137 réponses à ce sujet

[hoysexyjew]

FutureBoy81 wrote...

Jackal904 wrote...

Fallout 3 DLC is a perfect example of how DLC should be done for a singleplayer-only game. About every couple months they released good sized DLC. DLC that lasts you a lot more than an hour. Even Operation Anchorage took me a while and that's their shortest and worst DLC (although I still liked it). All their DLC was fairly lengthy and had a lot of content and substance to them. I gladly payed money for them because they were worth every penny. I don't care about paying for DLC as long as it's worth it. I would rather have substantial DLC every few months that costs money, than free DLC every few weeks that I can beat over lunch.

Please BioWare, I want more ME2 as much as the next guy, but I would much rather have fewer big DLC than lots of small DLC.

[Soldier989]

hoysexyjew wrote...

FutureBoy81 wrote...

Jackal904 wrote...

Fallout 3 DLC is a perfect example of how DLC should be done for a singleplayer-only game. About every couple months they released good sized DLC. DLC that lasts you a lot more than an hour. Even Operation Anchorage took me a while and that's their shortest and worst DLC (although I still liked it). All their DLC was fairly lengthy and had a lot of content and substance to them. I gladly payed money for them because they were worth every penny. I don't care about paying for DLC as long as it's worth it. I would rather have substantial DLC every few months that costs money, than free DLC every few weeks that I can beat over lunch.

Please BioWare, I want more ME2 as much as the next guy, but I would much rather have fewer big DLC than lots of small DLC.

 

[Frumyfrenzy]

I agree. Bethesda definitely did the right thing with their DLC in terms of playtime. But I prefer the way the Bioware-DLC fits in with the original game (Stone Prisoner, RtO). So a combination of both would be perfect for me.

[KCFender]

Point Lookout, with a price tag of $10, featured:

Expansive new area with totally different environments.
New voice-acting with uniquely designed characters and a humorous plot,
New weapons, new enemies.
Side quests added as well as a fairly long "main quest".
Also, during a particular part of the "main quest" the game shows off some visual... treats that you've never seen anything like before in any of the expansions or in the game itself.

For $10. Not $40. Ten dollars. Let's be honest, for the same amount of work and quality, BioWare would charge four times as much money.

Never expect BioWare to measure up to that quality of DLC. Fallout 3 DLC, particularly Point Lookout, was really, really impressive, and I don't think we'll ever see that kind of quality for that kind of price ever again.

And even the Oblivion Horse Armor, that wasn't any bit worse than this ME2 Appearance Pack or this DA:O Feast Prank thing. So sorry Bethesda haters, but in terms of DLC, Fallout 3 is plainly far more impressive and far more fairly priced than anything BioWare has ever done.

Modifié par KCFender, 02 avril 2010 - 09:21 .

[Kronner]

Fallout 3 DLC is light years ahead of any DLC BioWare has ever produced. Getting a little closer would be nice

[Burdokva]

At least the new armors/guns could have been better integrated into the game. I got the CE special Collector armor at the start of the game, before even encountering the Collectors (before even, story wise, Cerberus knew they were involved). It was the same with the Inferno, Arc Prjector and Cerberus armor/shotgun... really?



That way, while I greatly appreciate that they're free and offer variety, they're meaningless plot-wise.

[Wholetyouinhere]

People can hate on Fallout 3/Oblivion all they want, but that DLC absolutely mops the floor with anything anyone else has done - especially Bioware. I'm not going to suggest this happened on purpose. My guess is they don't have the right suits over at Bethesda telling everyone how to properly monetize (read: milk) this feature for all it's worth. As another poster suggested, chances are better than good we won't see anything resembling that value again. It was uneven, of course, and some of it approached "feastday proportions" (horse armor), but there's a reason why Fallout 3 won awards for DLC. I will buy Bethesda add-ons without hesitation (within reason) until their track record indicates I should not. EA/Bioware are on the exact opposite end of the spectrum; I'm reading extensive reviews for their DLC before I bite even a single bullet.

[T1l]

People love to b!tch out Bethesda for their Horse Armour, but guess which other company recently released a $2 perfunctory re-skin pack for their game? Let's hope Bioware learn the same lesson Bethesda did.

[ScotGaymer]

Wholetyouinhere wrote...

People can hate on Fallout 3/Oblivion all they want, but that DLC absolutely mops the floor with anything anyone else has done - especially Bioware. I'm not going to suggest this happened on purpose. My guess is they don't have the right suits over at Bethesda telling everyone how to properly monetize (read: milk) this feature for all it's worth. As another poster suggested, chances are better than good we won't see anything resembling that value again. It was uneven, of course, and some of it approached "feastday proportions" (horse armor), but there's a reason why Fallout 3 won awards for DLC. I will buy Bethesda add-ons without hesitation (within reason) until their track record indicates I should not. EA/Bioware are on the exact opposite end of the spectrum; I'm reading extensive reviews for their DLC before I bite even a single bullet.

I completely and totally disagree.

Bethesda's DLC policy is blatant profiteering - thats it. Theres no way to actually redeem it. The DLC reviews panned the DLC for a reason you know; it wasnt just a "lets bash Bethesda" fest. They did not win awards for their DLC - you are talking crap there mate. The only DLC that got good reviews was Mothership Zeta and that was in a "they FINALLY got the DLC right!" sense.

I agree with the OPs sentiment but not the example. Bethesda are turning into a new age developer version of Infogrames/Atari. *shudders* The direction they are going as a company especially in respect of DLC is appalling. They are totally not a good example of how to tackle DLC.

And thus far my main problem with ME2 DLC (but not DLC for DA:O and ME1) is that everything released thus far as "DLC" is stuff that was cut at the last minute from the original game. Theres been nothing original; but thats not so bad because its all been "free" which kinda mitigates the suckyness of it all.
But there is the upcoming Kasumi DLC which again was a character in the original game and was cut at the last minute and its seemingly increasingly likely we will be asked to pay for it; which i REALLY object to. I probably wont ever get it if im being asked to pay (of course it DOES depend on how MUCH they are asking).

I would have had the example running the other way if I was completely honest. Telling Bethesda to have a look at Bioware and how they do DLC.
I mean most if not nearly all of the Bioware DLC thus far has been of decent to good quality. All of it above mediocre certainly. With a few exceptions. Bioware also put out perhaps the two best DLCs for any game ever - Bring Down the Sky (ME1) and the Shale DLC (DA:O).
Whereas the vast majority of Bethesda DLC has been mediocre to poor quality. With one or two exceptions (Mothership Zeta, Knights of the Nine, Point Lookout maybe?).

I actually wonder if I and the above user actually played the same games. I am not a Bioware fanboy or a Bethesda hater. I loved and continue to love and play Oblivion in spite of its many flaws. And I love Fallout3 for its addictive gameplay in spite of the fact that its story is the worst written story ive ever seen outside of a kids book. I really dislike the "bit part" DLC thats been released for ME2 thus far and think it sets a dangerous precedent.
But seriously actually saying "id buy Bethesda DLC without question" then questioning the wisdom of buying Bioware DLC when there is a world between them in quality? I dont understand that at all. We must in different universes or something.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 02 avril 2010 - 10:44 .

[Rapamaha1]

Fallout 3 DLC's were something unique and they were really worth waiting for, well okay Im lying abit here, Operation Anchorage & Mothership zeta were 1 playtrough DLC:s and then I just deleted them, however Pitt,Lookout & Broken Steel were very good quality DLC:s, more content for hours,perks,items etc... even if Bring down the sky for ME1 was a great DLC In my opinion it wasnt even near the league with the fallout 3 dlc:s wich I just listed.

But then again, we havent really seen much DLC content for ME2 yet, I wouldnt really count few extra weapons as "content", we shall see if bioware can do quality DLC for ME2 with the kasumi addon coming up or should they just instead focus all their efforts on DA & ME3...

[Massadonious1]

I look at and care more about my ME2 characters than I ever did about my Oblivion horse.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

kasumi is gonna last more than an hour and it's coming out 2 months after the launch of the game. what does that tell you?

[Crippledcarny]

All I know is Fallout 3 The Pitt had one of the hardest moral choices I've ever seen in any game. I don't care if bioware comes out with 5min long dlc, if they can end something like The Pitt, I'll buy it.

[T1l]

Say what you will, but The Pitt DLC for Fallout 3 was probably the best DLC I've seen for any game, ever. Comparable to the GTA4 DLC from Rockstar which was also to an extreemely high standard. Those were getting to the point where you could almost call them expansion packs, rather than DLC, and in my opinion if you can't tell DLC from an expansion pack then they've got it right. Knights of the Nine was also excellent, for Oblivion. People sell Bethesda short.

Everyone remembers the Bethesda Horse Armour, uses it as an example of "How Not To Do DLC" and complains about it, yet purchases ME2 reskins which are exactly the same thing, for exactly the same price.

DLC is the devil. It can be done right, but rarely is. I just wish Bioware would stick to expansion packs. Awakening aside, Bioware have a pretty good track record in that department.

[Marta Rio]

FitScotGaymer wrote...
I completely and totally disagree.

Bethesda's DLC policy is blatant profiteering - thats it. Theres no way to actually redeem it. The DLC reviews panned the DLC for a reason you know; it wasnt just a "lets bash Bethesda" fest. They did not win awards for their DLC - you are talking crap there mate. The only DLC that got good reviews was Mothership Zeta and that was in a "they FINALLY got the DLC right!" sense.

I think you might be somewhat mistaken about the reviews  - looking at the metacritic aggregate scores, for Xbox it's 67 for Operation Anchorage, 76 for The Pitt, 82 for Broken Steel, 83 for Point Lookout, and 65 for Mothership Zeta.  The shortest ones (Anchorage and Mothership) got the worst scores, likely due to the $$ to gameplay ratio, while the longer ones have respectable scores around 80 (not great, but certainly not terrible). 

That being said, I'd certainly like to have ME2 DLC that is better than an 8 out of 10.  But, I did like what Bethesda tried to do with the Point Lookout DLC: give you a fairly sizable map to explore, with new quests and new NPCs to interact with, and pretty much "more of the same" gameplay.   If Bioware decided to take this approach, I'd be satisfied.

[Hathur]

Fallout 3 is the only game for me that ever got DLC right... the content was huge compared to any other DLC or any other game (especially compared to ME2's dlc and Dragon Age's DLC.... both these game's DLC is awfully weak compared to fallout 3's).



Frankly the DLC in Fallout felt more like small expansion packs than DLC (except for operation Anchorage, which was a little short at about 1.5 hours to finish... but it was still good with a nice story).



The Pit and Point Lookout in Fallout3 gave me at least 4+ hrs each of additional gameplay.. there was so much to do in those.

[bjdbwea]

You think BioWare/EA didn't think about this themselves? They obviously came to the conclusion that quick and cheap DLC overall gives them more profit than doing it Fallout 3 style. So if you're unhappy with the current model, protesting on the forums will do little. The only thing that could make a difference would be voting with your wallet and not buying the small-effort, low-quality DLCs. That's your choice, but as long as you help make it (more) profitable, nothing will change.

[Captain Crash]

Cant agree more. The DLC content for Fallout 3 to some extent was better then the game itself. It expended the world brilliantly and was a pleasure to play.

It proved 5 major DLC packs is so much better then tiny scraps being thrown out now and again to keep folks interested.  (In terms of gaming experience)

Modifié par Captain Crash, 02 avril 2010 - 12:44 .

[Selor Kiith]

First of all... thank you... now I want to play Fallout and can't because the PC is crippled...

Second...



Yes... something like Point Lookout for ME2 would be great and I would gladly wait and eventually pay 10-15 bucks for it...

[SithLordExarKun]

They should do an expansion similar to Awakening in my opinion or at the least something like point lookout or broken steel.

[Wolverfrog]

Also doing something that Fallout 3 did: release the DLC on disc. Many gamers don't have Xbox Live, including myself, and I'd still love to play the Mass Effect 2 DLC.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I agree with the OP. In general the FO3 DLCs were great and far better in quality than ME2 DLCs. For Oblivion... The Knights of the Nine was very well done. Shivering Isles was a DLC with a size near that of an expansion. You may not like these games (this forum *is* a BioWare forum after all), but bashing Beth for creating great DLCs just make you look silly.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 02 avril 2010 - 01:26 .

[ScotGaymer]

Marta Rio wrote...


I think you might be somewhat mistaken about the reviews  - looking at the metacritic aggregate scores, for Xbox it's 67 for Operation Anchorage, 76 for The Pitt, 82 for Broken Steel, 83 for Point Lookout, and 65 for Mothership Zeta.  The shortest ones (Anchorage and Mothership) got the worst scores, likely due to the $$ to gameplay ratio, while the longer ones have respectable scores around 80 (not great, but certainly not terrible). 

That being said, I'd certainly like to have ME2 DLC that is better than an 8 out of 10.  But, I did like what Bethesda tried to do with the Point Lookout DLC: give you a fairly sizable map to explore, with new quests and new NPCs to interact with, and pretty much "more of the same" gameplay.   If Bioware decided to take this approach, I'd be satisfied.

Most of the reviews i seen/read were less than flattering. Like I said Mothership Zeta seemed to be the "best" of the bunch. Those scores pretty much prove my point that they are hardly award winning.

Bring Down The Sky was of a calibre that would have deserved to win awards. None of Bethesda's DLCs to date save Shivering Isles and Knights of the Nine deserve that. Im thinking more in respect of Fallout 3 than Oblivion - I personally think that Oblivions DLC were done better than Fallout 3s.

Rockstar I agree did good DLC for GTA4.

Perhaps I only think less of Bethesda and Fallout 3 because Bioware have spoiled me for RPGs. I mean EVERY SINGLE Bioware RPG has had a brilliant if sometimes cliche'd storyline and amazing writing. The writing and story for Fallout 3 and every one of its DLCs are just blah in comparison. I am convinced Bethesda sacked all their writing staff and decided to have their software developers write the game and DLC exclusively to save money and it REALLY shows.

The only thing id say is I AM an old school Fallout fan and as such I found quite a lot of glaring plot holes and lore inconsistancies in F3 that really stood out to me that pretty much ruined the main quest for me. The sidey quests arent too bad (better than ME1s side quests anyway lol) but the MQs are generally done poorly. The only thing that saves Fallout 3 for me is Bethesda perfected the engine with it with the result you have an extremely addictive game in a gameplay sense. In that sense I am looking forward to TES V provided Bethesda hire decent writers for it.

EDIT:
I just want to add that I am not bashing Bethesda for having "good" DLC. On the whole their DLC has been rather poor; less than half of them are actually worth the money you pay for them.
Knights of the Nine, Shivering Isles, The Pitt, and Point Lookout all well done (not as good as Bring Down the Sky or the Rockstar DLCs) but when you consider that the rest of the DLCs were either poor or mediocre/"alright" done then no I dont agree that they have a good track record that Bioware should follow.

If Bioware DID follow Bethesda's corporate model (which is the self ruinous Infogrames/Atari model) I would never buy another Bioware game. Thankfully its not likely because EA used to follow that model also (the only thing that saved them was their EA Sports division) they have spent a great deal of time and energy in the last few years trying to get away from all that.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 02 avril 2010 - 01:34 .

[Blk_Mage_Ctype]

BioWare. Do What Bethesda Did With Fallout 3 DLC.



Do improper bug tested and release the game in an unplayable state at launch?

[ScotGaymer]

Blk_Mage_Ctype wrote...

BioWare. Do What Bethesda Did With Fallout 3 DLC.

Do improper bug tested and release the game in an unplayable state at launch?

Sorry bit spammy here but QFT!