2K Sports Announces NBA 2K12: Game of the Year Edition

[kbmnm247]

Quote: Originally Posted by NINJAK2

Yes. Alot of games have pissed me off doing this (Arkham City, BF3-I hear they are selling that for 30 or 40 bucks now for a limited time). People who are showing up early to the party have been getting screwed with these new price points with no real benefit of buying these games on release day.

I have no problem with them lowering the price of the new game, that is expected to keep the revenue coming in. I consider the time I had the game worth the difference in price in that case.

However, in this case, people are also getting the DLC for free, which came out what, like 2 months ago? Now, will the legends showcase be free to all of those who don't have it yet? Because in that case I'm fine with it. But why should I (someone who bought the game release day) have to pay for DLC that people, who buy the game brand new for $10 less than I paid, get for free? That doesn't really seem fair.

[Colts18]

Messed up.

[spankdatazz22]

Quote: Originally Posted by kbmnm247

I have no problem with them lowering the price of the new game, that is expected to keep the revenue coming in. I consider the time I had the game worth the difference in price in that case. However, in this case, people are also getting the DLC for free, which came out what, like 2 months ago? Now, will the legends showcase be free to all of those who don't have it yet? Because in that case I'm fine with it. But why should I (someone who bought the game release day) have to pay for DLC that people, who buy the game brand new for $10 less than I paid, get for free? That doesn't really seem fair.

EDIT: This sense that some feel they're owed something because they made a purchase day one doesn't make sense. Verizon released the Motorola Razr around October/November last year; I think it cost $300 w/a new contract. Now they're offering TWO Razrs for less than the price for the original one cost ($200) not even four months later. It's a more extreme example. And yes, it sucks for those that brought day one. But it's the way it is when you leap on something early.

Sports games have a short shelf life. People here complained incessantly when they released the DLC. Now it seems some are going to complain incessantly about this. There needs to be some understanding this isn't an uncommon practice.

[NINJAK2]

Quote: Originally Posted by spankdatazz22

The sense of entitlement is ridiculous around here. There are lots of "Game of the Year" editions out there that bundle previously released content for a lesser price. As a consumer if you choose to jump on something release day then complain when the price is cheaper a few months later, that's your fault. Whether it's tvs, cell phones, games, game systems, etc. if you as a consumer decide to jump on something on day one you can't expect to be given a cookie because you "supported" something early on. I don't know where this sense of entitlement comes from but it's a weak argument. You got to play or use things months before people that didn't buy it early - that's your benefit.

No one is acting entitled spank imo. I am happy with 2k12 despite a few issues I have with it. Some people paid $60 for a game with inaccurate rosters for months and then had to pay an additional $10-$15 just for the abilty to edit classic teams. Now people can pay close to $30 bucks less and get the same thing? I'm curious if they will get the classic GSW and Sac-town teams as well since that was supposed to be an exclusive for pre-orders(which is a reason why I prepaid as they made it seem that I would not be able to access those teams without doing so)? You are right that it's our fault for jumping the gun on these titles..It won't happen again next year...

[spankdatazz22]

Quote: Originally Posted by NINJAK2

I'm curious if they will get the classic GSW and Sac-town teams as well since that was supposed to be an exclusive for pre-orders(which is a reason why I prepaid as they made it seem that I would not be able to access those teams without doing so)? You are right that it's our fault for jumping the gun on these titles..It won't happen again next year...

Personally I've never thought that about a preorder bonus unless it was explicitly stated (that an item would never be available to anyone else). Battlefield 3 offered the Karland map pack as a preorder bonus but I never thought it wouldn't be offered to others down the line that didn't preorder. I got the Robin/Catwoman DLCs when I preordered Batman from a certain store - I never came away with the idea they wouldn't be offered or bundled sometime later. GTA, Red Dead Redemption, Fallout, etc. all have multiple DLC releases that are bundled later at a cheaper price as incentive to purchase the respective game. It's simply a reality of gaming.

Sports games don't have the shelf life of those other games. I see some constantly cry foul on 2Ks DLC effort. Would it be better they go the route EA does with it's DLC content? Would it be better if people had to buy online passes to access downloadable content like updated rosters or community created rosters? Because those are practices other sports games are doing right now and because the community expects [that behavior] from them, there's no uproar. I'm not trying to slam EA, I just think people need to have some perspective when they begin complaining.

[NINJAK2]

Quote: Originally Posted by spankdatazz22

Personally I've never thought that about a preorder bonus unless it was explicitly stated (that an item would never be available to anyone else). Battlefield 3 offered the Karland map pack as a preorder bonus but I never thought it wouldn't be offered to others down the line that didn't preorder. I got the Robin/Catwoman DLCs when I preordered Batman from a certain store - I never came away with the idea they wouldn't be offered or bundled sometime later. GTA, Red Dead Redemption, Fallout, etc. all have multiple DLC releases that are bundled later at a cheaper price as incentive to purchase the respective game. It's simply a reality of gaming. Sports games don't have the shelf life of those other games. I see some constantly cry foul on 2Ks DLC effort. Would it be better they go the route EA does with it's DLC content? Would it be better if people had to buy online passes to access downloadable content like updated rosters or community created rosters? Because those are practices other sports games are doing right now and because the community expects [that behavior] from them, there's no uproar. I'm not trying to slam EA, I just think people need to have some perspective when they begin complaining.

Just because one may have a different view doesn't mean they lack perspective. Just another side of the coin opinion.2k is free to price games at whatever they choose and still happy I bought it.

[KBomber]

Quote: Originally Posted by spankdatazz22

EDIT: This sense that some feel they're owed something because they made a purchase day one doesn't make sense. Verizon released the Motorola Razr around October/November last year; I think it cost $300 w/a new contract. Now they're offering TWO Razrs for less than the price for the original one cost ($200) not even four months later. It's a more extreme example. And yes, it sucks for those that brought day one. But it's the way it is when you leap on something early. Sports games have a short shelf life. People here complained incessantly when they released the DLC. Now it seems some are going to complain incessantly about this. There needs to be some understanding this isn't an uncommon practice.

From the perspective of 2K Sports, sales of NBA 2K12 were flat compared to 2K11. That was, in part, impacted by the NBA Lockout and I think some of the issues with the game have impacted that on the gamer side of things. I think the idea is to capitalize on some of the groundswell of love the NBA is starting to get back from the fans by introducing this deal.

That's my thought anyways...

[K0ZZ]

This is more of a cash grab than anything. Dumb tactic when EA does it. Dumb tactic when 2K does it.