Do you think cosmetics cost too much and should be reduced?
I love the game and I don't mind that you have to earn Shards in the game to unlock the cosmetics as it gives you something to play for and work against, however I think the costs of them is ridiculous as it takes a long time to earn Shards.
Also the cost of the Auric Cells is too high, for example £8 worth of Auric Cells will unlock one outfit, that's more than some of the DLC costs. The packs should not cost as much and the amount of Auric Cells required to purchase the cosmetics should be lowered.
Do you think cosmetics cost too much and should be reduced? 31 votes
24 votes
7 votes
Comments
-
No
Nope. Cosmetics are not generated for free, there are people working on it. And the Art Team of DBD is 10/10.
1 -
I feel kinda effy on it
0 -
Yes
I think the price is pretty steep, but i honestly think most skin prices in many games are. I understand that games such as this need to make money through other means but its pushed too far most times.
I agree the art team at BHVR is amazing and I love the work they do however I also look at it like this:
I pay 30$ for the game, a huge package with tons to do.
I pay 5-10$ for DLC that comes with new survivors, killers,perks and powers all mostly bug free ^.~
I pay 10$ for a single character skin that gives me nothing aside from a new look (unless I'm killer then I pay 10$ so others can see my new look...)
I just think the price is too damn steep for what we get. I have purchased the charity packs because you get a nice bundle of items for the price. I cannot swallow the fact that a single skin cost 1/3 of the games price. In fact they would most likely get more money from me if I felt the price was reasonable because instead of buying 1 skin the whole year I might be tempted to purchase 3 or 4.
----------------------
Another example is FFXIV:
I paid 80$ for the whole game with all DLC (sure it was a sale as I think I saved 30$)
I could then pay 40$ for a single mount. A mount that functions the same as all the free mounts in the game that came fully packaged for the above price.
It boggles my mind that single cosmetic items cost damn near the same price as a whole game! Unless the art team is making some serious moola per hour I don't understand the outrageous price discrepancy.
Maybe someone with an actually business perspective behind the scenes could enlighten me as I view this simply from a consumer side who makes an average wage and scoffs at these sorts of things most of the time.
5 -
Yes
I’ve spent hundreds of dollars on cosmetics and they’re a bit more than the average game, but I still buy them lol
0 -
No
To be fair - DBD is a fairly cheap game. I have over 3k hrs in this game, compared to what some titles give me for way more money...
I mean, my favorite example is "The Order 1886". I am a big fan of the design, but the game was worth 70 Euros at release for like 10 hours of gameplay, a lot of those cutscenes. This means, that I would have paid 7 Euros per hour. Now I would say that I spent like 150 Euros on DBD so far. Just calculate the value.
Furthermore, regarding Cosmetics: They are 100% optional. You dont need any of them. And for DLCs, as long as it is not licensed, you dont have to pay a single Cent either. And even the Perks can be available for free in the Shrine.
So yeah, DBD is a cheap game, and even if the Cosmetics are relatively expensive, compared to the Coregame, they are completely optional and nobody will be at disadvantage when not buying them.
0 -
I'd say £8 for a premium cosmetic is about in line with other games, and other games tend to a lot more recolors and lazy cosmetics, you can tell the cosmetics are, at the very least, made with a lot of talent and effort.
And generally, the people buying cosmetics are those who only/mainly play dbd, its seen as a way of supporting the game we love, i'm privileged enough to have a bit of disposable income, so the price isn't really a factor, more if I think they are good value, and imo they are.
0 -
Also, just comparing the cost of the cosmetics to DLC's, the fact that the DLCs are so cheap is because in part of the cosmetics. They offset each other and keep the barrier to entry for the gameplay changing content low. (I mean you can grind shards and not pay a penny for DLC if you want)
0 -
Yes
I agree they are optional but that wasn't the question.
I could offer a coffee at my shop that cost 100$. Is that too expensive for a coffee? Yes it is, even if its optional.
I'm also not arguing about DBD being pretty cheap for a game but rather the concept of a single skin costing 1/3 the game. The effort put into creating the game as a whole far exceeds the time of a single skin and the correlation in price always throws me off when it comes to micro-transactions.
If you think its a fair price that's great, if you don't mind spending the cash on it that's fine. It's your money and you may do with it as you please (unless you stole it from me then please return it). This is simply my point of view on my frustration around the price difference between the two.
0 -
Honestly, cosmetics barely have an effect on the game, and some make it harder for you to win (Neon Colors, etc.) They're mainly a way to show that you support the developers and are willing to spend a few dollars on a skin to support them. Also the art team is amazing.
0 -
Yes
I think the oldest cosmetics should be a bit cheaper but the others can stay the same for now.
0 -
No
Yes and no but mostly no. I always believe in the value of art and when it comes to my tattoos or other forms of art including cosmetics there is time and thought that goes into it basically paying the artist and the company of course for a profit. Around 10$ seems steep but you can see with most cosmetics there’s a lot of detail in what you pay for in comparison to lesser cosmetics. The enjoyment I get out of them mostly out weigh the costs but maybe a tad less so as to not be the same as a new dlc pack even if 50¢ or so. Honestly especially with the rift pass there’s a lot more for your money there for variations but I side more on the no.
0
