DLC maps low activity and the next DLC3 | Forums

[thekarlone]

Due the low activity (almost impossible to play, we've paid for a broken dlc) in the new maps, I think Ubi can do a thing to improve it (only if they want, of course).


1. Give the Map Pack for free.
2. Those who have purchased the Map Pack will obtain the DLC3 for free (is the same price, there's no problem).
3. Those who haven't purchased the Map Pack can obtain it for free and pay only for the DLC3 ($/€10).


So, both kind of players pays the same and the low activity will be solved a bit. What do you think?, considering that the "Money makes the world go around, the world go around, the world go around...".

[DoubleclickTF]

It's a great idea. I very much doubt that it will happen. But it's a great idea.

You'd make a good Head of Marketing for some games company out there, up until your eventual dismissal for doing what the customers want instead of what the shareholders want.

[Sephrick]

It's a great idea. I very much doubt that it will happen. But it's a great idea.

You'd make a good Head of Marketing for some games company out there, up until your eventual dismissal for doing what the customers want instead of what the shareholders want.

Because the shareholders love it when no one at all plays what the company designed.

I'm sure the shareholders are more concerned with the crippled server structure and low retention rate.

[giaquinto718]

its low because alot of people are boycotting the game until they fix it with some patches

I'm boycotting it, but they are apparently promising a patch, and have mentioned fixes

[DoubleclickTF]

Because the shareholders love it when no one at all plays what the company designed.

I'm sure the shareholders are more concerned with the crippled server structure and low retention rate.

Gabe Newell:

Recently I was in a meeting and there’s a company that had a third party DRM solution and we showed them look, this is what happens, at this point in your life cycle your DRM got hacked, right? Now let’s look at the data, did your sales change at all? No, your sales didn’t change one bit. Right? So here’s before and after, here’s where you have DRM that annoys your customers and causing huge numbers of support calls and in theory you would think that you would see a huge drop off in sales after that got hacked, and instead there was absolutely no difference in sales before or after. You know, and then we tell them you actually probably lost a whole bunch of sales as near as we can tell, here’s how much money you lost by bundling that with your product.

I'm not convinced that shareholders are concerned about minutiae such as server popularity unless it becomes an industry news story. Investors aren't necessarily knowledgeable about the products into which they sink their money, and problems can be misidentified. A public outcry can see, for example, DRM removed from one major title only for the same company to reinstate it in a later release of a different title. The company didn't forget it was a bad idea. What pressures, then, cause it to creep back?

Fred Wester, CEO of Paradox:

I just can’t see why people are using DRM still. If you take something like Sony’s DRM, SecuROM -- it’s a waste of money. It will keep you protected for three days, it will create a lot of technical support, and it will not increase sales. AndI know this for a fact, because we tried it eight years ago, and it never worked for us. Two major reasons: it costs money and it makes you lose money, and the other is that it’s so inconvenient to customers.

GameSpy: So why do they do it?

Fred Wester: I don’t know. I think there’s a lot of politics,especially in bigger companies. It’s simple for me being the CEO and half-owner of Paradox. I can basically call the shots I want to call, and if the board wants to ask questions it’s like ‘OK, we can take this into consideration.’ If you’re a CEO, you need to cover your back. And the people who ask, the board, know nothing about games. They’re there because they’re some investment company or something, and they ask “So what are you doing to protect our game from pirates?” And then they can reply “We’re buying this solution from Sony.” So I think it’s been a way to cover your back, previously. Now, I see no reasonable explanation for why people keep on adding it.