350 réponses à ce sujet

[FitShaced]

Wulfram wrote...

FitShaced wrote...

But everything he has said has been relevant.

You think it matters whether the restaurant decides to give you a smaller portion before or after they cooked the meal?

Analogies: the ultimate digrassion tool. This is a video game, not a dish from applebees.

Edit: Anywasy, my view? There needs to be incentive to preeorder. Much like there needs to be incentive to buy the game from the shelf and not used. This gives us that incentive.

Modifié par FitShaced, 15 octobre 2010 - 04:45 .

[Dave of Canada]

Wulfram wrote...

You think it matters whether the restaurant decides to give you a smaller portion before or after they cooked the meal?

If the Chef cooked up my meal before and then added more with it, I don't see how the portion is smaller. It's still a full meal, it's just smaller if you don't want the extra. The portions of the meal itself isn't smaller.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 15 octobre 2010 - 04:45 .

[upsettingshorts]

FitShaced wrote...
Edit: Anywasy, my view? There needs to be incentive to preeorder. Much like there needs to be incentive to buy the game from the shelf and not used. This gives us that incentive.

Incentives? I think you mean to say "manipulative marketing ploy" to make "suckers" out of "fanboys."  

Just in case it isn't clear, my post is meant to convey sarcasm.  Some folk'll just never accept what capitalism is.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 octobre 2010 - 04:54 .

[Pseudo the Mustachioed]

Dave of Canada wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

I feel goddamn sorry for those gamers who never got to meet goddamn Zaeed.

One of my favs from ME2.

"SHEPARD, OPEN THIS GODDAMN DOOR."

"I once took my niece and nephew out for ice cream and a walk in the park. I was the only one who made it out alive."
Zaeed was excellent. So was Shale. Is it weird that I related to her most of all? Haha.

Keepin some space on my harddrive for this extra guy. Thanks for the delicious goodies, BW!

[FitShaced]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

FitShaced wrote...
Edit: Anywasy, my view? There needs to be incentive to preeorder. Much like there needs to be incentive to buy the game from the shelf and not used. This gives us that incentive.

Incentives? I think you mean to say "manipulative marketing ploy" to make "suckers" out of "fanboys."  

Just in case it isn't clear, my post is meant to convey sarcasm.  Some folk'll just never accept what capitalism is.

Not a fanboi and i'm not getting suckered. I planned to Preorder. I'm paying nothing more.

[Meltemph]

 Oh, you definitely are a fanboy and you definitely are being taken FitShaced! You trust in a company that they will make a quality product.  How else can you explain someone elses current dislike over something!? 

[the_one_54321]

JohnEpler wrote...
Of course, I work for the company, so I'm certain some people wouldn't believe me if I told them rain is wet. That's their prerogative! For the rest, though, I figured I'd chime in and dispel some of the fears.

I personally believe you just fine, but think that it's inappropriate to add extra content at release and call it part of a special edition, or signature edition or whatever you call it. Shale was an example of such an implimentation that I found to be fair and ethical. I know why it was separate, as that was epxlained. And I know that it was offered to us with a new game free of charge. I'm also not specifically claiming that you're going to charge us extra for this new character at release, but your advertising for the pre-order does make it sound so.

[-Semper-]

JohnEpler wrote...

Except this isn't what we're doing. This isn't something we've ever done, at any point. I know many people are convinced that whenever we mention any kind of DLC that's released near the on-disc product that it's stuff we just tore out of the main game to sell for an extra price, but that's not true.

that fact ain't true either. actually shale was cut during the developement process of the main game just to be released as a excluded dlc to bust reselling the game. you will notice this because it was ready at release day and therefore went through the same qa origins took. it was by far the best dlc in quality, almost triple a and on top it is fully integrated within the toolset's database which ships only with core entries. only the exported files are relocated.

btw i hate false statements

Modifié par -Semper-, 15 octobre 2010 - 05:25 .

[DPB]

-Semper- wrote...

that fact ain't true either. actually shale was cut during the developement process of the main game just to be released as a excluded dlc to bust reselling the game. you will notice this because it was ready at release day and therefore went through the same qa origins took. it was by far the best dlc in quality, almost triple a and on top it is fully integrated within the toolset's database which ships only with core entries. only the exported files are relocated.

According to DG here that's not what happened - we wouldn't have got Shale at all.

[-Semper-]

dbankier wrote...

According to DG here that's not what happened - we wouldn't have got Shale at all.

so i call him a liar. during developement you cut content because it feels buggy or there is not enough time to fully integrate the idea to keep up the high quality. now if you look at shale you won't find something wrong. it's top notch and was created by the core team. simply compare it with the rest of the dlc which was produced by bioware's trainees. clearly there's a huge gap

if you take ea's attempt to activate multiplayer with a online key you can see something similar with shale - it was cut to prevent renting and reselling.

stating something different is just pr.

Modifié par -Semper-, 15 octobre 2010 - 05:35 .

[the_one_54321]

Shale was cut due to the developing time constraints and the game going gold. At that point they couldn't put it back in the game, but since it ended up being completed they allowed us to download it for free. That or it was implemented that way to discourage second hand buyers. Either way, it's not strictly underhanded business.

[upsettingshorts]

dbankier wrote...
According to DG here that's not what happened - we wouldn't have got Shale at all.

He's disputing the veracity of John Epler's statements and you're referring him to David Gaider?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 15 octobre 2010 - 05:36 .

[Leonia]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

dbankier wrote...
According to DG here that's not what happened - we wouldn't have got Shale at all.

He's disputing the veracity of John Epler's statements and you're referring him to David Gaider?

Apparently not everyone realises that Gaider is the Sithpeep

[-Semper-]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Shale was cut due to the developing time constraints and the game going gold. At that point they couldn't put it back in the game, but since it ended up being completed

it was not cut because origins gone gold. that would mean that you cut fully integrated and functional content. again shale's database entries are fully integrated within the core and just the exported files were relocated. so shale gone gold the same time origins was ready to ship. there were no additional hours of work needed.

Modifié par -Semper-, 15 octobre 2010 - 05:40 .

[the_one_54321]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

dbankier wrote...
According to DG here that's not what happened - we wouldn't have got Shale at all.

He's disputing the veracity of John Epler's statements and you're referring him to David Gaider?

Darth Gaider was the head writer. Either what he said about it is accurate or you're claiming that he just plain lied.

[Wulfram]

The story about how Shale DLC came about seems less convincing now they've decided to do exactly the same thing with the sequel.



Though I suppose it did have a key indicator of being DLC - ridiculously overpowered items.

[upsettingshorts]

the_one_54321 wrote...
Darth Gaider was the head writer. Either what he said about it is accurate or you're claiming that he just plain lied.

Oh I was just pointing out that telling someone who thinks a Bioware employee is fibbing that another Bioware employee said the same thing probably isn't going to work.

[Meltemph]

The story about how Shale DLC came about seems less convincing now they've decided to do exactly the same thing with the sequel.

Wouldn't you think you have that in reverse? The saw how well Shale DLC did outside of pre-orders and decided to this time around, make sure they had a DLC character ready come launch... Seems to make more sense to me.

[Wulfram]

Meltemph wrote...

The story about how Shale DLC came about seems less convincing now they've decided to do exactly the same thing with the sequel.

Wouldn't you think you have that in reverse? The saw how well Shale DLC did outside of pre-orders and decided to this time around, make sure they had a DLC character ready come launch... Seems to make more sense to me.

Well, in that case it just shows that if you give them an inch they'll take a mile.

[Meltemph]

Well, in that case it just shows that if you give them an inch they'll take a mile.

Huh? So because Shale was being cut they decided to use it as DLC instead and have the DLC budget take it up, and this it worked out well for them; and then for the 2nd one, they decided to use the DLC budget/development to make a DLC character at launch, means that they are taking a mile, because you think it would have been in the game otherwise?

So since you think that Shale would have been in the game, despite the developers saying otherwise, that they are doing the exact same thing? So then you are essentially telling them what is and is not DLC, seems a bit presumptuous to me.

Modifié par Meltemph, 15 octobre 2010 - 06:27 .

[Toroi]

For the most part, it clearly makes sense that DLC is done by a different team on a different time scale. This case is a bit different because they are advertising the DLC five months from release even of the original game. Clearly, they could integrate this particular DLC with the original game if they wanted to. Instead, they are using it as a marketing ploy to sell more preorders.



Welcome to capitalism. You can't fault them for wanting to sell preorders, and they could have gone the route of making it only available to collector's editions and charged you an extra $10-20.



I don't really care one way or the other. I have never preordered a game and am not likely to start. If the new content is so amazing, I'll pay the $5 and download it later. For the most part, DA:O DLC was pretty uninspiring and I didn't bother with most of it anyway. I'm not expecting that to change with DA2.

[Meltemph]

For the most part, it clearly makes sense that DLC is done by a different team on a different time scale. This case is a bit different because they are advertising the DLC five months from release even of the original game. Clearly, they could integrate this particular DLC with the original game if they wanted to. Instead, they are using it as a marketing ploy to sell more preorders.

The only reason it is even happening though is because DLC has a budget and development team. Yes they "technically" could have added it anyway, but then it would have COST them more to do it. You can easily differentiate between the 2 because 1 is primary project and the other is a secondary project. Each would obviously have its own budget.

[the_one_54321]

Toroi wrote...
and they could have gone the route of making it only available to collector's editions and charged you an extra $10-20.

Who says they're not? That's my gripe here. The advertisement makes it sound like the preorder is getting you stuff for free that people who wait for release will have to pay for if they want it.

[Adanu]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Adanu wrote...

I have no problem with either of these sort of deals, as it makes sense that you need to pay for DLC because of the resources involved.

How is this different from the current DLC? They still use resources they don't intially have, they are taking money out of their pockets and making this DLC.

but I see nothing that shows me that you cannot put this character into the game without pre ordering.

It'll most likely come with all new copies of the game. EA's 15 dollar project and all that.

That being said, please clarify if you mean party member or player character skin/model with this edition.

It's a party member.

You can't see the difference between this DLC and what we had before? Seriously? Ok, let me spell it out for you.

SHALL came with the game if it was new, she was free and you did not pay for her. The rest of the DLC went built after and put in as mini expansions. This is all well and fine.

Now they are telling us AN ENTIRE PARTY MEMBER will not be available HALF A YEAR before release and the ONLY WAY to get them is to Pre order the game, where Stone prisoner CAME WITH THE GAME IF NEW.

Do you not see the difference there?

[Dave of Canada]

Adanu wrote...

Do you not see the difference there?

Nope. Because Shale was also advertised as part of the Collector's Edition.