New Hitman Comes in Pieces

[j123]

Fuck this episodic bullshit cashgrab fuckery. Sell me the entire goddamn game or fuck off with it. Same thing is happening with FFVII. The dev greed is real.

Yeah, sadly this is the direction gaming seems to leaning towards. I think there was capcom fighter (I forgot the name) where they included the content on the disc, but needed to be purchased as DLC to unlock.

There's also the Halo 5 customization point system thing.

 

[HereticBD]

Yeah, sadly this is the direction gaming seems to leaning towards. I think there was capcom fighter (I forgot the name) where they included the content on the disc, but needed to be purchased as DLC to unlock.

Marvel vs Capcom 3.

 

[Porradossaurus]

Wait for the end of the year and buy the "special edition" (complete game) for a reasonable price.

 

[dAfTiE]

Jesus christ you people bitch a lot.
They were always going to be releasing the game in chunks, where were you at the time of the announcement?
Only thing this last change does is let you pay less for the initial chunk of the game, instead of paying full price and then having to wait several months for the last two pieces of content.
This release strategy is hardly perfect, but I think it's a lot better than the original one.

 

[usmctanker242]

What kills me is that we saw this shit coming years ago. Also, what kills me is that we're fine with paying $30 or so for three chunks of extra content, just as long as we've already paid $60 for the "full" game. Now we're crying foul because they want to sell the game in increments right off the bat.

Think of how much money people spent on a game like Borderlands 2, if they bought all the DLC as soon as it was available. Nobody bitched. In fact, praises were thrown at Gearbox for "caring about the community" and keeping the game going with extra content.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but we've certainly done absolutely nothing to make them think it's a bad idea. Gamers are all talk, and developers know it.

I think people need to realize that $60 for a game is a very, VERY, low price to pay in the current economy. Back in the late 1980's I remember my parents paid $60 for NES games. A game like Excite-Bike and Super Mario Bros 2 were each $60. Now, according to the inflation index, that means they were paying roughly $120 for each of those games in current dollars. Now think about that... games which took a few people a few weeks to design and create, costed about twice as much as "gamers" are willing to pay today.

Gamers are a group of babies and whiners... they whine about every single fucking thing ever (myself included sometimes). If people weren't so deadset on the $60 entry price, then DLC could be avoided. But the market was tested years ago and $60, even in today's market, is pretty much the cap that MOST gamers are willing to pay for entry to the games. If we were all willing to allow that cap to increase to $100, then we would see better games which are more complete at launch. A video game producing company needs to make profit, not just a good game. With the cost of development of AAA games the $60 return for each unit isn't enough, so they introduce DLC to increase the profits. I don't have a problem with it, especially with something like Hitman, where they're going to keep on creating content.

Also, this Hitman game looks awesome, and I'll be happy as a pig in shit if they are returning to the Blood Money style, rather than Absolution, which it certainly looks like from the trailers. Lets all just be happy that we're getting new, bad ass games, rather than bitching and whining about installments. It's better to get installments, even if we have to pay a nominal fee, than to pay $60 and get a half-assed game.

 

[InvertedCross]

Fuck this episodic bullshit cashgrab fuckery. Sell me the entire goddamn game or fuck off with it. Same thing is happening with FFVII. The dev greed is real.

This shit is heading in the wrong direction fast.

 

[Porradossaurus]

I think people need to realize that $60 for a game is a very, VERY, low price to pay in the current economy. Back in the late 1980's I remember my parents paid $60 for NES games. A game like Excite-Bike and Super Mario Bros 2 were each $60. Now, according to the inflation index, that means they were paying roughly $120 for each of those games in current dollars. Now think about that... games which took a few people a few weeks to design and create, costed about twice as much as "gamers" are willing to pay today.

Gamers are a group of babies and whiners... they whine about every single fucking thing ever (myself included sometimes). If people weren't so deadset on the $60 entry price, then DLC could be avoided. But the market was tested years ago and $60, even in today's market, is pretty much the cap that MOST gamers are willing to pay for entry to the games. If we were all willing to allow that cap to increase to $100, then we would see better games which are more complete at launch. A video game producing company needs to make profit, not just a good game. With the cost of development of AAA games the $60 return for each unit isn't enough, so they introduce DLC to increase the profits. I don't have a problem with it, especially with something like Hitman, where they're going to keep on creating content.

Also, this Hitman game looks awesome, and I'll be happy as a pig in shit if they are returning to the Blood Money style, rather than Absolution, which it certainly looks like from the trailers. Lets all just be happy that we're getting new, bad ass games, rather than bitching and whining about installments. It's better to get installments, even if we have to pay a nominal fee, than to pay $60 and get a half-assed game.

I disagree. There's no guarantee a company would profit the same or more if games cost $100 since people would buy less games. Sure, I would pay $100 for the next Dark Souls since I'm a die hard fan but many people who are not as invested as me and bought one or both previous games wouldn't buy the new one.

Along with that, many people who usually buy 2 games on hollidays for $120, for example, wouldn't be willing to dish out $200 now. They would probably buy just one game.
So, it would be much harder to sell an AAA game that cost millions of dollars to produce when there is an Elder Scrolls sequel or the next Witcher costing $100. This would hurt the industry even more.

And I don't think charging more for games is a guarantee they will have more content/quality. I see companies like EA releasing DLC even if their games are priced at $200.

DLC is here to stay, be it expansions, new characters or cosmetics. And it's not a bad thing if done right. Some expansions improve a lot of things because devs had the feedback of the original game.
I don't know if the Hitman thing is a scam, I hope it's not. But the problem today is games are so appealing people spend cash in them even when they know they are being scammed.

 

[HereticBD]

I don't think the new Hitman is a scam. It's actually quite the gamble, because the game will live and die on word of mouth, and how good/bad the first few installments are. If those first chunks of the game suck, then the sales won't be there for the rest of the game. The opposite is true if it ends up being great.

Bottom line though, if you don't like the business model, don't support it. Don't buy the game, and then voice your displeasure on Youtube.

 

[usmctanker242]

I disagree. There's no guarantee a company would profit the same or more if games cost $100 since people would buy less games. Sure, I would pay $100 for the next Dark Souls since I'm a die hard fan but many people who are not as invested as me and bought one or both previous games wouldn't buy the new one.

Along with that, many people who usually buy 2 games on hollidays for $120, for example, wouldn't be willing to dish out $200 now. They would probably buy just one game.
So, it would be much harder to sell an AAA game that cost millions of dollars to produce when there is an Elder Scrolls sequel or the next Witcher costing $100. This would hurt the industry even more.

And I don't think charging more for games is a guarantee they will have more content/quality. I see companies like EA releasing DLC even if their games are priced at $200.

DLC is here to stay, be it expansions, new characters or cosmetics. And it's not a bad thing if done right. Some expansions improve a lot of things because devs had the feedback of the original game.
I don't know if the Hitman thing is a scam, I hope it's not. But the problem today is games are so appealing people spend cash in them even when they know they are being scammed.

See, what you're saying is the problem, in my opinion at least. People need to get over the $60 price point for a AAA game if they want to see the video game economy change in any kind of meaningful manner. DLC is here to stay because people are only willing to pay what is essentially half of what they were willing to pay about 25 years ago for video games. Think about that... that's in-fucking-sane!

I don't think Hitman is a scam... Blood Money had so much re-playability it was amazing. It took me a LONG time before I felt as though I had mastered that game and had found every avenue of approach for each level. Then I went online and took a look at what other people were doing and it blew my mind... I had to try these different strategies. So I think the timing with the releases will great as we'll be just about finished up with each section when a new one is available. Also, don't forget the Daily Hits (or whatever they are actually called) as well as they were talking about doing something similar to the Contracts idea from Absolution.

Can anyone provide a source where they have confirmed the cost of the base game, as well as the additional cost of the installments? I haven't seen it anywhere, just curious.

 

[Porradossaurus]

See, what you're saying is the problem, in my opinion at least. People need to get over the $60 price point for a AAA game if they want to see the video game economy change in any kind of meaningful manner. DLC is here to stay because people are only willing to pay what is essentially half of what they were willing to pay about 25 years ago for video games. Think about that... that's in-fucking-sane!

I don't think Hitman is a scam... Blood Money had so much re-playability it was amazing. It took me a LONG time before I felt as though I had mastered that game and had found every avenue of approach for each level. Then I went online and took a look at what other people were doing and it blew my mind... I had to try these different strategies. So I think the timing with the releases will great as we'll be just about finished up with each section when a new one is available. Also, don't forget the Daily Hits (or whatever they are actually called) as well as they were talking about doing something similar to the Contracts idea from Absolution.

Can anyone provide a source where they have confirmed the cost of the base game, as well as the additional cost of the installments? I haven't seen it anywhere, just curious.

In truth, I feel the same way as you do... I wish games were released complete as they were 20 years ago. When I said DLC is here to stay I wasn't defending that practice, just stating a fact.

When DLC (or expansion packs) started they were meant to add a new experience without devs needing to build a new engine for a sequel. It was a way to explore the theme further. Baldur's Gate's expansion was great as were the Ultima games' and many others. Those were content made after the game was released and they usually were improvements over the vanilla game since devs had feedback of what was wrong. You could buy it or not, either way you had a complete game experience already.

Now companies are releasing games with locked content so you have to pay for something that should've been there already. DLC has become an unethical cash grab and people are buying into it.

 

[usmctanker242]

In truth, I feel the same way as you do... I wish games were released complete as they were 20 years ago. When I said DLC is here to stay I wasn't defending that practice, just stating a fact.

When DLC (or expansion packs) started they were meant to add a new experience without devs needing to build a new engine for a sequel. It was a way to explore the theme further. Baldur's Gate's expansion was great as were the Ultima games' and many others. Those were content made after the game was released and they usually were improvements over the vanilla game since devs had feedback of what was wrong. You could buy it or not, either way you had a complete game experience already.

Now companies are releasing games with locked content so you have to pay for something that should've been there already. DLC has become an unethical cash grab and people are buying into it.

You're right about DLC evolving from additional stuff to basically completing the game. This is because of that price ceiling of $60. For a studio to spend years and millions of dollars on a game they need a serious return on investment. I think that return just isn't high enough with that $60 purchase, so they have to space the game out over multiple DLC's to make it to about $100-120, which is where I personally believe a AAA game should be priced. The reality is that video games have gone for 8-bit side-scrolling platformers to 3D artistic and literary masterpieces. Think about the script and voice acting necessary for a modern game? How many hours do we spend playing these games? I'm happy to pay $1/hour for a game I love. I can't even count the amount of hours I put into Blood Money... bought it on 360 and Xbone when I upgraded. Well worth the price.

 

[GhostZ06]

Jesus christ you people bitch a lot.
They were always going to be releasing the game in chunks, where were you at the time of the announcement?
Only thing this last change does is let you pay less for the initial chunk of the game, instead of paying full price and then having to wait several months for the last two pieces of content.
This release strategy is hardly perfect, but I think it's a lot better than the original one.

oh stop, these arent expansions, stop. You know damn well that its a stupid practice, this is an excuse to over charge the game when you now its not even worth the price. Why dont they just make the fucking game and stop this "episodic" and dlc bullshit.

 

[dAfTiE]

oh stop, these arent expansions, stop. You know damn well that its a stupid practice, this is an excuse to over charge the game when you now its not even worth the price. Why dont they just make the fucking game and stop this "episodic" and dlc bullshit.

I didn't say they're expansions. I'm saying they announced the game as coming out with partial contents and the rest coming later. Back then the deal was 60 for the initial drop and then you got the rest of the shit later for free.
Then they removed parts from the initial drop, spaced out the release of the later parts and are now selling them all chopped up for a total price of 60. I think that's better than the initial pre-order for a retail game business model.

 

[deadshot138]

Saw the gameplay online, looks okay but not something I'll wait forever for episodes for.

 

[usmctanker242]

oh stop, these arent expansions, stop. You know damn well that its a stupid practice, this is an excuse to over charge the game when you now its not even worth the price. Why dont they just make the fucking game and stop this "episodic" and dlc bullshit.

Quoted from the sauce in the OP

"Of course you can still buy the Full Experience which is the complete first season, so all the content this year as it’s released, up front for $60 as always promised. Whether you purchase the complete game or buy each episode individually, we want to remind the community that there will be no micro transactions in HITMAN. "

So how are they over-charging? If you want to buy the whole game at launch, you're more than welcome to drop $60 and get the whole game including all of the DLC for the first year. If, however, you'd rather only pay a smaller entry fee you'll end up having to spend a bit more for the DLC. I think it's a great idea and a win/win for the gamers. If you're a big Hitman fan you're probably willing to pay $60 for the whole game. But if you're new to the series, or skeptical for some reason, you can drop $15 to get started and see if you enjoy it. Sounds like a perfect idea which will cater to every gamer.

 

[usmctanker242]

Also, the Hitman beta is currently available for PS4 users and will be available for PC users via Steam on Feb 19. People who have pre-ordered will have full access to the beta.

https://hitman.com/news/hitman-beta-faq

 

[HereticBD]

Quoted from the sauce in the OP

"Of course you can still buy the Full Experience which is the complete first season, so all the content this year as it’s released, up front for $60 as always promised. Whether you purchase the complete game or buy each episode individually, we want to remind the community that there will be no micro transactions in HITMAN. "

So how are they over-charging? If you want to buy the whole game at launch, you're more than welcome to drop $60 and get the whole game including all of the DLC for the first year. If, however, you'd rather only pay a smaller entry fee you'll end up having to spend a bit more for the DLC. I think it's a great idea and a win/win for the gamers. If you're a big Hitman fan you're probably willing to pay $60 for the whole game. But if you're new to the series, or skeptical for some reason, you can drop $15 to get started and see if you enjoy it. Sounds like a perfect idea which will cater to every gamer.

I wouldn't say it's win/win. If you're paying $60, don't you want the whole experience right off the bat? It's kind of annoying having to wait for installments. Totally reasonable in a $20 Telltale game, but for $60 I want the entire game now. I imagine this will be an entirely digitally distributed game until it's complete too, so if you buy it at full price and don't like the first bit, you're stuck. You can't take it back, or get decent trade-in value for it.

I think it's up the consumer to decide if they want to risk buying it, but I don't think a good business model for the consumer at all, and there are questionable motivations behind it.

 

[Lovestorm]

Turns out i won't be buying this with the quickness. Will have to wait a year.

 

[usmctanker242]

I wouldn't say it's win/win. If you're paying $60, don't you want the whole experience right off the bat? It's kind of annoying having to wait for installments. Totally reasonable in a $20 Telltale game, but for $60 I want the entire game now. I imagine this will be an entirely digitally distributed game until it's complete too, so if you buy it at full price and don't like the first bit, you're stuck. You can't take it back, or get decent trade-in value for it.

I think it's up the consumer to decide if they want to risk buying it, but I don't think a good business model for the consumer at all, and there are questionable motivations behind it.

It's win/win in the sense that you get exactly what you pay for. I don't mind the wait... if it takes them some extra time to put some good finishing details/polish on portions of the game I'm OK with that. Waiting another year for the game to drop would suck knowing that so much of it is ready to go. To each their own I guess, but I have no problem with installments, especially if it's a regular monthly installment as they are saying it is.

 

[Jermei]

I just bought it. Midnight download is counting down... at first I thought the broken up story was lame but I know ill be excited for new chapters as they come in. Plus they want you to play the fk out of these levels and get good at completing the difficult tasks so im cool with that. Easy to skip though and beat the game if you dont replay the levels.