Pre-order Bonuses | Forums

[kalle90]

^ No, I don't feel the NEED to have everything. I am not controlled by a possesive or envious nature.

Having a different outfit that only a smaal percentage of players have is simply fun, weapons too. And the players who don't have my suit, have a suit that I can't have. It just ADDS to the experience. You can only wear one at a time anyway, why this irrational NEED to have EVERYTHING. If that mind set was applied to the real world, EVERYONE would be terminally depressed.
Players need to get over the material urges that make them focus on the negative aspects rather than the positive.
The game environment is much larger than it ever was, why this need to isolate it all to one total package?

Are YOU saying that extra content should be included for free for everyone, or that companies shouldn't exercise the option to create and sell more content? Or are you suggesting they should make more content as standard and up the price of the game and thereby sell less of them (probably).

I don't need to have everything and I wouldn't deprive others of perks just because my situation didn't allow for them. A SUIT isn't altering the game in any significant way at all.
Again it's not about depriving some, it's about offering differences. Pre orderer's should be rewarded. The only issue is finding ways to offer similar rewards to those who have no access to them.

I do agree, that as with EVERYTHING, there will always be an avenue that some will exploit, i.e. removing content that should be included.
As I said, GOW3 extra campaign was not part of the main campaign, it had totally new playable characters. And the main campaign was as long if not longer than both other entries in the franchise AND it upped the play to 4 players. So they gave us MORE than ever, then offered even more as an option. Where's the issue there?

So Yes, I am serious.

You're talking about being possessive, while you obviously get kicks from having something others don't. We could argue that is just another form of being possessive.

All I'm saying is that everything that is done by the game releases should be available to everyone. There is no reason to hold back any of that, except for business reasons, but I'm in the gamer crowd. Everything done after the release is the real bonus, and as such for example Raam's Shadow in GOW3 is just fine. As long as it's fully seperate and the main game won't have any "To use this, you need to buy the DLC". The weapon skin packs of GOW3 however were ridicilous, really made the game feel cheap and messy. As we don't even see our weapons much, I didn't care about them, but the notion of "Buy all weapon skins for $20ish" really bothers me. If this isn't stopped now it will just get worse. "You want a red coloured Ferrari? Pay $5 to unlock the color"

I don't see why pre-ordereds should be rewarded, even less so with in-game stuff, which is already done and could be available to everyone. What makes pre-orderers any better from those who buy at launch, or who want to see through the first couple of weeks whether the game is actually good?

[hastings84]

I don't see why pre-ordereds should be rewarded, even less so with in-game stuff, which is already done and could be available to everyone. What makes pre-orderers any better from those who buy at launch, or who want to see through the first couple of weeks whether the game is actually good?

I disagree, and here's why.

When I pre-order a game, that means I have done something special for the developer --- not myself. If I want to show my support for a dev company and their upcoming release, I will pre-order it. PAYING for a game months before I get it, in many cases. A pre-order bonus, in my mind, should be a thank-you from the developer. Extra content that says "You're a valued consumer". To me, that warrants some special "gift" for people who pre-order, regardless whether or not non-pre-orderers get it.

For the people who pre-order solely for the bonus content, or early access to things, well I can't speak to that - But those people have certainly been a victim of subliminal advertising.

[SolidSage]

You're talking about being possessive, while you obviously get kicks from having something others don't. We could argue that is just another form of being possessive.

All I'm saying is that everything that is done by the game releases should be available to everyone. There is no reason to hold back any of that, except for business reasons, but I'm in the gamer crowd. Everything done after the release is the real bonus, and as such for example Raam's Shadow in GOW3 is just fine. As long as it's fully seperate and the main game won't have any "To use this, you need to buy the DLC". The weapon skin packs of GOW3 however were ridicilous, really made the game feel cheap and messy. As we don't even see our weapons much, I didn't care about them, but the notion of "Buy all weapon skins for $20ish" really bothers me. If this isn't stopped now it will just get worse. "You want a red coloured Ferrari? Pay $5 to unlock the color"

I don't see why pre-ordereds should be rewarded, even less so with in-game stuff, which is already done and could be available to everyone. What makes pre-orderers any better from those who buy at launch, or who want to see through the first couple of weeks whether the game is actually good?

I have a feeling you'll argue anything I have to say so I probably won't bother to say too much more.

But, again, a desire for DIFFERENCE doesn't equate to possesiveness in my mind. I like Players have different experience options. I might not like playing SC the way you do, or my character looking the way yours does, why should I/it have to? So YOU can own every little piece of content available and nobody can have something you don't? That doesn't make sense to me. Pre-order content varies from store to store, tou or ai could both choose the SAME content if we wanted, as long as the pre-order options were available where we live.
As I said, making it available to all is the real issue, not the variety and diversity that is offered by it.

As far weapon skins, well you might not like them but plenty of us do. I disagree with your statement that we don't even see the weapons much. I think we see them for about 100% of the game, there's always an alternative weapon on the back of the character in the 3rd person shooters I play. You have played Gears right? Did you not notice the Gnasher on your dude's back the entire game? When you color that weapon in MP, it makes ID'ing your friends/clan much easier. Same in GRFS, my partners specific SCC camo (available to everyone who CHOSE to purchase SCC) on their weapon is a great assist in knowing who in the match is important to me and who I want to support.

You not liking the weapon skins is a perfect example of why DLC is great, I can have things I DO want and you don't have to suffer the things YOU don't like.

@Hastings
While pre-orders may help Devs track trending popularity or whatever, and reward players for signalling intent to purchase and loyalty, I imagine the bigger reason for it is to manage Publisher/Outlet relationships. Back end deals designed to improve affilate relationships. It's surely the outlets that want the pre-order bonus options so they can entice consumers into purchasing from them.

[sameer_monier]

I won't read through all of this :P, my 2 cents, they can do whatever they want, as long as they release everything later to the people who can't get the pre-order stuff like me, I would hate to miss a skin that is so awesome just cause I can't pre order from Gamestop.

I think SCC market campaign was really great in that regard, everything became available for everyone later on, something to respect the developer and Ubi for IMO

[hastings84]

While pre-orders may help Devs track trending popularity or whatever, and reward players for signalling intent to purchase and loyalty, I imagine the bigger reason for it is to manage Publisher/Outlet relationships. Back end deals designed to improve affilate relationships. It's surely the outlets that want the pre-order bonus options so they can entice consumers into purchasing from them.

By this theory then, I should not pre-order, given my general hate for the outlet stores, like EB Games.

I still think a large part of it comes down to the publisher wanting consumer figures to an upcoming release. Why do YouTubers want views? Why to tweeters want followers? High numbers. Popularity contest. They want their game to go GOLD asap.

I do think maybe you're exaggerating the effectiveness of weapon skins though. I'm impartial to them because I have not found a relative use for them, like you say you have. But just having them as an option to customize with is what means the most to me. CONTENT. Otherwise, I totally agree with you.

....as long as they release everything later to the people who can't get the pre-order stuff like me

Ahhh I don't know the answer to that problem. But wouldn't you love a pre-order EXCLUSIVE item, if you were able to?

Also, maybe we should push for exclusive forum member items.

[sameer_monier]

Ahhh I don't know the answer to that problem. But wouldn't you love a pre-order EXCLUSIVE item, if you were able to?

Also, maybe we should push for exclusive forum member items.

Nope, I wouldn't mind people getting their hands on something I got for free as a pre-order, if I paid money for it then yeah I won't like it if they got it for free, Equality Man

How about you get the Making of videos, sound tracks, t-shirts, singed stuff ........etc as exclusive stuff

And ingame things skins. weapons, dlc, ........etc we all get it


Edit like Far Cry 3: Insane Edition, you get all those sweet things that I can't get like Vass Wahine, but later on I get the SP mission too, and all those MP packs too, I guess that is fair for both parts, cause you still got something I won't have.

[kalle90]

But, again, a desire for DIFFERENCE doesn't equate to possesiveness in my mind. I like Players have different experience options. I might not like playing SC the way you do, or my character looking the way yours does, why should I/it have to? So YOU can own every little piece of content available and nobody can have something you don't? That doesn't make sense to me. Pre-order content varies from store to store, tou or ai could both choose the SAME content if we wanted, as long as the pre-order options were available where we live.
As I said, making it available to all is the real issue, not the variety and diversity that is offered by it.

You not liking the weapon skins is a perfect example of why DLC is great, I can have things I DO want and you don't have to suffer the things YOU don't like.

They can have the difference experience options without exclusive stuff. You choose costume A, I choose costume B, someone else chooses costume C. So what if someone who didn't buy Conviction wants to play GRFS with SCC camo? Why shouldn't they be able to do that? So I don't see what issue is there with having everything pre-release on the **** disc. Also, store specific exclusives are the worst, Arkham City was a huge disaster with one store offering Robin, another offering Joker's Carnival, 3rd having Penguin's Iceberg Lounge, not to mention the crapload of costumes shared around. And if you got some of them, in the end you had to rebuy them so you'd get the rest (The challenge map pack DLC has Carnival and Iceberg lounge so even if someone got Carnival for pre-order they had to buy it for the 2nd time to get the Iceberg Lounge. Same with costumes) which actually screws the pre-orderers over. Atleast something like the shotgun of Conviction was relatively mild.

I'm not saying I don't like those weapon skins. Point is that the weapons shouldn't be DLC at all. We had our menu cluttered with locked weapon skins from day one with markings about "Buy this". To me that's just saying "You can't get the complete launch game for $60, you need to pay more". Like said as long as it stays with weapon skins and cosmetic it's atleast bearable, but no doubt developers are testing the waters. If this stuff sells (and even if doesn't, but the sales of base game aren't hurt, they aren't making any losses and have no need for change) they're going to extend it. That is unless they kill used game markets before it.

In short: I'm against day 1 DLC, pre-order bonuses or otherwise.

@Hastings
I pre-order games because they look awesome (actually very few games look so awesome I rather pre-order them than buy on launch day, just in case something goes bad, especially the way things are now). I don't consider it special service for the developer, I'm just seeing a great game. Even moreso because if the game isn't all that good, the reward won't make me feel any better, and if the game is good I don't see need for special rewards. All in all this pre-order mania is damaging the companies reputation IMO. They're all embracing sort of "We're not selling our games complete. Instead we're cutting them to pieces and using them as baits so people would buy our game like a pig in a bag". DLC could be a good thing, but companies like Capcom are making it a total joke.

These days I usually just wait for the GOTY editions, but even they lack stuff. I'm just used to getting complete games, and not ones riddled with microtransactions and exclusive stuff. If thing keep going down this line I'll just have to go retro.

[SolidSage]

@Hastings
Well I think maybe that's right, about you not supporting EB. I do think pre-sales figures has something to do with it, but if that was the only factor wouldn't they offer the SAME pre-order content through all outlets, instead of each chain having something different to offer.
The weapon skins really do help tho, obviously Gears has the button to locate players but launching and hauling tail to the engagement is improved, for me, when I can quickly ID which player in front is my guy. GRFS is even harder/more involved to locate a pal, so the camo is helping there too. Especially when characters look similar AND players can change up character after every death.

@Sameer
I have no problem with everyone having everything at some point, but I do prefer in game rewards.

@Kalle
Day1 DLC is it's own entity, how I feel about it is specific to the content. Gears huge list of skins wasn't a big deal to me. They gave us a bunch of cool ones anyway, and you could get others in a variety of ways. Let em make som extra money for expanded content like that. It's not really an important one. Missions and maps is different, holding those back seems unfair. Insurgency seemed right though.
I pre-order regardless too. Getting something for it is cool.
Why SHOULD a GRFS player get access to the SCC skin if they didn't play it? That's a fan loyalty reward. I like that too. If I purchase a ton of Ubi games isn't it nice if them to enhance the relationship I have with them. It's like Sky miles to me.

I think the big difference in opinion here is that you think content is removed for these uses and I think extra content is created for it. Yes it may be the day1 sometimes, but if the financial support aspect of being able to sell it wasn't available, they probably wouldn't bother building the extra stuff. And in that reality, NOBODY get's an SCC skin, for example. Whereas now, everyone who bought or buys SCC can get it.
And isn't motivating more players to try/buy SCC a good thing for us and SC?

[Jazz117Volkov]

I fear I have missed most of this conversation (and I'm not in the mood to read it all o_O)
Anyway, just to add a little something. I would actually encourage DLC of the aftermarket kind.
Like the weapon skins for GOW3.

However, something that bugs me to no end is when a random company (EA) rips a significant weapon out of the game (N7 Assault Rifle) and packages it for a preorder bonus.
'Cause then the game (Mass Effect 3) has an incomplete arsenal (N7 weapons)
and the suckiest part is, the gun was on the disk, installed onto MY computer, but I can't use it because I didn't preorder from a shop that doesn't even exist in my local region.

[SolidSage]

Deffo a grey area. We need our guys to do it right, as bonuses, not rip offs.