469 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

prazision wrote...
When that opinion is "Yes BioWare, please take my money for tiny addons to the game!" I can't help but wonder.

Have people been saying that? I didn't, Bryy didn't, and I'm pretty sure TheMadCat didn't. Who did?

Don't you know? All opinions are rendered moot once they culminate in the partaking of a trend that other people don't like. Once that happens, your opinion automatically turns you into a sheep.

Come, graze with me, brother.

Baa.....

[Schneidend]

prazision wrote...

When that opinion is "Yes BioWare, please take my money for tiny addons to the game!" I can't help but wonder.

Ah, hyperbole.

Well, since we're putting words in the mouths of others, your opinion is "Bioware, you thieving bastards, you should give me the fruits of your labor for free."

[Cazlee]

The main issue I have is that unlike the DLC package for DA:O, Bioware is including an adventure campaign DLC as the incentive to purchase DA2 instead of the companion DLC.



The adventure campaign DLCs can be purchased at any time during the adventure and still be played to full potential. On the other hand, a companion DLC is something that would need to be purchased at the beginning of the game to enjoy to full potential.



If you purchase the companion at the end of your campaign, you miss his commentry on dozens of topics and lose out on opportunities to build or destroy the relationship. It just feels like he should have been part of the purchase package instead of the extra mission despite the supposedly better deal of getting the mission instead. And because he's not part of the purchase package it feels that Bioware will be selling an incomplete game.



That's just my opinion.

[Darkchipper07]

BlackLotus30 wrote...

You know reading treads like this makes me angry, it's like people look for any reasons to complain about something. DLC is Optional....your game is not incomplete because they release DLC... heck they don't even force you to buy the DLC.

i'm a die hard fan of Bioware and even I didn't buy most of the DLC they offered because i wasn't interested. Your talking to someone who bought the collector edition for the X-box and the normal game for my pc and bought shale.

Day one dlc is the problem hell if they don't release it day one and maybe a month or two later i will be fine but the part is they're working on it when the game is in development and releasing it when the game launches is shady. I don't trust them and everyone is trying to convince me that they have two separate teams one working on the full game and one working on the dlc.(Without proof) Why not just work on both at the same time with one team cause it's pretty much the same thing?

[Morroian]

Cazlee wrote...

The main issue I have is that unlike the DLC package for DA:O, Bioware is including an adventure campaign DLC as the incentive to purchase DA2 instead of the companion DLC.

The adventure campaign DLCs can be purchased at any time during the adventure and still be played to full potential. On the other hand, a companion DLC is something that would need to be purchased at the beginning of the game to enjoy to full potential.
 

The game is meant to be replayed.

[Beerfish]

prazision wrote...

For a bit of reality-based contrast:
The Lost and Damned cost $15 and was an entire 10-15 hour storyline.
Witch Hunt cost $7 and was a sixty minute fetch quest that did not even advance the Morrigan storyline.
Let's hope Sebastien is closer to the former than the latter. If he adds $7 worth of content, he's worth $7. If he adds as much content as Shale, he should be included in all new (non-preowned) copies of the game, because he is already completed and would be a terrific incentive not to buy used. EA has expressed over and over that they hate the used game market. So give me a reason to buy a new copy.
I'm starting to wonder if all these apologists work in EA's mailroom or something, sheesh.

Eh?  You have a strong conviction that in this case you feel used is better than new.  Go and buy used ot do whatever the heck you want.  Pay whatever you want for the game buy or don't buy the dlc.  In the end I could not care less what you do.  Do you honestly think that everyone and their dog that has pre ordered or will be buying day one will be swayed by what you do?   Magic 8 ball says 'unlikely'.

(And nice slam of anyone disagreeing with you as an apologist.)

[Morroian]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Day one dlc is the problem hell if they don't release it day one and maybe a month or two later i will be fine but the part is they're working on it when the game is in development and releasing it when the game launches is shady. I don't trust them and everyone is trying to convince me that they have two separate teams one working on the full game and one working on the dlc.(Without proof)

The devs have addressed this before on this forum you'll just have to find the thread if you want proof. 

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Why not just work on both at the same time with one team cause it's pretty much the same thing?

Separate budgets, separate revenue streams. They do it this way so they can release it as a pre-order or buy new incentive.

Modifié par Morroian, 13 janvier 2011 - 06:20 .

[AlanC9]

Cazlee wrote...

The main issue I have is that unlike the DLC package for DA:O, Bioware is including an adventure campaign DLC as the incentive to purchase DA2 instead of the companion DLC.

The adventure campaign DLCs can be purchased at any time during the adventure and still be played to full potential. On the other hand, a companion DLC is something that would need to be purchased at the beginning of the game to enjoy to full potential.

If you purchase the companion at the end of your campaign, you miss his commentry on dozens of topics and lose out on opportunities to build or destroy the relationship. It just feels like he should have been part of the purchase package instead of the extra mission despite the supposedly better deal of getting the mission instead. And because he's not part of the purchase package it feels that Bioware will be selling an incomplete game.

That's just my opinion.

Hmm... since so many people don't replay games, this is an interesting point. OTOH, I'm not sure folks who won't replay DA2 would be in the DLC market anyway

[Beerfish]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

BlackLotus30 wrote...

You know reading treads like this makes me angry, it's like people look for any reasons to complain about something. DLC is Optional....your game is not incomplete because they release DLC... heck they don't even force you to buy the DLC.

i'm a die hard fan of Bioware and even I didn't buy most of the DLC they offered because i wasn't interested. Your talking to someone who bought the collector edition for the X-box and the normal game for my pc and bought shale.

Day one dlc is the problem hell if they don't release it day one and maybe a month or two later i will be fine but the part is they're working on it when the game is in development and releasing it when the game launches is shady. I don't trust them and everyone is trying to convince me that they have two separate teams one working on the full game and one working on the dlc.(Without proof) Why not just work on both at the same time with one team cause it's pretty much the same thing?

Believe what you will, buy or don't buy, think of them as rip off artists or not.

My main beef with these type of arguments?  Do you have the same fervor over marketing practices that have used incentives to 'buy now' for years and years?

[AlanC9]

Morroian wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Why not just work on both at the same time with one team cause it's pretty much the same thing?

Separate budgets, separate revenue streams.

And separate deadlines. Not having to put the DLC on the disc means that the DLC can be worked on after DA2 proper goes gold.

[Cazlee]

Morroian wrote...

Cazlee wrote...

The main issue I have is that unlike the DLC package for DA:O, Bioware is including an adventure campaign DLC as the incentive to purchase DA2 instead of the companion DLC.

The adventure campaign DLCs can be purchased at any time during the adventure and still be played to full potential. On the other hand, a companion DLC is something that would need to be purchased at the beginning of the game to enjoy to full potential.
 

The game is meant to be replayed.

It can be replayed, but it's not necessarily meant to be replayed. I don't remember the stats exactly, but most people that bought DA:O did not finish it. I imagine that only a small percentage of players actually replay the game multiple times.

[Naitaka]

Cazlee wrote...

The main issue I have is that unlike the DLC
package for DA:O, Bioware is including an adventure campaign DLC as the
incentive to purchase DA2 instead of the companion DLC.

The
adventure campaign DLCs can be purchased at any time during the
adventure and still be played to full potential. On the other hand, a
companion DLC is something that would need to be purchased at the
beginning of the game to enjoy to full potential.

If you
purchase the companion at the end of your campaign, you miss his
commentry on dozens of topics and lose out on opportunities to build or
destroy the relationship. It just feels like he should have been part of
the purchase package instead of the extra mission despite the
supposedly better deal of getting the mission instead. And because he's
not part of the purchase package it feels that Bioware will be selling
an incomplete game.

That's just my opinion.

I couldn't have put it any better myself.

Morroian wrote...

Separate budgets, separate revenue streams. They do it this way so they can release it as a pre-order or buy new incentive.

That is why you can find evidence in the toolset that Shale was originally included in the base game because the team working on Origin totally didn't have anything to do with the dlc team...wait, what?

Modifié par Naitaka, 13 janvier 2011 - 06:25 .

[AlanC9]

Beerfish wrote...
My main beef with these type of arguments?  Do you have the same fervor over marketing practices that have used incentives to 'buy now' for years and years?

Yeah. My supermarket's selling flank steak this week. But I just made boeuf bourguignon and I don't want anything that beefy again for a few days. How dare they raise the price next week when I actually might be in the market for the steak!

(I wonder if that popped into my head because you said "beef")

[Morroian]

Naitaka wrote...

That is why you can find evidence in the toolset that Shale was originally included in the base game because the team working on Origin totally didn't have anything to do with the dlc team...wait, what?

Shale was entirely different. She was originally meant to be in the main game but they ran into problems with her implementation and she wasn't going to be ready at the original release date. When the game was delayed due to the console port they were able to release her as free DLC for those who bought the game new.

[Merci357]

Naitaka wrote...

Morroian wrote...

Separate budgets, separate revenue streams. They do it this way so they can release it as a pre-order or buy new incentive.

That is why you can find evidence in the toolset that Shale was originally included in the base game because the team working on Origin totally didn't have anything to do with the dlc team...wait, what?

Shale was part of Origins, but got left out, because, after like 5 years, they had to finish the job. This happens in all the games, features get canceled due to a variety of reasons. Remember, DA:O was a PC only game back then, with a march(?) 09 release target. Someone made the decision to make DA a multiplatform game, it got delayed, again. The bulk of the team was working either on the ports or already on DA2, a small(ish) DLC team finished Shale, since most basics where already done. No hidden conspiracy, but again, YMMV.

Modifié par Merci357, 13 janvier 2011 - 06:33 .

[Naitaka]

AlanC9 wrote...

Beerfish wrote...
My main beef with these type of arguments?  Do you have the same fervor over marketing practices that have used incentives to 'buy now' for years and years?

Yeah. My supermarket's selling flank steak this week. But I just made boeuf bourguignon and I don't want anything that beefy again for a few days. How dare they raise the price next week when I actually might be in the market for the steak!

(I wonder if that popped into my head because you said "beef")

A more apt comparison is is that when you have gone off to the supermarket to buy a surloin only to get half of the portion for the same price since they decided to consider the other half a different portion of the animal. Then they tell you that if they didn't give the animal more feed, it wouldn't have grown that part all together. How would you feel about that?

[AlanC9]

Naitaka wrote...
A more apt comparison is is that when you have gone off to the supermarket to buy a surloin only to get half of the portion for the same price since they decided to consider the other half a different portion of the animal. Then they tell you that if they didn't give the animal more feed, it wouldn't have grown that part all together. How would you feel about that?

If it was true, I'd feel just fine about it. And while this isn't true about cows AFAIK, it is true about games.

[Naitaka]

AlanC9 wrote...

If it was true, I'd feel just fine about it. And while this isn't true about cows AFAIK, it is true about games.

Then I think we can just agree to disagree at this point. Although I'd still have felt much better about this if they included the companion as free dlc with every new copy and had the optional item/advanture as day1 dlc.

[Morroian]

Naitaka wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

If it was true, I'd feel just fine about it. And while this isn't true about cows AFAIK, it is true about games.

Then I think we can just agree to disagree at this point. Although I'd still have felt much better about this if they included the companion as free dlc with every new copy and had the optional item/advanture as day1 dlc.

The optional adventure is tied to the companion not much use having 1 without the other.

[Planeforger]

I definitely don't support the trend towards microtransactions and DLC, especially not the blatant cash-grabs that are day 1 DLC. Even so, I'm fine with it as long as I don't have to pay extra for it - so things like the Signature Edition are great for me.



So...yes, this extra DLC has lost a sale from me. The lack of the Signature Edition on Steam has definitely pushed me off the fence and into the "definitely not buying" territory.



I feel slightly insulted as a customer, really.

And before people say that I could have gotten the SE elsewhere...well, no, I couldn't have. D2D and Impulse aren't selling the game to Australians, the EA store is selling it to us for $89, and the retailers here are probably selling it for more, too. Steam is the only one selling it for a reasonable price. ):

[Naitaka]

Morroian wrote...

The optional adventure is tied to the companion not much use having 1 without the other.

Wait, what exactly are you refering to? Unless i'm missing something here, I didn't think The Black Emporium and Sebastian are directly related, nor were Warden Keep and Shale in Origin.

[Darkchipper07]

Beerfish wrote...
Believe what you will, buy or don't buy, think of them as rip off artists or not.

My main beef with these type of arguments?  Do you have the same fervor over marketing practices that have used incentives to 'buy now' for years and years?

Well it depends are the incentives day-one dlc if yes then yes.

[Morroian]

Naitaka wrote...

Morroian wrote...

The optional adventure is tied to the companion not much use having 1 without the other.

Wait, what exactly are you refering to? Unless i'm missing something here, I didn't think The Black Emporium and Sebastian are directly related, nor were Warden Keep and Shale in Origin.

Isn't the Black Emporium just a store? I was talking about Sebastian's companion quest, I assumed thats what you were talking about.

[Sabbatine]

All this news has sapped my interest in the game. I don't know that I won't buy it day one, but yesterday Dragon Age 2 was my most anticipate game this year... today I'm not sure I'll even play it this year. All these surcharges added to the game are wrecking my budget...

Lets see if I can break this down.

$49.99 for Dragon Age 2.
$9.99 to cover non-existent royalties for releasing a game on the pc.
$7.99 for not buying Dragon Age 2 from Gamestop two months in advance (estimated dlc price)

So if I'm understanding this, Bioware wants to charge me extra for buying from the retailer of MY choice rather than the retailer of their choice. For pre ordering the game when I want to rather than when they want me to...

Good lord, what happened to Bioware while I wasn't looking...?  I don't care how good the game looks, jumping through these hoops feels like I'm being punished for being a fan.  They are free to run their business how they see fit, but the way they're selling the game now is alienating me as a fan.

Modifié par Sabbatine, 13 janvier 2011 - 06:50 .

[AlanC9]

Naitaka wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

If it was true, I'd feel just fine about it. And while this isn't true about cows AFAIK, it is true about games.

Then I think we can just agree to disagree at this point. Although I'd still have felt much better about this if they included the companion as free dlc with every new copy and had the optional item/advanture as day1 dlc.

Agree to disagree about what? How DLC gets budgeted and has resources allocated is not a matter of opinion.

As for which DLC should have gone with which SKU, it's an interesting question. I'm kind of surprised that what looks like the more interesting DLC is being used to spur preorders rather than to make buying DA2 used less desirable. I don't see the business strategy there, unless preorders are really valuable to EA/Bioware for some reason. Maybe more preorders gets them more shelf space and free media which gets them more sales later?

Edit: or maybe they think that Sebastian is good enough that they'll sell a bunch of him to folks who didn't preorder.

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 janvier 2011 - 06:52 .