148 réponses à ce sujet

[Ashaman X]

I'm in two minds about it. It certainally costs money to develop the DLC, and BioWare has a right to get this money back. That being said, I think they should perhaps charge a once off price that lets you get all the bridging DLC, at a cheaper rate than buying each one on it's own. I'm working under the presumption that each piece of the bridging DLC is going to be pretty large and offer 2-3 hours playtime each, so yeah.



The other problem of course is what to do for those who can't buy DLC. You don't want to alienate them by having massive story arcs they can't play, but you don't want to keep the majority who can buy hanging either. It's a bit of a pickle for the story writers no doubt.

[crimzontearz]

didymos1120 wrote...

ehuntington wrote...

This is EA a for-profit corporation pretty much like any other for-profit corporation you'd care to name, not a charity, that we're talking about. Of course we'll have to pay.

Fixed it for you.

Does anyone really, honestly believe that if Bioware magically become independent again, that they wouldn't charge for most of the DLC?  Of course they would.  They're a business.

uhm...yeah....Bioware, when it was independent would never have thought of cutting content from a game and selling it later as DLC....happened twice so far since EA took charge.  Yes EA has nothing to do with THIS particular DLC but they do tend to suck the soul out of developers in general and turn them into mediocrity-spewing revenue machines. I'd not be surprised if Bioware was planning for a huge bridging DLC at the cost od 1200 MS points and EA made them  split it into 3 parts each of them 1600 MS points.

[KingDan97]

crimzontearz wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

ehuntington wrote...

This is EA a for-profit corporation pretty much like any other for-profit corporation you'd care to name, not a charity, that we're talking about. Of course we'll have to pay.

Fixed it for you.

Does anyone really, honestly believe that if Bioware magically become independent again, that they wouldn't charge for most of the DLC?  Of course they would.  They're a business.

uhm...yeah....Bioware, when it was independent would never have thought of cutting content from a game and selling it later as DLC....happened twice so far since EA took charge.  Yes EA has nothing to do with THIS particular DLC but they do tend to suck the soul out of developers in general and turn them into mediocrity-spewing revenue machines. I'd not be surprised if Bioware was planning for a huge bridging DLC at the cost od 1200 MS points and EA made them  split it into 3 parts each of them 1600 MS points.

The only content that was CUT from a game and made into DLC was Shale, because when the game went into production it was buggy and could barely be played. They were cutting it from the disk anyway so they ended up making it a bonus for buying a new copy. assuming all DLC that will ever come out for any game is the developer "cutting" things from the game, is naive. These are ideas that had they been in the original game would've delayed the development of the game right up to the doorstep of when ME3 will be coming out with it being DLC.

And Bioware has stated on MANY occasions that they are 100% in control of the development and release of their games and DLC. so you need to get your facts straight. You want to know who to blame for the costs of the DLC? Microsoft. Their points system made it so that it wasn't profitable to release it at say 3$ and then be good off because Microsoft takes a huge cut of the cost of the DLC because of their points system. That made a standard value for DLC which led to Bioware fitting their standard costs in line with it. THAT is why DLC costs so much. In addition to the inherent price of production.

So stop blaming EA and stop saying that ages and ages ago before DLC was a standard that Bioware wouldn't have paid for it.

Modifié par KingDan97, 01 août 2010 - 03:32 .

[JaegerBane]

Kamagawa wrote...

Do you think the DLC that bridges ME2 and ME3 be free?
I think it should.

I think I've heard every argument under the sun advocating free DLCs, and they all ultimately fail to address one point -

THIS CONTENT HAS TO BE DEVELOPED AND DISTRIBUTED.

No matter how you slice it, someone has to be paid to do this stuff. You can't get around that fact.

If we're talking something like Firewalker, that's fine - it's short and sweet and intended to garner reactions. But proper, meaty stuff like Overlord and Stolen Memory - it just isn't realistic to expect this kind of stuff for free. It's like walking into a McDonalds and expecting them to give you food for free. It required effort to make and produce.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 01 août 2010 - 03:27 .

[smudboy]

1. Why would you need a bridge between ME2 and ME3?  Why not just have...ME3?
2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot, nor bridged anything from ME1, why should we pay more for plot specific development after ME2?  Shouldn't ME3 simply take care of that?  Or do you want a prologue DLC bundled with ME3?

[KingDan97]

smudboy wrote...

1. Why would you need a bridge between ME2 and ME3?  Why not just have...ME3?
2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot, nor bridged anything from ME1, why should we pay more for plot specific development after ME2?  Shouldn't ME3 simply take care of that?  Or do you want a prologue DLC bundled with ME3?

Oh you are such a troll...

[theelementslayer]

smudboy wrote...

1. Why would you need a bridge between ME2 and ME3?  Why not just have...ME3?
2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot, nor bridged anything from ME1, why should we pay more for plot specific development after ME2?  Shouldn't ME3 simply take care of that?  Or do you want a prologue DLC bundled with ME3?

1. They said they would do it
2. Why do you always bring up your problem with the plot

[Fiery Phoenix]

smudboy wrote...

1. Why would you need a bridge between ME2 and ME3?  Why not just have...ME3?
2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot, nor bridged anything from ME1, why should we pay more for plot specific development after ME2?  Shouldn't ME3 simply take care of that?  Or do you want a prologue DLC bundled with ME3?

1. It's been said that they would make a DLC that serves as a bridge between ME2 and ME3.
2. "No data available."

[smudboy]

Actually, nevermind.

If a compnay needs a DLC to bridge a story, they've got quite a lot of problems to deal with.

Modifié par smudboy, 01 août 2010 - 03:47 .

[JaegerBane]

smudboy wrote...

2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot
<snip>

Oh pipe down, for pete's sake. There's a time an a place to moan about plots and a thread discussing the price of DLCs isn't it.

[Mister Mida]

Brodyaha wrote...

Making it for free isn't a viable way to live. Wasn't BW purchased by EA because BW was losing money in the first place?

I think it was more the other way around. You don't put a company that loses money on a list of Canada's best ten employers.

[crimzontearz]

KingDan97 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

ehuntington wrote...

This is EA a for-profit corporation pretty much like any other for-profit corporation you'd care to name, not a charity, that we're talking about. Of course we'll have to pay.

Fixed it for you.

Does anyone really, honestly believe that if Bioware magically become independent again, that they wouldn't charge for most of the DLC?  Of course they would.  They're a business.

uhm...yeah....Bioware, when it was independent would never have thought of cutting content from a game and selling it later as DLC....happened twice so far since EA took charge.  Yes EA has nothing to do with THIS particular DLC but they do tend to suck the soul out of developers in general and turn them into mediocrity-spewing revenue machines. I'd not be surprised if Bioware was planning for a huge bridging DLC at the cost od 1200 MS points and EA made them  split it into 3 parts each of them 1600 MS points.

The only content that was CUT from a game and made into DLC was Shale, because when the game went into production it was buggy and could barely be played. They were cutting it from the disk anyway so they ended up making it a bonus for buying a new copy. assuming all DLC that will ever come out for any game is the developer "cutting" things from the game, is naive. These are ideas that had they been in the original game would've delayed the development of the game right up to the doorstep of when ME3 will be coming out with it being DLC.

And Bioware has stated on MANY occasions that they are 100% in control of the development and release of their games and DLC. so you need to get your facts straight. You want to know who to blame for the costs of the DLC? Microsoft. Their points system made it so that it wasn't profitable to release it at say 3$ and then be good off because Microsoft takes a huge cut of the cost of the DLC because of their points system. That made a standard value for DLC which led to Bioware fitting their standard costs in line with it. THAT is why DLC costs so much. In addition to the inherent price of production.

So stop blaming EA and stop saying that ages and ages ago before DLC was a standard that Bioware wouldn't have paid for it.

believe what you will Bioware actually confirmed that they have a DLC team working parallele with the regular developer team to produce day 1 DLC (yes they confirmed this themselves go look on the old DAO board and the old ME board). in other word they do so so they can get the extra money on day 1 because that content could be just shipped with the bloody game (sorry the  "DLC has less QA loopholes" excuse does not hold much water). Yes Shale was cut but then since the game was delayed they had time to re-implement him. Some content from ME2 DLC was already present (incomplete) on the disk like gee, nearly the whole Shadow Broker dialogue and Kasumi's Dialogue. Some call it "hooks for future DLC" I call it "we cut it out to sell it later for whatever reason and to make more money". The facts that the devs say nothing to explain any of this does not help either. (oh wait you are right they do not owe us anything.....but guess what, choosing not to say anything only leads people to be even more upset about it and the devs know it so apparently they are totally ok with it) 

Look at the history, The devs mentioned the Hammerhead way back, it ended up mysteriously as DLC, The VERY FIRST ME2 squad teaser said "Reclute 12 companions for your mission" and "dirty Dozen", which was later retconned even on the main site and Kasumi and Zaeed became DLC

you can be Bioiware and EA's little apologist I will just call them the way I see them.

note also I have ZERO problem with free day 1 DLC that becomes paid DLC for people who do not buy their copy new, I dislike second hand market and I believe it hurts the companies for no reason. 

[Thompson family]

smudboy wrote...

1. Why would you need a bridge between ME2 and ME3?  Why not just have...ME3?

To keep interest alive while you take your time and reduce the pressure to rush ME3 out half-baked.

2. Considering ME2 didn't have a plot, nor bridged anything from ME1 ...

*Groan*

My Shep is now the only being the Galaxy that's trusted, or at least respected, by the Geth and the Quarians. I was also intrigued to find out that the Geth were not mortal enemies of all Organics and are massively stronger than believed -- to name just the most important single advance of the plot.

Another thing: I saw a collector's edition on the shelf at a Best Buy yesterday. I take it as a given that Bioware will eventually release a "game of the year" edition with all this in it. Why wouldn't they?

Modifié par Thompson family, 01 août 2010 - 05:15 .

[JaegerBane]

crimzontearz wrote...
believe what you will Bioware <blah blah blah>

Yeah, crimson, this whole 'they cut out chunks for resale' conspiracy theory is older than the forums and it makes no more sense now than it did back when someone first blurted it out.

Put bluntly, the concept of DLC, although maturing, is still not yet at the stage where it's a sure thing. Particularly not for Bioware, who have something of a colourful history with DLCs. The idea that they'd build things up and then actually take them out and release them later makes no sense from the perspective of software design - you're essentially advocating that they spend resources developing something that may never get released in favour of developing a game that *will*.

I've no doubt they place ideas on the backburner for potential development into DLCs - but this is a far cry from actually taking stuff out and selling it seperately. The only difference here is that the extra ideas that don't make it into the game get eventually released on DLC rather than staying in the artist's portfolio as concepts.

Look at the DLCs that have been released - people complained about shottys all being short-ranged - and poof, a longer range shotty. People complained about armour being in one section rather than pieces - and poof, Kestrel arrives. It's clear that user feedback is obviously being worked into DLCs.

you can be Bioiware and EA's little apologist I will just call them the way I see them.

Translation: You want something for nothing and you're miffed that they're not willing to simply give you it. Yeah, well, welcome to the real world, kiddo.

[KingDan97]

crimzontearz wrote...

believe what you will Bioware actually confirmed that they have a DLC team working parallele with the regular developer team to produce day 1 DLC (yes they confirmed this themselves go look on the old DAO board and the old ME board). in other word they do so so they can get the extra money on day 1 because that content could be just shipped with the bloody game (sorry the  "DLC has less QA loopholes" excuse does not hold much water). Yes Shale was cut but then since the game was delayed they had time to re-implement him. Some content from ME2 DLC was already present (incomplete) on the disk like gee, nearly the whole Shadow Broker dialogue and Kasumi's Dialogue. Some call it "hooks for future DLC" I call it "we cut it out to sell it later for whatever reason and to make more money". The facts that the devs say nothing to explain any of this does not help either. (oh wait you are right they do not owe us anything.....but guess what, choosing not to say anything only leads people to be even more upset about it and the devs know it so apparently they are totally ok with it) 

Look at the history, The devs mentioned the Hammerhead way back, it ended up mysteriously as DLC, The VERY FIRST ME2 squad teaser said "Reclute 12 companions for your mission" and "dirty Dozen", which was later retconned even on the main site and Kasumi and Zaeed became DLC

you can be Bioiware and EA's little apologist I will just call them the way I see them.

note also I have ZERO problem with free day 1 DLC that becomes paid DLC for people who do not buy their copy new, I dislike second hand market and I believe it hurts the companies for no reason. 

Okay having PLANS for DLC and having a team working on DLC isn't the same thing as cutting content from the disk. It should also be noted that games are 100% finished and on a production line MONTHS before they are released. So that means they were bug testing for the day one patch and making DLC, that I would like to note you got for FREE if you bought a new copy, and still do get with a new copy, because if they made sure to put the time aside.

You don't know what the hell will be in the Shadow Broker DLC, and I doubt it will be the 7 or so lines currently out there on YouTube. The Hammerhead wasn't talked about by Bioware before launch, all we had was speculation from Javi, which included a name that came out of a preview from Joystiq who had seen it on the text for the 4th floor and concept art from a vidoc.

Bioware also explained why they put the "hooks for DLC" in, it was to keep the download size down and to help save money for people because Microsoft has a required charge for certain sizes.

It takes MONTHS of playtesting to get DLC bug free, which means that DLC we're just getting now is because they were bugfixing. Would you rather have a buggy mess for Lair of the Shadow Broker or a quality experience.

Modifié par KingDan97, 01 août 2010 - 05:28 .

[crimzontearz]

awww Jaeger I was wondering when you would say something...but no you are still firmly on the "bioware does no wrong" side of the camp so there is really no point in replying to you, luckly Bioware appreciates your extra money.  As for me, I have no issues giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar as long as said Caesar is not nickle-ing and dime-ing me. And even more so if Caesar decides to tell people "it is none of anyone's business why we decided to have people pay for content that was planned for the original game" where a "well, this was made with another budget" answer would have made everyone happy

KingDan97 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

believe what you will Bioware actually confirmed that they have a DLC team working parallele with the regular developer team to produce day 1 DLC (yes they confirmed this themselves go look on the old DAO board and the old ME board). in other word they do so so they can get the extra money on day 1 because that content could be just shipped with the bloody game (sorry the  "DLC has less QA loopholes" excuse does not hold much water). Yes Shale was cut but then since the game was delayed they had time to re-implement him. Some content from ME2 DLC was already present (incomplete) on the disk like gee, nearly the whole Shadow Broker dialogue and Kasumi's Dialogue. Some call it "hooks for future DLC" I call it "we cut it out to sell it later for whatever reason and to make more money". The facts that the devs say nothing to explain any of this does not help either. (oh wait you are right they do not owe us anything.....but guess what, choosing not to say anything only leads people to be even more upset about it and the devs know it so apparently they are totally ok with it) 

Look at the history, The devs mentioned the Hammerhead way back, it ended up mysteriously as DLC, The VERY FIRST ME2 squad teaser said "Reclute 12 companions for your mission" and "dirty Dozen", which was later retconned even on the main site and Kasumi and Zaeed became DLC

you can be Bioiware and EA's little apologist I will just call them the way I see them.

note also I have ZERO problem with free day 1 DLC that becomes paid DLC for people who do not buy their copy new, I dislike second hand market and I believe it hurts the companies for no reason. 

Okay having PLANS for DLC and having a team working on DLC isn't the same thing as cutting content from the disk. It should also be noted that games are 100% finished and on a production line MONTHS before they are released. So that means they were bug testing for the day one patch and making DLC, that I would like to note you got for FREE if you bought a new copy, and still do get with a new copy, because if they made sure to put the time aside.

You don't know what the hell will be in the Shadow Broker DLC, and I doubt it will be the 7 or so lines currently out there on YouTube. The Hammerhead wasn't talked about by Bioware before launch, all we had was speculation from Javi, which included a name that came out of a preview from Joystiq who had seen it on the text for the 4th floor and concept art from a vidoc.

Bioware also explained why they put the "hooks for DLC" in, it was to keep the download size down and to help save money for people because Microsoft has a required charge for certain sizes.

It takes MONTHS of playtesting to get DLC bug free, which means that DLC we're just getting now is because they were bugfixing. Would you rather have a buggy mess for Lair of the Shadow Broker or a quality experience.

now Kingdan....sorry about it...look, seriouly Bioware said several times that DLC is much easier to bugfix than the regular game AND on top of that it has less QA issues than the regular game so that really does not hold water. Also, the Hammerhead was talked about by the devs prior to launch, no speculation...it was also in some GI or OXM interview/preview

still...I hope Bioware proves me wrong  but so far I remain boubtful

[Onyx Jaguar]

DLC teams are usually independent from main development team, or are set off (in other companies). I assume that this is the case with ME 2.



Also DLC = small expansions (I mean hell, back in the day Microsoft released Mech packs for the Mech Warrior games at cost). They are made after the fact using resources from the main game (instead of new engines/modifications and the like).



And most of this content doesn't have much place in the game. Who am I to care if they are selling different skins and ****. They can do what they want. Do I want them to be free, yes. Should they, no.



Also the DLC stuff we have seen in ME 2 is drastically different from what we have seen in DA. It is designed differently and it plays differently. You look at the cut content in DA and Shale/Warden's Keep play the same, but the other content is just strange (and lazy).



And after playing through the Hammerhead I am almost certain that it was not finished by released and what we ended up getting was a demo. The CN stuff might have been cut (doesn't explain the design differences in regards to Zaeed). But I doubt Overlord and Kasumi were (sure, Kasumi dialogue was present in the game files, but again that doesn't explain the design differences, I'd speculate more that they started recording lines and kept them in to keep the deadline).



Also the Cut stuff is a form of DRM. I have seen more insidious uses than what we have seen with the CN and Shale.

[atheelogos]

LPPrince wrote...

atheelogos wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

Kamagawa wrote...

Sorry, I probably should have written out my reasoning.

If bridging DLC is free, it may give people the incentive to buy ME2.
Think of it as a form of marketing. another way ofdoing it is to charge a bit less than 520ms points for bridging DLC. Bioware can probably go to 300ms points, but I think they can charge between 400 and 500 ms points to get new ME2 owners, just as long as it is cheaper than the standard 520ms points.

My personal feeling is that Weapon and armour DLC should be free and they should charge for mission DLC. I don't actually mind paying 520ms points for good DLC.

Heh.

I tell my friends on Xbox Live that don't have ME2 when DLC comes out for it.

One friend of mine went apepoop.

Friend-"Ok dude seriously, they need to stop releasing DLC for it. My God, its been what, 8 months? How many DLCs do they have out?"

Me-"I have like 17-"

Friend-"SEE!? THAT'S RIDICULOUS!"

Me-"Well dude, its not like you had to pay for all of it. Hell, the Cerberus Network gave a bunch of free DLC, then you've got the free Dr. Pepper Promotional DLC items, etc etc."

Friend-"Ooh, who cares!?"

Me-"Are you butthurt that your favorite games don't get like 20 DLCs? Left 4 Dead 2 has what, like a whole two?"

Friend-"WHATEVER!"

Me-"By the way, there's a weapon DLC on the way, and after that, Lair of the Shadow Broker. So make that 19 DLC's I'll have."

Friend-"YO WHAT THE *Insert many cusswords here*"

So there are actually gamers out there that are upset that ME2 has a lot of good DLC? Now I've seen everything. lol
let the haters hate I guess. Bioware keep doin yo thang!!

He's just mad that his favorite games don't get supported like that.

ME2 has TONS of DLC, and TONS more are on the way.

I can't wait to keep pissing him off.

[JaegerBane]

crimzontearz wrote...
awww Jaeger I was wondering when you would say something...but no you are still firmly on the "bioware does no wrong" side of the camp so there is really no point in replying to you,

Translation: I can't think of a response and hence will fall back to the good ole' Ad Hominem.

Still, good to see you're being honest, at least.

Modifié par JaegerBane, 01 août 2010 - 07:04 .

[Spartas Husky]

crimzontearz wrote...

.  As for me, I have no issues giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar

hehehehe give Caesar what belongs to Caesar nice... very nice....


Perfect description of what Bioware should follow....

cheers:wub:

[TOBY FLENDERSON]

I would rather pay for an awakening style DLC bridge (minus all awakenings bugs) with substantial content, than get a free DLC with little content. This is because Bioware is still a company and has to rationalize its expenditure of resources. Free=short and poor, Payed=long and substantive.

[JaegerBane]

TOBY FLENDERSON wrote...

I would rather pay for an awakening style DLC bridge (minus all awakenings bugs) with substantial content, than get a free DLC with little content. This is because Bioware is still a company and has to rationalize its expenditure of resources. Free=short and poor, Payed=long and substantive.

This. I want more Overlords and Stolen Memories. If they contain moar gunz and whatnot, then so much the better - but I'm highly interested in this concept of 'post-Collector base' DLCs.

[Spartas Husky]

TOBY FLENDERSON wrote...
This is because Bioware is still a company and has to rationalize its expenditure of resources.
Free=short and empty

Payed=long and empty.

fixed