137 réponses à ce sujet

[ScotGaymer]

Like I said im not really disagreeing with the original point. I actually wholeheartedly agree with it. the ME2 DLC thus far has been less than inspiring with Zaeed being the best (my only problem with it is you cant actually talk to him on the ship) and the worst being the pointless and useless appearance pack idea - I mean LAME!



But if you think about Biowares DLC ON THE WHOLE for all their games from Neverwinter Nights onwards then they are very good ON THE WHOLE.

Compared to Bethesda whose DLC has been "alright" ON THE WHOLE.



Im not just bashing Bethesda for no reason - ive stated my reasons already. Their corporate policy (following the Infogrames/Atari/EA model of maximum profit minimum work), the fact that until Fallout 3 every game they ever released has been pretty much unplayable because of game breaking/ctd causing bugs until the first patch (this is in spite of the denials that their games have any serious bugs), their response to said bugs ("Bugs? What bugs? There are no bugs in our games!"), and the implementation of DLC into the main games also (they have yet to have any sensible context to their introduction which shows just sheer laziness on the part of the devs). There is also the appallingly bad writing and dialogue in probably about 70% of Fallout 3 as well; ive read childrens books with better plots and writing.

Those are my reasons.



Perhaps also part of it is dissapointment because Bethesda games have the potential to be THE BEST RPGs ever(!) in my opinion and usually fall far short of the hype/my expectations.

Taken "at face value" I suppose I quite like Bethesda games and Bethesda DLC on the whole - but the point is i only "quite like" them whereas i "really like" Bioware games and DLC on the whole. The mediocre versus good comments ive made previously.



I can and have backed up my arguements as far as I am concerned. Tho perhaps ive not communicated myself very well.



Bioware's old "policy" of delivering good games with strong storylines and putting the customer/community first seemed to have served them very well in the past and I see no reason why it wont serve them well in the future if they keep it up. The danger is that they are starting to follow the more mercenary EA/Atari model I think.

[Spinnazie]

Andaius20 wrote...

What so you want them to retcon the ending of there story, the ruin the lore of there game by making easter eggs "official DLC" and other DLC's that add pointless FPS action that otherwise don't really have anything to do with the story. Also adding in pointless bullet spurge enemies?

Sorry but Bethsofts FO3 DLC are FAR from good.

lol you mad? Stop being such a raging fan boy.

Bethesda has made amazing expansions / DLC for their games. I've been disapointed in just about every Bioware DLC I've played.

[kyle-mac]

I honestly can't judge either company's dlc based on long-term track records, but i played fallout 3 and i played both mass effects. bring down the sky was a pretty good quality dlc all around, but i'd say fallout's wins overall. they don't use cutscenes so much, but the voice acting and environment detail is there just as much as it is for mass effect. they don't give you just one mission, though. they give you an entire new area to explore (point lookout being the best example, obviously) with lots of new characters, enemies and missions. and if you care more about new weapons and outfits, every one of their dlc's included a bunch of each of those that were actually good enough to bother using, for the most part. other than bring down the sky, i really haven't been all that impressed with any of the mass effect 1 or 2 dlc so far. i do like zaeed, but i don't get why he's not as interactive as the rest of the crew. each character only really says a few paragraphs worth of text. it wouldn't have been much more. actually, he does talk to you a bunch, but it's all one-sided.

in conclusion, i think bethesda had the way to go with dlc worth paying for. some more than others, but you'll always have that. i think a great ME dlc would be a new hub world as big or bigger than any of the current ones with several missions on it, preferably actually tying into the main story a bit without making it required playing to know what's going on in ME3.

Modifié par kyle-mac, 04 avril 2010 - 10:41 .

[Jackal904]

nikki191 wrote...

looking at what was changed in ME2, not to mention that most of the dlc has been weapons and armour, seems pretty obvious that its more profitable to bioware and ea to cater to the fps and gears of war crowd than to roleplayers, etc

I don't even think fps fans prefer some new weapon over more missions. I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that 99% of people would prefer new missions over new equipment.

[shnizzler93]

to quote the title: like, making an almost entirely new game? (yes, not Fallout 3, but i'm referring to Shivering Isles) instead of working on ME3?

[Darth Drago]

Spin****e wrote...

lol you mad? Stop being such a raging fan boy.

Bethesda has made amazing expansions / DLC for their games. I've been disapointed in just about every Bioware DLC I've played.

-I agree as well, that I have yet to be disappointed in any download or expansion from Bethesda. Even the hate full horse armor everyone keeps bringing up here to use against BioWare. I’ll even add that out of the 3 Bethesda games I have and played; Morrowind, Oblivion and Fallout 3 none of them I have been disappointed in. Unlike Mass Effect 2.

Andaius20 wrote...

What so you want them to retcon the ending of there story, the ruin the lore of there game by making easter eggs "official DLC" and other DLC's that add pointless FPS action that otherwise don't really have anything to do with the story. Also adding in pointless bullet spurge enemies?

Sorry but Bethsofts FO3 DLC are FAR from good.

-BioWare already ruined the lore in the Mass Effect universe with their addition of thermal clips.

Lets see, my experience with BioWare on the X-Box/X-Box 360:
-Knights of the Old Republic: the Yavin space station add on. Short and interesting but nothing that good.
-Jade Empire: Nothing, zip, failed completely on this one.
-Mass Effect: Bring Down the Sky was pretty good but not that great again. Pinnacle Station was fun once.
-Mass Effect 2: Not one of the downloads to date impress me at all. Zaeed is about the best out of them. Kasumi has promise at least but I’m not holding my breath.
-Dragon Age: Soldiers Peak was pretty good actually. It reminded me of each of the Oblivion “home” downloads. The Stone Prisoner is another pretty good one, similar to Zaeed. Return to Ostagar I cant comment on since I have yet to get it. The Feastday Gifts I have but still need to look at but they sound great.

I would have to say BioWare means well but they just don’t get the picture as to what real downloadable content is for the most part. The are trying, at least when it comes to the character add on packs, but I don’t need more characters, I need more to do in a game that has so little to actually do in it.

Modifié par Darth Drago, 04 avril 2010 - 11:17 .

[SmokeyNinjas]

IMO Bethesda DLC on the whole has been far far better then any DLC i've seen from BioWare to date

[thepiebaker]

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.

quality over quantitiy

[Spinnazie]

thepiebaker wrote...



quality over quantitiy

What exactly are you trying to say? Who has "quality" DLC?

Modifié par Spinnazie, 05 avril 2010 - 01:26 .

[Jackal904]

shnizzler93 wrote...

to quote the title: like, making an almost entirely new game? (yes, not Fallout 3, but i'm referring to Shivering Isles) instead of working on ME3?

I don't believe it's quite that simple. They can form groups to work on DLC and other's to work on ME3. BioWare has a lot of employees, so I think at a certain point the amount of work getting done by an additional worker on a single project tends to plateau. And even if that's not the case, I would rather have some good ME2 DLC before ME3 gets released than get ME3 a bit sooner. And creating a huge ME2 expansion would be awesome, even if it meant I had to wait an extra month for ME3. The benefit of getting a game sooner only lasts until you reach the old release date. The benefit of extra content lasts forever. You can't "re-get" the same game sooner, but you can replay extra content as much as you want.

Modifié par Jackal904, 05 avril 2010 - 02:07 .

[Jackal904]

One and only bump. I really want BioWare to read this if they already haven't.

[Vicious4065]

I like how Fallout did their DLC, but I'd rather have one big 10-15 hour expansion over even that stuff. I like how Bethesda did it with oblivion (full out expansion packs) vs. what they did with Fallout 3 (episodic).



I'd honestly like it either way because both are better than these micro packs and at best hour long missions.

[Livemmo]

Honestly... why? It doesnt make sense business wise. As it is, they're throwing together 20-30 minute dlc that really doesnt take that many resources to create and people are buying them. If theres a market for something like that, why stop? The only thing I really dont like is how they went about adding companions into the game. They really feel like they were just thrown together and rushed out the door. Sure, the loyalty missions are awesome, but cmon Bioware give me a damn conversation wheel.