204 réponses à ce sujet

[Narachi]

Aslong if they make good DLC to keep me busy AND expansion I don't really care if I have to pay...aslong if it's a decent enough price for the DLC

[feidxeno]

Agree with OP, DLC content right at game release is kind of ridiculous.

You don't see such moves by the industry in the past.



There will definitely be people paying for the DLC even if they don't like to pay simply because they like the game and they want to experience everything within the game.



If we take Baldur Gate for example, its like asking you to pay extra bucks to unlock Minsc & Boo or Edwin or Holy Avenger quest. We love them but breaking a complete game into parts for sale when you have already paid the full retail price just seems plain ridiculous to me.



If its the case like Tales of the sword coast or Throne of Bhaal, THAT is more justifiable. Quality content despite a higher price.

[Naterstein]

I am waiting to pass judgment, the prices do seem high for Wardens (really enjoyed it tho) and if you had to buy Shale (used games only). I want to see the length of play of the next DLC before I cast any stones.

[Sanguinius_nz]

Its a curious sense of entitlement. You have paid for the game as it is. The game is relativly stable and the devs have been pretty good with the community even releasing a quick patch already.

The developers have taken time to make some stuff that is additional to the game itself. Now the making of these modules is not free it takes time and manpower. This i feel justifies a small fee for the work they have done.

As has also been said before, these things are optional, in no way is it a detriment not to have Shale in your party or access to wardens keep. If you don't want to pay don't pay but its also a very silly thing to think they are a bottomless pit of money where they can afford to continue development on content without monetary input.

[Inarai]

On the subject of DLC: DLC functions as a way to release small amounts of content post-release to the community. It allows a developer to continually expand on a game without having to develop a series of expansion packs which require more investment(both time and money), and accordingly, they really can't take as much risk with,

The consequence, then, is that a pack of DLC is expected to have a certain amout of content, basically related to it's cost relative to an expansion. It's also expected to have a level of quality similar to that of the original game.

And it's fine, really, when - as is inarguably the case here - the original game offers a complete experience. It seems a little odd the way that they advertise it in-game, but, it's not a bad bit of integration to offer. I just wish it weren't so brazen. So, in other words, they do not "owe" you Warden's keep. They are not milking people by asking them to pay for a product, as said product is not actually essential to the experience that is what the game is designed to be. And as such, you may choose whether or not you wish to purchase it. If you think it is not worth the money, don't. If, on the other hand, it seems like it is, go for it.

As for DLC at release, it makes sense.  You get your teams working early enough that they might get something out for then.  Better than planning for 3 months down and delaying it.  It's not like we're talking about soemthing that was merely withheld, or not originally intended as DLC, right?  IT's not like they pulled out a key part of the game, and asked you to pay for that, is it? 

Now, I don't know where this sense of entitlement comes from... But will people please get over it/themselves already?

Modifié par Inarai, 12 novembre 2009 - 04:56 .

[Wolfva2]

Retriraver wrote...
I agree for the most part, but it is a ripoff nonethless. Like I said before, they most likely made the game as a whole with the DLC, then blocked it off in order to charge extra for "extra" content. Purely a profit scheme. Yes, that is capitalism, but it is not necessarily part of a good business model. Imgaine going to a movie theatre, paying for your ticket, and watching the movie. Only while watching the movie do you discover a few scenes were cut out, they then ask you for an extra $5 to see the scenes. You and I would leave and never go to that theatre again, most likely. Same concept for the most part.

Game companies have made insane profits without DLC in the past. There is no reason to believe they could continue. Also, like I said in my OP, I could understand DLC and it's cost if it were released after the game, to expand on the story or whatnot. But releasing DLC with the game and charging for it, that's dispicable. Next thing you know, you will have to pay for DLC to even continue to the end of a game. Fallout 3 was fine you see. They released a full game then expanded it with DLC, that's perfectly exceptable. (just an example)

Ever hear of 'The Directors Cut' edition of movies?  So yes, we DO go to the movies, buy our tickets, and then later get the OPTION to purchase the same movie but with deleted scenes.  Do we HAVE to buy them?  Nope.  I'll note that both the game's DLC and the deleted scenes from movies are things that only add to the finished product, they are not necessary to the product.  Bottom line, you don't want to pay for DLC, then don't.  It won't hurt you or detract from your enjoyment of the game.  Heck, I'm skipping it because it doesn't really seem worth it to me.

[Wolfva2]

Yaruchi wrote...


Let me try to paraphrase this so I can come up with something to say.

Ignore the main point of what I said, take the small things and blow them way out of proportion.

USE lots of WORDS in all CAPS because it MAKES my argument VALID.
You're a hypocrite, hypocrisy is bad, BAAAW serious business, you hypocrite. Hypocrite this and hypocrite that.

------------------------

So in other words, you ignored everything I saw and exaggerated everything, then spewed hypocrite and hypocrisy a lot. Let me try.

Firstly, these developers we're talking about here don't sell a damn thing. They make the content, then never see it again. The SALES fall to the MARKETING division, because that is THEIR job. Not a SINGLE place there did I say everybody should be paid the bare minimum, wherever the bar may be these days. All depends on location. I'm not the one saying they need to distribute EXCESSIVE amounts of DLC content that is over-priced so they can feed and clothe their children. Assuming the designers for DA:O were paid the rather large sums(in comparison to your average middle-class mommy&daddy) that corporate-hired design henchmen most DEFINITELY make, I strongly doubt they have any trouble buying Johnny a t-shirt. Oh, and did I mention that EA/BioWare, whoever handles their pay, most likely doesn't rely entirely on the video game's sales to pay the workers? The dev's for the game don't wait for their payment for the job until after the sales start rolling in. That would be fubar'd like crazy. They probably get paid hourly, just like everyone else. So that extra dlc content they made? yes, they got paid to make it. Do THEY see the direct profits from their sales past that? Nope. Guess whose ppocket it goes to then? The higher ups.

Corporate greed isn't something you can overlook just because you think Bob the designer is getting short-handed., because the sale of what he made has no part in his wages. If the DLC's completely skyrocketed, he'd be a likely candidate for  future project, but gain nothing extra. If it failed horribly, he may not be commisioned in the future in favor of other workers, but he doesn't recieve any less pay, the company does.

Off to sleep, now.

First, do you always attack the person as opposed to the arguement?  Pretty weak debate tactic.  But, since you seem clueless, the occasionaly capitolized word is used as an emphasiser.  If we were speaking in person as opposed to typing, it would be slightly exagerated in pronunciation. 

Second, the developers get paid for developing.  You stated that they get paid far more then they need to survive which I countered.  Now you come back and attempt to backtrack?  In any case, your responce has nothing really to do with what I had written. Which, contrary to your sputtering indignation, actually addressed the points you actually DID make.

If you think the DLC is overpriced, then don't buy it.  It's what I've done.  And, afterall, isn't that the bedrock of the free market?  Someone sells something for a certain price; if enough people think that price is to high, they don't pay it.  The merchant then drops the price.  Or, a lot of people buy it because they think it's a good deal and the merchant raises the price to make more money. 

Your entire corporate greed arguement smacks of the pampered arguement of a University student who listens to his liberal professors WAY to much.  Or, perhaps the professor himself.  Not an attack, mind you.  Just an observation.  So. Let us address corporate greed for a moment.  Companies exist SOLELY (there's that emphasiser tactic again) to make money for their stock holders.  They do this by providing a service, or goods.  If enough people want those services or goods, then the company succeeds.  Otherwise, they fail.  Success is good.  Success means that 'greedy company' can continue to employ people.  It also means the stockholders continue to make money.  Now, stop grinding your teeth at the thought of those 'vile, evil, despicable rich people' making oodles of cash off the backs of the poor proletariat.  Those stockholders just happen to include teachers, janitors, nurses, cops, retirees,  etc etc.  Because many of them have 401Ks which happen to invest in those companies.
So, if success is good, then failure is bad.  Why is that?  Isn't it good for those 'greedy rich people' to lose their golden goose?  Nope, because if the company fails, then alot of people lose their jobs.  A lot of people whose retirement plans or 401Ks have invested in that company lose money.  One thing history teaches us is that companies will do whatever they can to stay in business.  If that means closing down plants and laying off a lot of folks, then they will do that.  Personally, I'd rather a gaming company provide unnecesarry DLC content and make more cash then they know what to do with (which probably means better profits for the lowly peons that work at that company) then not make a lot less cash and lay off some poor working stiff who didn't do anything wrong.


I'm gonna agree with everything Inarai said.  Hey, know what's worst then in game advertising of DLC?  Howabout ingame advertising of real life products....or worst then that....being able to order real life products while ingame?  Like, Pizza? <LOL>.  Wasn't it WoW that did that?

[Sinborn]

DLC is only a scheme when the offered content is present on a vanilla install but unlocked by a purchased code of some sort. Otherwise, there's no fault in any company for charging for extra content, no matter how much you feel you're entitled to it.



That being said, reading the incessant ****ing and moaning about DLC is like free content in itself.

[Wolfva2]

Heh, welcome to Forum Wars 2.0 Sinborn! I swear, if only I knew how to code I'd create that MMO. Probably make billions.

[PurplePaladin]

First, I LOVE DA. Second, DLC at launch is a sneaky squeeze on game consumers. People keep saying "it's optional", DUH; but that's like buying a great dinner, and having the soup, salad, vegtables, potato, and drink as "optional".

Making more content for a game several months after the release, and the company getting some $ for it seems ok to me, but letting people with more money (or willing to pay more money) get actual more game; more items; more quests; and more content seems REALLY almost classest. Think about it: people who have more money are now actually getting more/extra/better games than the average Joe does when he ponnys up what little he can to buy the "Peasant Version" of the game.

The perfect example is that I got furlowed at work; 20% less pay for me.  I actually had to really scrimp and save and give up quite a lot last month (and this) to get this game.  My friend, who is retired and doing very well financially, told me that he is going to buy every DLC for the game.  After we both thought about it a while, we reailized, the bottom line is a wealthier person gets more/better game content     And I/we are not talking abount "vanaties" here (like pets or a extra pretty looking helm), were talking more actual game/content from day one.  It's really REALLY odd to think my friend will buy the exact same game, at the exact same time, and get way more game than me because he happens to be wealthier at the time, and especially it they could have just "included" the so called DLC (which I'm calling "Left out Content) in the game from release. 

Modifié par PurplePaladin, 12 novembre 2009 - 08:01 .

[Inarai]

PurplePaladin wrote...

First, I LOVE DA. Second, DLC at launch is a sneaky squeeze on game consumers. People keep saying "it's optional", DUH; but that's like buying a great dinner, and having the soup, salad, vegtables, potato, and drink as "optional".

No, it's like you got all of the above(Although, where are you eating that the drinks are free?!) and then being asked if you want dessert.  This idea that you're entitled to a full game plus whatever they might be able to come up with before release is ridiculous.

[Oliver Sudden]

The sad thing is, we wouldn't even be having this discussion if DLC wasn't such a cash cow for publishers. While some complain about it or boycott, there's more than enough people willing to pay it to insure DLC will be with us for years to come.



(And, really, it's all Blizzard's fault: the other publishers saw the money they were raking in with WoW subscriptions each and every month and looked at their own income, which spikes when a game is released and then dwindles to nothing. "We want us some of that continuing income," they cried and came up with two buck horsey armor)

[Blue_dodo]

I'm not going to touch this topic with a ten foot pole but I do want to make something very very clear



EA had NOTHING to do with the !@$!$ing dlc, or the game for the matter as stated many,many, MANY times they are only the parent company and the producer.





so let me recap...



STOP BLAMING EA FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THIS GAME !!!, you wann ablame somebody then blame the developers (not that you should after all the have made an incredible rpg)...



thank you we may now return to the usual...you know...



p.s no I don't like EA but I' not going to be pointing randomly fingers when there is no proof that they have done something wrong

[KB3SKU]

Retriraver wrote...

Am I the only one who feels like game-makers these days are really milking their customers?

I find it rather dispicable that Bioware made DA:O and released it along with DLC that costs extra money. I can see this as acceptable if they made the DLC after the game release, but it seems like the DLC should have been part of the game anyways. I feel cheated when they basically made the game, then blocked part of the game out and make you pay extra money for it. Basically what they have done is charged you $25.00 more than the base game just to get all the content they made for the game. So the actual cost of the 'full' game is $75.00.... that's kind of ridiculous.

Furthermore, the bioware points system is ridiculous. It's exactly the same as the Microsoft points. It's also annoying because they charge some specific amount of points for each DLC, so you may end up with points you don't even need, or not enough points and you have to pay more money to get a few points. DA:O DLC is an example. one of the DLC's costs 1200 points (~$15.00), the other costs 560 points (bit more than $5.00). I bought the 1600 point package for $20.00. I spent 1200 points for one of the DLC's and now I am left with 400 bioware points. So now in order to get the other DLC I have to go back and buy more points than I need, the minimum to buy is 500...

Yes, the game is very good, no question about that. But these game developers are obviously milking the crap out of us...

Talk to EA,ive hated that company since they killed Earth and Beyond a few years ago.

I dont think Bioware is to blame,EA is.

I agree with you,all the DLC you have to pay for should of been in game already at start. I got the Collectors Edition (digital download)..But i feel for the ones that have to pay for somthing that should of been in the game in the first place.

[Arokiss]

THEY'RE TUKEN ARE MONIES.



*Ducks* Sorry about that. But hey. It's called a BUSINESS. It makes them money. I usually don't buy DLC stuff unless i'm REALLY bored, or am feeling cool. The great thing about it is...



Here it is...the MAGICAL secret...



YOU HAVE THE CHOICE TO BUY IT OR NOT!!!!!111!!1!!111!!1oneoneelevenonehundreadandeleven

[Yaruchi]

On a side note, i'm not even out of high school presently. Senior to be precise. So no liberal professors filling my head with their philosophies. Currently, I'm waiting for the tower DLC to become free content, or maybe get pirated somehow, since I can see it happening via the toolset thing. If not, I may give in later, since $7 isn't that wallet-emptying on any scale, as much as I don't think EA needs it. And to comment on something you said in there...somewhere. EA won't fail as a company because their gratuitous amounts of dlc didn't sell like they wanted. Especially with Mass effect 2 incoming.



Unless they got a supermassive profit up in the millions from those DLCs alone, It's -probably- not translating into raises for the developers, or lowly peons in general. And while that's a possible monetary gain, I don't see it happening what with all the skeptics of DLCs and such.



And that npc in your camp is rather lame.

"Hey, I need help clearing my family name, but you need to buy the tower first, k? lolol."



I've never heard of anything that lets your order tangible products ingame.

Probably isn't WoW, i've been playing it since day 1 vanilla and I know blizzard wouldn't go THAT low.

Then again, Blizzard can be extremely unpredictable. Like how they decided the legendary weapon from their recent expansion's poster child ISN'T his signature weapon, instead some axe they pulled out of nowhere.

[Yaruchi]

Blue_dodo wrote...

I'm not going to touch this topic with a ten foot pole but I do want to make something very very clear

EA had NOTHING to do with the !@$!$ing dlc, or the game for the matter as stated many,many, MANY times they are only the parent company and the producer.


so let me recap...

STOP BLAMING EA FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THIS GAME !!!, you wann ablame somebody then blame the developers (not that you should after all the have made an incredible rpg)...

thank you we may now return to the usual...you know...

p.s no I don't like EA but I' not going to be pointing randomly fingers when there is no proof that they have done something wrong

EA *IS* the parent company, by the way. They bought bioware if i'm not mistaken. So they kind of had a lot to do with it.

[Inarai]

KB3SKU wrote...

Retriraver wrote...

Am I the only one who feels like game-makers these days are really milking their customers?

I find it rather dispicable that Bioware made DA:O and released it along with DLC that costs extra money. I can see this as acceptable if they made the DLC after the game release, but it seems like the DLC should have been part of the game anyways. I feel cheated when they basically made the game, then blocked part of the game out and make you pay extra money for it. Basically what they have done is charged you $25.00 more than the base game just to get all the content they made for the game. So the actual cost of the 'full' game is $75.00.... that's kind of ridiculous.

Furthermore, the bioware points system is ridiculous. It's exactly the same as the Microsoft points. It's also annoying because they charge some specific amount of points for each DLC, so you may end up with points you don't even need, or not enough points and you have to pay more money to get a few points. DA:O DLC is an example. one of the DLC's costs 1200 points (~$15.00), the other costs 560 points (bit more than $5.00). I bought the 1600 point package for $20.00. I spent 1200 points for one of the DLC's and now I am left with 400 bioware points. So now in order to get the other DLC I have to go back and buy more points than I need, the minimum to buy is 500...

Yes, the game is very good, no question about that. But these game developers are obviously milking the crap out of us...

Talk to EA,ive hated that company since they killed Earth and Beyond a few years ago.

I dont think Bioware is to blame,EA is.

I agree with you,all the DLC you have to pay for should of been in game already at start. I got the Collectors Edition (digital download)..But i feel for the ones that have to pay for somthing that should of been in the game in the first place.

...  Scroll up, please.  This game is on a very short list of games which should be immune to that charge.

I got the Collector's Edition too; I feel like I got value for my money, great value - which is huge, I don't have much of it(tuition sucks.  Especially to those of us trying to avoid debt).

[KB3SKU]

Retriraver wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

And yet another "Omg Bioware/EA are so greedy" DLC whining thread.

It's quite simple. If you do not like the DLCs, don't buy/play them. See? Simple huh.

Either way, there is no need for the whining.

IFSW

If you don't like the discussion, don't click on the topic and instigate.

Oh, and how the hell is someone supposed to know if they like the DLC's? You have to play them to know if you like them or not, and you have to buy them to play them, don't you?

I agree.

just ignore him,he seems like a trouble maker.

Modifié par KB3SKU, 12 novembre 2009 - 08:19 .

[Blue_dodo]

Yaruchi wrote...

Blue_dodo wrote...

I'm not going to touch this topic with a ten foot pole but I do want to make something very very clear

EA had NOTHING to do with the !@$!$ing dlc, or the game for the matter as stated many,many, MANY times they are only the parent company and the producer.


so let me recap...

STOP BLAMING EA FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THIS GAME !!!, you wann ablame somebody then blame the developers (not that you should after all the have made an incredible rpg)...

thank you we may now return to the usual...you know...

p.s no I don't like EA but I' not going to be pointing randomly fingers when there is no proof that they have done something wrong

EA *IS* the parent company, by the way. They bought bioware if i'm not mistaken. So they kind of had a lot to do with it.

EA may have bought bioware but as mentioned many, many, MANY times all aspects of bioware were left alone, furthermore  just because the ware the parent company does not meant they had anything to do with the game development just the publishing

I could be wrong, since well I am not majoring in business

[Mordaedil]

Cave_Dweller28 wrote...

I might pirate that one piece of
DLC just because of the obnoxious advertising XD. The concept of
premium content in general doesn't sit well with me.

You
know you can get permanently banned and have your game locked down for
uttering this non-sense, right? You prove NOTHING by pirating anything,
other than the fact that the content is desired, but you're a cheap
bastard who can't afford the price of a bubble-gum to get a little more
game. Heck, it's 45 minutes, almost an entire movie. For $7. And you
can use it repeatedly. And you claim you want to pirate it.

You are an idiot, and I say that with no reservations.

Anzurok wrote...

Well... Electronic Arts did this to Oblivion and everyone was upset about it, because Morrowind DLC was all free. But no one knew EA owned Bethesda at the time. They also did this to The Sims 3. And now they're doing it to this game... is anyone really surprised though? EA is the greediest bunch of pigs I know of.

Electronic Arts does not own Bethesda and they had certainly no involvement with Oblivion, because it was published by 2k Games.

I don't think anyone is as greedy as the community here though. You paid ~$50 for 60~80 hours of entertainment. Entertainment at less than a dollar an hour, while most games charge $25 for an hour of entertainment. And they provide optional set pieces that can increase the experience at a very AFFORDABLE price, so that they can pay their programmers so they can provide continued patching for the game, that we have yet to see, but that we will see in what comes of in the future.

I understand being upset over false advertisement. But I don't understand why you've got such an entitlement complex to everything that comes out of the box. Dragon Age: Origins is Bioware giving you love. And you toss it in their face and say "I feel ripped off, because it felt like I could get another 45 minutes of enjoyment out of this game and get the full 72 hours I played up to 73 at no extra cost to me" which is completely absurd.

I don't think I've seen a community this spoiled, but I do salute msot of you for being more aware of what you put into a game. Just because it provides "10 hours of entertainment", I don't consider it correct when 7 hours are basically grinding to get up to the level required to beat the final boss. But that's a completely different league from Bioware games.

Can someone honestly feel the hours they've spent on the game title already has not made the game worth the money five times over? I mean of course by comparing it to the market currently. Do you really think your money could be better spent?

If you do, please tell me how, because I'd really like to see something more "valueable" than DAO.

Again, I don't mean to put down people who have an argument with the DLC content itself. It could certainly have been improved from the sound of things. But I'd argue it's NOT a matter related to the VALUE of the DLC.

[BringwinD]

Compare the retail game, depth of the game + price, and compare warden's keep, depth + price. overpriced imo. DLC is fine, but for $7 i expected longer content.. its not even 1/3 size of the many dungeons you have to run in this game.

[KB3SKU]

Blue_dodo wrote...

Yaruchi wrote...

Blue_dodo wrote...

I'm not going to touch this topic with a ten foot pole but I do want to make something very very clear

EA had NOTHING to do with the !@$!$ing dlc, or the game for the matter as stated many,many, MANY times they are only the parent company and the producer.


so let me recap...

STOP BLAMING EA FOR EVERY SINGLE THING THAT YOU DISLIKE ABOUT THIS GAME !!!, you wann ablame somebody then blame the developers (not that you should after all the have made an incredible rpg)...

thank you we may now return to the usual...you know...

p.s no I don't like EA but I' not going to be pointing randomly fingers when there is no proof that they have done something wrong

EA *IS* the parent company, by the way. They bought bioware if i'm not mistaken. So they kind of had a lot to do with it.

EA may have bought bioware but as mentioned many, many, MANY times all aspects of bioware were left alone, furthermore  just because the ware the parent company does not meant they had anything to do with the game development just the publishing

I could be wrong, since well I am not majoring in business

Won't last long,same things were said about Westwood,guess what? Westwood is dead.  Give it time,EA will get there skeleton fingers into aspects of Bioware. Everything they touch turns to dust overtime.

[Inarai]

KB3SKU wrote...

Retriraver wrote...

Shadow_Viper wrote...

And yet another "Omg Bioware/EA are so greedy" DLC whining thread.

It's quite simple. If you do not like the DLCs, don't buy/play them. See? Simple huh.

Either way, there is no need for the whining.

IFSW

If you don't like the discussion, don't click on the topic and instigate.

Oh, and how the hell is someone supposed to know if they like the DLC's? You have to play them to know if you like them or not, and you have to buy them to play them, don't you?

I agree.

just ignore him,he seems like a trouble maker.

He has a point, he just made it terribly.  You make that decision the same way yo make the decision to purchase games.