. The same goes for all the times at a pub jukebox i've wasted money on songs I own for free at home, but putting a pound coin in whilst hammered to hear a song I can hear from free at home feels weirdly justified.

MK11 has given me way more than £100 of entertainment over the last year, I have not many complaints at all other than I'd like some better costumes for the some of the girls (Cassie and Jacqui especially).
 
Last edited:

Second Saint

A man with too many names.
What console were you buying games on in 2001 for 60$? I don't think that became the industry standard until Xbox 360. The prices fluctuated for a long time though(with consoles as well), a lot of older consoles had even more expensive games.

I think people's gripes are more about content than the nature of DLC though.
I was thinking of ps2 prices, but I went back and double checked. It was $50, so I must've been remembering the price after taxes. My bad, it was 19 years ago.


thats nonsense. how do you explain then all the games which dont even cost 60 bucks in the first place and dont have dlc´s ?
point is not even that dlc´s exist, its the price for it we discuss about here...
I'm just pointing out that the cost of triple A games has not risen with inflation for a very long time, and as such dlc is pushed to offset costs and often ends up at 90 - 100 dollars total when things are said and done. Probably because they would like that to be the actual cost of the game. Are the reasons why something might be expensive somehow not material in a discussion about whether it is properly valued?

For the record, it's a bit steep at 40 when you don't even get all the skin packs. I wouldn't have been bothered at 30, however.
 

Juxtapose

Master
This is probably accurate. I just honestly can't see a fighting game character being worth more than $3 at the maximum. Like the absolute maxiumum.
I always felt the seasonal and pricing model that was done for Killer Instinct (2013) was fair and well done. I believe a lot of people came to agree with that, though it was blasted at first.
 

theotherguy

Kombatant
The Kombat Pack was $40. We expect at least 3 of them I believe, so that is 40*3=$120 + the original $60 for the base game. So that's $180.

In a few years they will release a Komplete Edition that includes everything. Do you think it will cost $180 when it comes out? Me neither, so my answer is no.

Alternatively, would you buy a game off the shelf for $180? No because you'd feel like a dope.
That is really dumb logic.

You're not taking into account the use of the product over the X number of years before the Komplete edition is released.

You pay for the privilege of getting and using it earlier. No different to the millions of people that wait in lines to get the latest and greatest phone. They could wait 3years and get the same phone for 1/2 price, but they don't, because they want the new version now and are happy to pay for it.

People need to weigh up what is more important to them - money or playing the game. It's risk vs reward, pay more and get it early, or pay less and get it later.

It's not hard to understand.
 

ZeroSymbolic

Motor City Warrior
That is really dumb logic.

You're not taking into account the use of the product over the X number of years before the Komplete edition is released.

You pay for the privilege of getting and using it earlier. No different to the millions of people that wait in lines to get the latest and greatest phone. They could wait 3years and get the same phone for 1/2 price, but they don't, because they want the new version now and are happy to pay for it.

People need to weigh up what is more important to them - money or playing the game. It's risk vs reward, pay more and get it early, or pay less and get it later.

It's not hard to understand.
I see it like this-a given product has a value. In an age where most games are released in damn near beta condition and then patched over time (if ever, see Fallout76), why not wait until the game is actually finished and then buy it at half price. Like buying a game at launch anymore is just being a chump. (Yes, I bought the game on release, yes Im a chump for NRS).
 

Zviko

Warrior
Fair or not it's not really 40$. If you are patient you can get it for more than 50% off before 4/6 characters are even released. But we want everything right away and pay 40$ before we even know who's in the pack and then complain about the price later. :D
 

Metin

Ermac & Smoke Main
i said simple no because Jacqui Briggs contents are not enough. There should be more. For example that witch Jade skin should have been given to her.
 

theotherguy

Kombatant
a given product has a value.
Yes, the company determines that along with the buying public. But it's up to you to decide if that is worth your money. If you don't think so, then vote with your wallet and wait. Otherwise pay for it and play it while all the other people are bitching about it being too expensive and not playing the game.

In an age where most games are released in damn near beta condition and then patched over time (if ever, see Fallout76), why not wait until the game is actually finished and then buy it at half price.
Because that might not be a viable option if it's an online game and the online crowd dwindles after 6-12months. If you're buying a single player, story driven game, then sure that makes a lot of sense. But this is also the new normal for a lot of AAA games. People might not like it, but unless we do something to indicate that we don't like it, it will keep on happening.

But again, that's what people need to weigh up if it's a priority for them.

Also, people need to let go of the "back in my day..." stories. Yes, it's true back in the day you would get a "complete" game, but you also didn't get years of extra content, adding a 1/3 extra in characters and other assets, or bugfixes on a semi-regular schedule.

Also games didn't cost millions to make...

Here's another take on it. If you were selling something would you forgo 30% of your potential profits even though you know a good percentage of your buyers would pay the initial higher price? Most decent business owners would take an increase in profits, unless they had solid data that shows the lower cost would give them the same bottom line at the end of the day.
 

Juggs

Lose without excuses
Lead Moderator
I will never feel that DLC is fairly priced, really in any game. UNLESS it provides some massive expansion to the game that produces a much higher replayability factor, I will always feel DLC is overpriced these days.

That said, I almost always purchase DLC in most games I play. But that doesn’t mean I feel it’s worth it or that the price is fair.
 

Dankster Morgan

It is better this way
I will never feel that DLC is fairly priced, really in any game. UNLESS it provides some massive expansion to the game that produces a much higher replayability factor, I will always feel DLC is overpriced these days.

That said, I almost always purchase DLC in most games I play. But that doesn’t mean I feel it’s worth it or that the price is fair.
I can relate to this on all counts really. Few games have had DLC that's both on par with the base game and fairly priced.
 

Art Lean

Kombatant
Also, people need to let go of the "back in my day..." stories. Yes, it's true back in the day you would get a "complete" game, but you also didn't get years of extra content, adding a 1/3 extra in characters and other assets, or bugfixes on a semi-regular schedule.
Totally agree, and worse still back then, if there was an update it was released as a full-priced new title. The SNES for example got Street Fighter 2, Street Fighter 2 Turbo and Super Street Fighter 2, all of which were sold as stand-alone full-price releases, with the end result being one being a bit faster and the other have 4 more characters. If you did end up getting SSF2, what do you do with your old cartridge(s)? Sell them? Who'd want it when the better version's now out? Turned expensive games into useless junk.

As others on the below link remember, Super Street Fighter 2 on the SNES was £59.99 in the UK when first released (a price to this day I have always distinctly remembered) via then-massively popular gaming catalogue Special Reserve:
That's £123.15 in today's money, or $152.23 in US dollars... for four characters!

As another example, both the Saturn and PS1 received MK3, UMK3 and MKT, all again as separate full-price titles. It's not like UMK3 was sold for only £9.99 if you owned the original MK3; if you wanted the update you had to buy a whole new game at full-price. And there was never any chance for things like the missing textures in parts of Trilogy's backgrounds to be fixed, the final game was released as-is, "warts 'n' all" to forever remain looking lazy and half-finished.

Sorry I don't miss those old days in the slightest when it came to those kinds of business practices and vastly prefer the DLC structure of today, whether it be free or paid for.
 
Last edited:

ZeroSymbolic

Motor City Warrior
I think most of the time waiting a year or two after release is the way to go, you get a more complete, more refined product at a decreased cost. Just like the business owner looks to make the most, the consumer also looks to pay the lowest. Economics works both ways.
 

Dankster Morgan

It is better this way
I think most of the time waiting a year or two after release is the way to go, you get a more complete, more refined product at a decreased cost. Just like the business owner looks to make the most, the consumer also looks to pay the lowest. Economics works both ways.
Sure if its a single player game. The complete editions of The Witcher 3, Arkham Knight, and other games earlier this generation are dirt cheap and have a shit load of content. But if its a game based on online multiplayer that will be most active and fun earlier on, might as well just say fuck it and skip it, or just buy it day 1.