All DLC are overpriced. Even the ones that sell a character at 5 bucks is overpriced, when you think that you buy 25 characters with 60 bucks as well as other modes and goodies. Your beef should be with all DLC, not just NRS'.
Actually I don't like a very large part of the DLCs practices in the gaming industry and almost never buy them, so I can say that my beef is with all DLCs, I was just targeting NRS in particular here because it is a NRS forum and a thread talking about the price of Aftermath. On paper I have nothing against DLCs, but A LOT of them are not worth their prices. The last time I thought a DLC was worth it was The Witcher 3: Blood and Wine, and it was quite some time ago.
Right, so by your logic 60/25=2.40, but wait half the game was ToT/story/etc, so 2.40/2=1.20. So each character is worth $1.20. Lets be generous and say the story is $5. So aftermath should be $8.60, lets say $10.
As much as you might want it to, it doesn't work like that. The market dictates the price. An iphone costs $1200 because that price is what apple think people will pay.
How is it almost all AAA games are $60 at launch, almost all DLC is $4-6 and almost all season passes are ~$25? Could it be that this a defacto price for those items because they know this is what people are willing to pay.
I didn't mean to affect a particular value to a single base game character, I just wanted to highlight the huge difference between $60 for the starting content and this $40 "expansion" that adds way less than the base game content and yet is charged for more than the half of it.
Well, Apple acts like all video game companies, they know people will buy it without even thinking and they take advantage of it to make a comfortable profit out of their products. If the players or Iphone buyers would complain and boycott overpriced products, then the price of all these things would drop, because you better sell something with less profit than not selling anything at all.
No, it's a valid point. They're also part of the gaming industry, what they do affects everyone. If they do it and get away with it, then others follow suit. If every company canned DLC, then you can be sure the one left doing it will get some flack for it.
If someone is willing to spend $60 on something that becomes obsolete the very next year, versus $60 that still holds value upto 4 years later, how is that not a valid argument?
I think you misunderstood what I said, or maybe I wasn't clear enough. Annual releases like Call of Duty or FIFA/Madden and all this shitty franchises were indeed the leading exemples to what the gaming industry has become. I just meant that the companies that are also taking advantage of its playerbase to milk them at a lesser level should not be excused because Activision and EA have worse economic practices. If the CoD/FIFA players are mindlessly willing to buy the same game again and again every year, then yes they will take advantage of it. That would make them huge assholes for taking advantage of them like that to me, but hey, what company would deny large profit for minimal efforts ? Why would they bother making efforts if the players buys anything they release ?
It is no surprise that the other companies want to take advantage of this. CoD and FIFA games are so identical from a year to another they can allow themselves to release one game per year since they have enough staff to do so, but you can't do that with all games. So the other companies try new things to trick players into buying their shit.
What WB did with MK11 since its release is shameful and the playerbase should be angry at them, but no here I see people defending them like it was a personal offence. The problem is, I already said it but I'll say it again, that the standards of quality/quantity has been lowered so much people don't see the problem. They are so low people that are actually complaining about the prices are being criticized by other players because... multi billion dollars companies maybe need average people to defend them I guess.
