469 réponses à ce sujet

[PrinceOfFallout13]

prazision wrote...

Morroian wrote...

prazision wrote...

I agree in theory, but giving Gamestop money for a bad game does not encourage developers to make more bad games. If DA2 ends up being as much of a step backwards from Origins as it sounds like (as well as being less than half as lengthy) then I absolutely do not want to encourage them by paying for a new copy.

Thats a different point, you were protesting about the DLC policy. If you think its going to be a bad game why would you buy it period?

I won't buy it if people I trust tell me it's bad. At the moment, I have nowhere near enough information to assume the game will be great.
My problem with the Sebastien DLC is simple: It's day 1 DLC. It should be included with all new copies (like Shale was) to encourage people to buy it new instead of used.
As it stands, I have no reason to buy a new copy since I would still have to pay for Sebastien.
It's a truly baffling decision given that EA has said over and over that they are very concerned about the used game market, yet this DLC decision actually ENCOURAGES buying the game used!
It would even make sense if Sebastien were a pre-order bonus up until launch, but ending the bonus 2 months early when we still know almost nothing about the game? I'm perplexed.

i take it you missed the ign preview? seriously buying something you loathe is a fail logic no matter you are the .1% of the minority so who cares

[Bryy_Miller]

It's a truly baffling decision given that EA has said over and over that they are very concerned about the used game market, yet this DLC decision actually ENCOURAGES buying the game used!

How? It's your own subjective opinion, your own choice. It ENCOURAGES people to buy new, but they don't have to.

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:24 .

[Morroian]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Not nice being mean when you don't understand what buying something used is.

• I buy DA2 i finish playing it
• I sell it to someone(they buy it used)
• they pay me and NO ONE ELSE
• they buy $7 dlc

How many purchases does EA get out of this.(here i'll help one $60 purchase and $7 dlc instead of TWO $60 purchases)

And this is why EA doesn't like used game sales they try to put in exclusive dlc so you buy it new. I tried if you don't understand i'm at a loss.

The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

[Bryy_Miller]

Morroian wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Not nice being mean when you don't understand what buying something used is.

• I buy DA2 i finish playing it
• I sell it to someone(they buy it used)
• they pay me and NO ONE ELSE
• they buy $7 dlc

How many purchases does EA get out of this.(here i'll help one $60 purchase and $7 dlc instead of TWO $60 purchases)

And this is why EA doesn't like used game sales they try to put in exclusive dlc so you buy it new. I tried if you don't understand i'm at a loss.

The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

[*]And as I've stated before, they still get your money. 

[Darkchipper07]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

[*][/list]How many purchases does EA get out of this.(here i'll help one $60 purchase and $7 dlc instead of TWO $60 purchases)

[*]Still get $7. You assume that it is the amount that matters. It doesn't.

Bryy_Miller wrote...

prazision wrote...

I for one will go on record as saying I am going to wait a week (at most) for the inevitable used copies to show up, and that yes, BioWareEA will be getting no money from my purchase of the core game.

Well.... you're still buying the game. Profit will still go to them. So.... good for you?

Well I thought you did cause (look above bolded everything that brought this up)

Modifié par Darkchipper07, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:27 .

[TheMadCat]

Soul Cool wrote...
It alleviates it. The majority of gamers and critics gave DA:O generally favorable to praiseworthy reviews.

Alleviate for who? The general public? The developers? What does that have to do with someones own, personal opinion?

If you enjoy traditional RPGs, know that BioWare has a long history of very high quality games, and want to pick up a traditional RPG of the past decade, DA:O is something you are highly likely to enjoy.

Not necessarily no, there have been plenty of games in genres I like from developers I like that I personally haven't enjoyed or completely hated. Just because it fits the mold of something I'd like doesn't automatically mean it was something I'd like. I think Origins is a decent example of that, it's exactly the type of game I felt I'd like and though I certainly enjoyed it in retrospect it was a very mediocre game. It had great characters and solid dialogue but beyond that it had faults of various degrees in pretty much every other aspect. Now that doesn't mean it's definitively a bad game, it just means it didn't achieve what I was expecting or fell short in areas I wasn't.

AlanC9 wrote...
I thought about this some more and I realized
that "baiting" is often used to talk about getting someone to decide
something emotionally rather than rationally. So I was wrong about it
necessarily being deception, but it is trying to get someone to do
something that he wouldn't want to do if he was thinking clearly.

Emotionally? What like some homeless guy with a sad face coming up to you with a dixie cup looking for change and you dropping a quarter because you feel bad? Come on now, baiting is incredibly simple philosophy. It's creating an incentive to get people to purchase something they may not normally buy, luring consumers with something that may interest them, AKA bait. Could be a sale, a promotion, free goodies, price slash, etc. Nothing deep or emotional about it. It sounds sinister but it's an incredibly simple and common practice in every realm of business.

BioWare threw out a few goodies to entice people to preorder and since preorders are a major factor in determining how many copies/licenses retailers/digital distributors will initially purchase from the publisher it helps increase the initial volume the publisher will move. 

Modifié par TheMadCat, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:44 .

[Darkchipper07]

Morroian wrote...
The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

No the think is he's going to buy a $50 used game and $7 dollar DLC because he wants to spite the company (EA/Bioware). He said it himself.

Modifié par Darkchipper07, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:34 .

[prazision]

If you can't see the huge gameplay difference between Shale and Warden's Keep then I give up.

[Bryy_Miller]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

[*]Well I thought you did cause (look above bolded everything that brought this up)

[*]I bring it up because it's true.

[Darkchipper07]

So we can agree that buying a used game does not give any money to Bioware. Not including him buying DLC, sticking to the core of what started this argument.

Modifié par Darkchipper07, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:36 .

[Bryy_Miller]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

No the think is he's going to buy a $50 used game and $7 dollar DLC because he wants to spite the company (EA/Bioware).

Somehow, I doubt BioWare or EA will care that he bought it out of spite. Somehow, I think they'll only care about the $7 they made from that purchase.

And that's really what it boils down to. He accomplishes nothing by actually buying the product less. He's not making any kind of statement, other than "I have no idea how this works". 

[Naitaka]

Merci357 wrote...

Uhm, Black Emporium = Shale > the DLC you'll get for free if you buy the game new.
And Sebastian = Warden's Keep > the paid day 1 DLC unless you got the CE/SE.
How is this any different compared to Origins?

So you consider the value of an extra voiced companion involved throughout the game to be the same as an extra 2~3 hour dungeon with some random items?

[Dave of Canada]

prazision wrote...

If you can't see the huge gameplay difference between Shale and Warden's Keep then I give up.

Really? I played the game just fine without either of them.

[MDarwin]

marshalleck wrote...

rsuffix wrote...

marshalleck wrote...
 Some of it is bonus content from the collector's signature edition. Nothing new there, devs have been tossing bonuses into the CE of their games for years now. Some of the DLC will come with all new retail versions of the game. As far as like the pre-order swrod and shield go, sure they're "content" but I honestly doubt they'll be very useful beyond the first few levels of the game. It's just a sword and shield, it's not like the game will be broken without them.

 The only people who are really being extorted are those who try to save a buck by buying the game used at Gamestop. And that place is a rip-off anyways--I went there the other day to get a copy of Demon's Souls for PS3, and I noticed they were selling pre-owned games at full retail price. If you want to get worked up over a scam, there's one for you. They'll buy a used game from you for like $5 credit then turn around and sell it for ten times that much.

The sword and shield and other various items like that I generally have no problem with as pre-order bonuses. I can accept those as being some incentive for people to buy the game earlier. Sure, it's not great, but whatever.

My problem in this situation is that there is actual game play content being held back. There is a character and his missions being removed from the game and put on sale as day one DLC. Not only that, but it was then offered for a limited time to people that pre-order the game way before launch day.

I'm not interested in saying if this is a scam or not. I'm simply saying that I don't agree with the practice. I frankly find it very disheartening and offputting. I don't understand why people are seemingly in favour of this practice either.

Prince Vael or whatever? He's the bonus for the signature edition. All pre-orders until January 11 were upgraded for free to signature edition. It's called an incentive to buy, and it's used to drive sales. Pretty common practice for decades now in retail. "Buy now, and get (whatever) free! limited time offer!" It's not a scam (I know you didn't say it was) and there's nothing shady or questionable about it. 

Shameless capitalism, sure. But that's the 21st century for you.

Except for Retailers here in Australia. They charge extra for the SE edition. And I prefer a "Hard Copy" of a Game I buy.

[slimgrin]

Dave of Canada wrote...

prazision wrote...

If you can't see the huge gameplay difference between Shale and Warden's Keep then I give up.

Really? I played the game just fine without either of them.

I for one loved having Shale and her quest simply for buying new.

[AlanC9]

TheMadCat wrote...

Emotionally? What like some homeless guy with a sad face coming up to you with a dixie cup looking for change and you dropping a quarter because you feel bad? Come on now, baiting is incredibly simple philisophy. It's creating an incentive to get people to purchase something they may not normally buy, luring consumers with something that may interest them, AKA bait. Could be a sale, a promotion, free goodies, price slash, etc. Nothing deep or emotional about it. It sounds sinister but it's an incredibly simple and common practice in every realm of business.

BioWare threw out a few goodies to entice people to preorder and since preorders are a major factor in determining how many copies/licenses retailers/digital distributors will initally purchase from the publisher it helps increase the inital volume the publisher will move. 

I'm just saying that those things aren't called baiting. Except maybe if you work in retail; I wouldn't know.

Edit: I'm just talking as a copyeditor here.

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:53 .

[Darkchipper07]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

No the think is he's going to buy a $50 used game and $7 dollar DLC because he wants to spite the company (EA/Bioware).

Somehow, I doubt BioWare or EA will care that he bought it out of spite. Somehow, I think they'll only care about the $7 they made from that purchase.

And that's really what it boils down to. He accomplishes nothing by actually buying the product less. He's not making any kind of statement, other than "I have no idea how this works". 

........... but the thing is he could have bought it new if he wasn't angry about the dlc or the game direction. $57 for the used game and dlc if they had been more convincing $60 for a new game. If a customer is unhappy with something you try to fix that to keep the customer to a certain degree. He is willing to buy the game just not give them money cause of trust issue.

Also you're assuming he buys the dlc what if the dlc is not good he won't buy it do they gain any sales then. Judging from pass experience most of the dlc was not great.

[prazision]

This thread is hilarious. If you think EA is happy to get $7 from DLC rather than their share of a $60 new game + $7 DLC you have clearly never read an EA press release. Also probably know nothing about basic economics.

[Bryy_Miller]

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

No the think is he's going to buy a $50 used game and $7 dollar DLC because he wants to spite the company (EA/Bioware).

Somehow, I doubt BioWare or EA will care that he bought it out of spite. Somehow, I think they'll only care about the $7 they made from that purchase.

And that's really what it boils down to. He accomplishes nothing by actually buying the product less. He's not making any kind of statement, other than "I have no idea how this works". 

........... but the thing is he could have bought it new if he wasn't angry about the dlc or the game direction. 

He could have. But he didn't. Which is what matters in this situation. Not hurt feelings.

[AlanC9]

prazision wrote...

My problem with the Sebastien DLC is simple: It's day 1 DLC. It should be included with all new copies (like Shale was) to encourage people to buy it new instead of used.
As it stands, I have no reason to buy a new copy since I would still have to pay for Sebastien

So the preorder bonus doesn't give you incentive to do anything except maybe preorder. Yep, that's true. It doesn't give me an incentive to buy ME3 either. It wasn't supposed to give me incentive to buy ME3, but it also wasn't supposed to give me an incentive to buy new rather than wait if it failed to get me to preorder -- they have a different DLC for that incentive. So Sebastian failed to get me to do two things that Bio would like me to do.

I suppose the Sebastian DLC actually fails to get me to do an infinite number of things, actually.

Modifié par AlanC9, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:52 .

[Merci357]

Naitaka wrote...

Merci357 wrote...

Uhm, Black Emporium = Shale > the DLC you'll get for free if you buy the game new.
And Sebastian = Warden's Keep > the paid day 1 DLC unless you got the CE/SE.
How is this any different compared to Origins?

So you consider the value of an extra voiced companion involved throughout the game to be the same as an extra 2~3 hour dungeon with some random items?

I'd value the companion higher, of course. But he is as optional as any other DLC. My point was, simply, that paid day 1 DLC is anything but new, even for the DA franchise.

[Dave of Canada]

prazision wrote...

This thread is hilarious. If you think EA is happy to get $7 from DLC rather than their share of a $60 new game + $7 DLC you have clearly never read an EA press release. Also probably know nothing about basic economics.

You hate the DLC.
Yet you'll buy the game used to make sure they get no money from the game itself.
However you'll buy the DLC supporting the DLC you hate so much that made you not buy the game.

Simple: You're supporting DLC. Not hard to understand.

[Darkchipper07]

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Bryy_Miller wrote...

Darkchipper07 wrote...

Morroian wrote...
The OP probably wasn't going to buy it anyway so its not $60 compared with $7 its $7 compared to $0.

No the think is he's going to buy a $50 used game and $7 dollar DLC because he wants to spite the company (EA/Bioware).

Somehow, I doubt BioWare or EA will care that he bought it out of spite. Somehow, I think they'll only care about the $7 they made from that purchase.

And that's really what it boils down to. He accomplishes nothing by actually buying the product less. He's not making any kind of statement, other than "I have no idea how this works". 

........... but the thing is he could have bought it new if he wasn't angry about the dlc or the game direction. 

He could have. But he didn't. Which is what matters in this situation. Not hurt feelings.

prazision wrote...

This thread is hilarious. If you think EA is happy to get $7 from DLC rather than their share of a $60 new game + $7 DLC you have clearly never read an EA press release. Also probably know nothing about basic economics.

Well there you have it straight for the horses mouth. So please stop i'm tried of arguing he said everything i was trying to explain to you and stop calling people dumb it's not nice.

[TheMadCat]

AlanC9 wrote...

i'm just saying that those things aren't called baiting. Except maybe if you work in retail; I wouldn't know.

Sure they are, it's not thrown around a whole lot because as I said it sounds far more sinister then sale or free goodies but the principle is exactly that, creating an incentive for people to buy a product or visit a store they may not normally purchase or visit now or ever in order to increase revenue. BioWare (And every other developer out there) packaged in features that normally wouldn't be there and advertised those features in order to drive up the number of pre-orders which in turn will allow them to ship out a larger inital volume and generate more revenue. You may not like the term baiting, a lot of people don't, but it is.  

Modifié par TheMadCat, 13 janvier 2011 - 04:56 .

[AlanC9]

Dave of Canada wrote...

prazision wrote...

This thread is hilarious. If you think EA is happy to get $7 from DLC rather than their share of a $60 new game + $7 DLC you have clearly never read an EA press release. Also probably know nothing about basic economics.

You hate the DLC.
Yet you'll buy the game used to make sure they get no money from the game itself.
However you'll buy the DLC supporting the DLC you hate so much that made you not buy the game.

Simple: You're supporting DLC. Not hard to understand.

Here's the thing I don't get. Say Sebastian was included with all new retail copies rather than preorders. Doesn't he still have the choice to buy used and then buy the DLC? Is he asking for Sebastian to not be made available for sale at all?