"the only reason they're getting away with it is because 300,000 of you are rich, desperate for content, or dumb."

I would heartily agree with the latter two reasons. Look at how many poor underprivileged people are alcoholics and smoke cigarettes. The markup on those "luxury" goods are much more than on microtransactions, yet people buy bottles of booze and packs of cigarettes daily.

The moral of the story is, don't come off thinking you're cool because you are one of the 300,000 who payed $6.25 for content. They are taking advantage of your addictive nature and your willingness to spend money on unwise investments.

I ranted on this issue yesterday:
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/12/guitar-hero-ii-gets-new-song-pack/

Between my two rants, I don't know how much more I have to say on this issue other than thank you to everyone who is supporting these bloated prices. You're ruining it for the majority.

Well...I'm not dumb, desperation for content could be better perceived as enjoying extended game play sessions provided by DLC, and I don't think anyone has to be rich to afford the packs...I mean, just because you can only afford McDonald's, doesn't mean I can't eat at Arby's =)

Joking and bitching aside, the success of DLC has a tertiary benefit no one seems to have mentioned...the rise of the Indie game developer... The combo of DLC + XNA + XBL will help a lot of start-up projects and developers notice amongst the gaming community...

GameDev,

I agree with you partially. XBL Arcade is a great avenue for decently priced games that will open up more doors for indie developers. I do not hesitate to buy good games from XBL Arcade.

In-game DL content, though, especially for content that is recycled and expensive, does nothing to help the little guy. If anything, it hurts an indie developer because people are spending their points on junk like horse armor and recycled song packs instead of your games.

GameDevMich,

Let's be clear here - there's a difference between "desperate for content" and "enjoying extended game play sessions provided by DLC". To pay $6.25 for three songs is desperate. At those prices, if all the tracks for GH1 were released, it would total almost $100, and that's just silly. Enjoying content is different - I have every piece of DLC for Oblivion except for the horse armor, and that's because the horse armor is a waste of money.

As for the "rich" thing, replace that in your head with "have money to blow". Personally, I'm on a budget, so I have to pick and choose what I'm willing to part with my hard earned cash for.

On DLC helping indie devs: you're right - the concept of DLC as a whole, is great for indie devs. The guitar hero tracks aren't great for anyone. These high priced packs aren't moving the industry forward, they're just moving the prices up.

The total price of all the DLC for GH does prove a valid point, considering the original cost of the game + controller. It does sound silly on the surface, but it would be more expensive if someone who does not own a PS2 bought the system and the game. See the balance?

It still boils down to choice. You're statement of "have money to blow" does make your "rant" more logical. You are on a budget, so you make the choice not to download the content. I am also on a budget, but I might splurge just to get my favorite song. Also my choice. Doesn't quite sound like desperation to me, but opinions vary =)

Until GH3 and RB DLC pricing is released, I'll remain optimistic. Also, unless someone shows the internal financial reports of the companies, one could argue that the extra revenue generated from DLC goes back into research and development for more content and better games (Rock Band).

GameDevMich,

"...it would be more expensive if someone who does not own a PS2 bought the system and the game. See the balance?"

No, I don't. If you don't already have a 360, you've gotta buy that to get the DLC. There is no "balance" here. Let's pretend there is a balance here. I could go on ebay and spend less than $100 on GH1, the guitar, and a ps2.

Now, on to other things - you may be right, the profit may be going to R and D for new games, but it's more likely going into the pockets of execs. They're also profiting on the game itself, and every guitar controller sold. Unless they're making the coolest game ever that jacks into the back of your neck and makes you think that you're on stage, chances are the costs were covered by GH2 itself, seeing as how it was a rehash of the PS2 version.

I'll agree with you about choice - yea, everyone has a choice to get it or not. The problem here is that this content has paved the way for some really shitty choices down the line. They did ok with their DLC this time, so maybe next time GH3 will have twenty five tracks on the disc and the DLC will be $10 for three songs... the end result of people choosing to purchase overpriced content now is waaaay overpriced content in the future. Cost will go up, and value will go down.

And by MILLIONS, you mean three hundred thousand, right?

Which is pretty fucking sad, considering the game sold that many in its first five days after release.

Spin, spin on PR guys, virtually nobody is buying your overpriced, rehashed shit.

Somebody tell Mr. Welsh to go lurk on their own forums, thatll give him an idea of how attractive and desirable their pricing structure is.

I will give you a touché on that, Mr. Blair:

Touché!

To the former Prime Minister of Britain: There's very little statistical data available on what is or isn't a high amount of sales for DLC. The fact of the matter is that 300,000 packs sold could very well be excellent when compared to other pieces of DLC for other games. All that being said, more packs would have sold at a lower price point. There's no question about that.

While I kind of sounded like a dick in my post above, I don't LIKE microtransactions. I agree with Jason that competition in this niche genré can only help lower the prices and be good for gamers.

Get off your high horse and shut the hell up. Nobody is forcing you to buy the content and you are NOT entitled to it. It's just a bunch of songs for a video game not some kind of plebeian right.

Some people feel that they get enjoyment out of these packs and that they are worth their money. That makes them retarded? You just spent eight bucks on a plastic guitar and you feel all self-righteous about people spending a few dollars for some extra songs? Shut. Up.

Activision has nothing to do with Rock Band. It is being developed by Harmonix and published by MTV with EA distributing. No announcements have been made about Rock Band's retail or DLC pricing yet.

deaftly,

It's not an issue if you have the money - most of us do. The issue is that people like you set the stage for higher prices in the future.

Now, to trade jabs, it's funny that out of all the decent songs available for DL, you choose mullet-rock.
Also, it's funny that you can capitalize FTW, but not "i", but that also seems to reflect the mullet-rock preference...

Here's the thing - it doesn't matter whether we the customers are impressed with the adoption rate - Activision is. They're happy with what they're making from the people willing to buy these overpriced packs. The rest of us can go fuck ourselves as far as their concerned.

:) I can't say that I haven't been there myself.

One Sunday morning I woke up with the full version of Doom on the XBL arcade. I have that game on my PC. Beer can be powerful...

haha...man, if $6.25 is all you spent while drunk, I would say you made out pretty damned good. I mean, it could have been a lot worse, like say a pocketful of bar tab CC receipts and a walk of shame in the morning...er...not that I would know of anything about that.

Black Sabbath = Classic Rock / Heavy Metal
Solo Ozzy = Mullet Rock / Heavy Metal

Granted, this is a slippery slope, but when a metal band hit the 1980's it was practically guaranteed to become a mullet rock band (IMO). Some may argue that most southern classic rock is also mullet rock, but I figure that if is band is played on the same station as Poision, Scorpions, Whitesnake, and Warrant, then that band constitutes mullet rock.

Sue me.

A click through rate of 2% in online advertising is considered a success. You don't need to sell the content to every user for it to be successful. The cost to distribute is negligible and the cost to produce (these are previously made tracks with previously established distribution rights) which means that a high percentage of the revenue, much higher than the actual game sale, is profit.

300,000 downloads at 500 points == almost 2 million dollars. Not bad for a low cost add-on.

It simply can't be compared to online advertising. In this instance you've got a direct market composed entirely of people who presumably enjoy the game (why else would they buy it and play it), and therefore most, if not all of them, are presumably interested in buying additional content for that game. In which case they should be targeting a MUCH higher sales percentage than 15%, and a more acceptable price should easily achieve that goal.

alright Mr Kutaragi, this isn't a BMW, it's a song pack. Content that was released for the PS2 long ago. It's not a premium luxury car, it's rehashed content. It's overpriced, and rehashed. I've got no problem w/ paying for extra content, as long as I'm getting value for my money. The crackdown DLC provides value for my money. These song packs do not.

Are you Ken Kutaragi in disguise?

bag of milk?

In Canadia they sell milk in bags. It's more eco-friendly, dontcha know?

oh snap! I have revealed my Canadian location... Yep, we get milk in bags, but we don't need fridges cause we have igloos. Also, we drink pop on our couches, not soda on our sofas.