New Features Aren’t All Free in NCAA Football 12

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

So, why does it concern you that people support it while they don't buy it. Who cares? To each their own, right? I'm fine with people who are against the whole thing and expressing their opinion, but to disagree with people who support the extra feature and have the option of buying it or not shouldn't bother others, either.

Well for starters that's not even what I said. I said people who justify it and say it's worth purchasing (meaning they're probably going to buy it) is for all intents and purposes the same as being happy with it.

Second I do take some issue with people going out and buying it because I believe that will make it more likely for EA to introduce more micro transactions in the future. Especially if enough people buy this DLC to make it a "success" in EA's eyes. That being said I'm not going to tell people how to spend their money, do what you want. I have a much bigger issue with the people who want to constantly defend it and in some cases try to argue why it's a good thing.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

Well for starters that's not even what I said. I said people who justify it and say it's worth purchasing (meaning they're probably going to buy it) is for all intents and purposes the same as being happy with it. Second I do take some issue with people going out and buying it because I believe that will make it more likely for EA to introduce more micro transactions in the future. Especially if enough people buy this DLC to make it a "success" in EA's eyes. That being said I'm not going to tell people how to spend their money, do what you want. I have a much bigger issue with the people who want to constantly defend it and in some cases try to argue why it's a good thing.

You did say, at the very least supporting it. I support the cause, but won't buy into the effort. That's what I thought you meant.

I really don't feel that a great percentage of people will purchase the extra commodity, but I could be wrong. This is to only offset the cost of maintaining the servers which EA provides.

I don't really think it's as big as a deal as some people are making it out to be. Hard to predict the future when we don't know anything about the present.

[poopoop]

To be fair you don't even know what the cause is.

None of us have access to EA's budget details. We don't know how much these features cost to implement/maintain and how they change EA's ability to make a profit on this game. You can't say with any certainty that this DLC is necessary to offset the costs. You can assume that the costs of implementing these are so great that EA "had" to charge for it, but you don't know.

All I know for certain is EA has no direct competition, largely because of actions they took to make it that way. That leads me to believe they're less inclined to give us the most for our money, or at least they no longer have comp there to force them to. That belief is only strengthened when I see them start offering game features as DLC. And I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt based on their past history with microtransactions.

We know what happened years ago when another company forced them to lower prices while still giving us the same amount of content.

[jeremym480]

The last thing I have to say about it is that Dynasty Wire, the ability to advance my dynasty and call plays/super sim from a computer are the types of things that I dreamed about when I thought about Next-Gen gaming. It's easily.... EASILY the most innovated feature ever in a video game and it's not even close, IMO.

For someone to say that they don't think that EA hasn't accrued additional cost by adding this and maintaining their servers is pretty ignorant. Those cost cut into their bottom line so you're damn straight that they have every right to charge for them. The funny thing is it's actually going to cost less this year to commish multiple dynasties and have the supersim feature than it did last year. Yet I haven't seen any of the naysayers give EA props for that

Honestly, I have yet to see a single good reason as to why EA shouldn't charge for this commodity... Most of the complaints in this thread are the classic "straw man" comparisons / "the sky is falling" post. Seems to me like people just want services for nothing. Hell, I'd like free texting on my cell phone, free premium channels with my basic cable and all the toppings that I want for the price of a regular frozen yogurt but, that's not how the world works. So like I said, with that I'm out. The agenda's and/or sense of entitlement has been entertaining though.

[12]

This doesn't bother me in the least.

DLC is here to stay.

If it's worth buying, I'll buy it.

If it's not, I won't.

[poopoop]

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

The funny thing is it's actually going to cost less this year to commish multiple dynasties and have the supersim feature than it did last year. Yet I haven't seen any of the naysayers give EA props for that

I have an issue with them charging period. So no I'm not going to give them props for charging less, they are still charging. Even so, had they charged the same amount this year I'm sure you'd still be here defending it anyway.

I honestly don't understand the need to defend it. Don't know if it's people just justifying/rationalizing their eventual purchase. Some sort of loyalty to EA. Or something else. Should be demanding more for your money.

Quote: Originally Posted by jeremym480

Seems to me like people just want services for nothing.

No not for nothing. For the amount we pay when we buy the game.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

I honestly don't understand the need to defend it. Don't know if it's people just justifying/rationalizing their eventual purchase. Some sort of loyalty to EA. Or something else. Should be demanding more for your money.

My last post in here too. As I said earlier in the thread, difficult to debate w/people that have agendas.(you keep bringing up no competition in a topic that doesn't talk about it)

You mentioned a few post ago you aren't trying to tell people how to spend their $, but here you are trying to rationalize why people are defending it. Why? Again, who cares, it's their money and enjoyment and thoughts on the subject. I don't try to rationalize why people that are against it aren't for it.

You are worried about something now that you think may happen in the future. Again, way too early to speculate and start jumping off buildings and bridges proclaiming the world is ending with a $3.00 extra charge to a video football game.

As far as your earlier post, you said I don't know what their budget is and neither do you. I'm more inclined to believe someone statement from a company vs someone's opinion on a message board. So, your theory to believe they're less inclined to give us the most for our money, or at least they no longer have comp there to force them to--- is also pure speculation on your part because most companies are now charging for DLC, not just EA, with or w/o competition and you don't know what their budgets are.

[mattbooty]

Quote: Originally Posted by poopoop

No not for nothing. For the amount we pay when we buy the game.

I'm with everyone else, there really isn't anything new to be said, I just have one last question that I hope you can answer for me. This is not an argument, or me flaming you in any way, I'm honestly curious about this.

Do you also rail against cell phone companies for selling a base phone plan then charging extra for texts, data plans, etc? Cable/satellite providors for having a base tv package and charging extra for premium services like hbo, HD video, DVR service?

If you do not, what is it about NCAA that makes it different from that to you? In all of these cases (and many more) you pay for a base product and then the company tries to charge you for extras and add-ons. In each example someone could make the case if they wanted that the add-on "should" be included in your base package. Someone could make the argument that they've given verizon/directv/etc their money in the past so they helped "pay for" the add-on service so they should get it for free...

Basically every argument against EA charging for this could be applied to any company that charges for an add-on service. Do you rally against them also? and if not why this and NOT them, what makes it different?