251 réponses à ce sujet

[mujahadin]

krabman wrote...

 I do absolutely hate that they put some guy in my camp hawking it. I already paid my money and dont want advertisements in my game. EVER.

I wouldnt mind an npc in camp promoting it if they made the npc look like morrigan

[Grumpy Old Wizard]

I like DLCs as long the initial product is not skimped on. I like Bioware's games and they always do a great job supporting their games and keeping us informed of patches and stuf and in listening to the community.



I've not picked up the game yet, but I'll be doing that this morning to enjoy over the weekend.

[Arcane Fury]

Yelina wrote...

AshedMan wrote...

I fully support DLC and even Day 1 - DLC, however, I cannot support $7-$15 prices for one hour of content.

If the DLC they release is akin to the Deep Roads experience or the Circle of Magi (content that was broad, deep, and took some time to complete) then I would be a happy camper purchasing all of it. Look at Fallout 3's DLC. They had similar pricing but at least offered 3-6 hours of play.

Charging $7 for Warden's Keep and $15 for Stone Prisoner is pure greediness coming from EA. I cannot and will not support anymore of that.

Exactly, I won't fall prey to 1 hours worth of content from Bioware anymore. Thats just crap. $7 for a Deep Roads type of adventure would be highly worth it but Warden's Keep was a freakin joke for that much money. Pure crap content. I was screwed!

I'll make sure not to buy Warden's Keep...1-2 hours of content for 1 month of WoW subscription? No thanks. I'm kind of on the fence for DLC. If they release dlcs that are actually worth the money, I'll consider, but I'm not going for the Oblivion horse armor style dlc as this dlc seems to be, that was an utter joke. 

[pulcherrima]

Akka le Vil wrote...
It's pathetic (and fun in a very twisted way) to see the dumb fanboys of a game working actively to ruin the chance of having another game like it.
Because the more 5$-for-one-hour-content DLC sell, the less large and good game like DAO will be created.

A bit harsh, but true.

slikster wrote...
I, and others like me will contribute to making your dreams come true, and you can just sit back and wait.  There may even be enough of us to warrent you getting a "proper" expansion in the future.  Whether or not you like it, the suits will use DLC sales to gauge interest and contribute to cost-volume-profit analysis of an expansion.  ....

Let me see..... you are saying that if DLCs sell well at close to TEN TIMES the price/hour of a traditional expansion, EA executives will be so dumb as to stop generating DLCs and make an expansion that would net them 1/10 of the profit?
Errrmmmm..... well, riiiight, keep dreaming.

We are not talking here about a 10% price increase, not even a 50%, we are talking here about a scheme to get freakin FIVE to TEN TIMES the traditional price....... geez i wonder how games were developed before the 1hour overpriced DLCs.

[SkippyMcGee88]

Lowlander wrote...

I had every intention of staying away from these forums.

But GRRRRRR!  Count me in with the pitchforks and torches set on this one.

Industry problems and layoffs at EA? Solution: Crappy DLC??

If there is an industry problem it rests clearly on the shoulders of EA, which changed the industry from innovation to sequelitis after buying up and destroying most indepenedent game houses that it took over. It spewed some of the worse DRM infections on the public. Remember Spore?  EA was doing this not because of piracy, but because of their war on end users trading, buying/selling used games.

Layoffs at EA Good. EA going bankrupt would be a cause for celebration IMO.  EA is not a creative force, they are the Borg.

The DLC we have seen here is offensive. It is essentially selling items in a single player game. I dislike this in  in MMOs, but in stand alone single player games, it is bile inducing.

Wardens keep was short do nothing DLC, what it really was is selling you best armor weapons in the game for cold hard cash.

Face it, actual adventures are a lot of work.  But a new sword and armor, that takes 5 minutes. The dollar return is immense if you can get people to accept paying cold hard cash for their items.

I don't buy any BS about plans to release DLC after the game came out. If that was the case it should be, post campaign new adventures, not swords/armor to use in a camaign you would have already completed.

I am never signing up to be nickel and dimed for in game items.  You can sell more story, but I am never laying out real cash for a virtual sword.

I have long had an uneasy feeling because I love Bioware as much as I despise EA. In the end I expect EA will do to them what they did it every other gaming house the acquired. Destroy them.  This feels like the first steps.

10/10

Most people who support this DLC are "fanboys" and that isn't a knock, since there is really nothing wrong with that...

For example... I'm a Cleveland Browns fan, I still pay for tickets to the games, even though the owner ruined the team and they blow. Yet I defend them and constantly spew out cash for their products.

But with that being said...

I realize I'm being duped, swindled, conned, or whatever other term applies there...

But back to the topic...

DLC, Micro-Transactions, etc... Are not about "improving" the game, they are about making that Company/Developer/Publisher MORE PROFITS.

Plain and Simple...

So defending said companies/developers/publishers with some of the reasoning I'm reading in many of these threads, make me slap my head and wonder if these are the same people who drank the Kool-Aid and voted for Obama because they believed all of the crap he said in his campaign...

Stone Prisoner... Decent DLC because of the the immersion... Worth 15? No... 7 maybe

Warden's Keep... More like Warden's Coffee Break... 30minutes max, basically a Micro for some items and 8 codexes which quite possibly were more time consuming reading than the actual content.

I read someone knocking WoW in how much people have spent on it... You do realize it's been out for 5 years, and that content you've spent money on DWARFS anything and everything any of these other DLC offer. Not too mention add in replayability, which destroys any other game not modded a plethora of times.

Now with that said, I'm not defending WoW or Blizzard... Mainly because Blizz and Activisions merging I've noticed many "EA" trends, ie, basically all the crap that was added in the last year which they charge anywhere from 10-35 bucks(transfers, faction changes, pets, etc, etc, etc) stuff they said they would never do.

But you CANNOT compare the pricing differences...

DLC and Micros are milking money from the consumer to bolsters said companies pockets... Nothing more, nothing less.

They add in, Mouse Wheel type things, appease the appropiate % of the base, to min/max profits without losing consumers...

These do not improve the product the consumer recieves... Because it's a BUSINESS.

They add in enough to justify what they spent, compared to the reaction it will get...

It will continue this way til the next big "Profit Increasing" idea comes out...

People forget... DLC used to be free. It was called patches, with content. Only recently had DLC been associated with paying money, it used to be DLC just meant that literally, DOWNLOADABLE CONTENT, not Downloadable Content that Costs Money.

D2 did it with 1.10, TF2 did it... New content, cost? Nothing

Many games did it... Til they realized they could charge for this.

People also wonder why patches/hotfixes are not as frequent in most games anymore... Directly correlated to the DLC market.

These are the things that have become prominent in todays gaming business market... Not exactly sure if this timeline is accurate, but this is sort of the way it went.

I.E.
Expansions
Subscriptions...
Micro-Transactions...
Cross Marketing Promotions... (Buy this for Game 1, Get this for Game 2) or (Buy Product 1, Get this for Game 2)
DLC...
And whatever the "Next Big Thing" is...

It will continue this way til people eventually say enough... But that will never happen. It's all about money.

Companies/Developers/whatever start of idealistic...

It's not about the money, it's about the product...

That eventually changes... Either they are bought up, or money changes them, or whatever.

It's just how the world goes... It's just how people are...

All that being said... The new DLC... You can keep it EA/Bioware, you're not the Cleveland Browns.

Modifié par SkippyMcGee88, 20 novembre 2009 - 12:35 .

[romankalik]

SkippyMcGee88 wrote...

People forget... DLC used to be free. It was called patches, with content. Only recently had DLC been associated with paying money, it used to be DLC just meant that literally, DOWNLOADABLE CONTENT, not Downloadable Content that Costs Money.

While I agree that DLC's are first and foremost a business consideration (gaming is a business industry, after all - nothing's free), I am sick and tired of this sense of, I dunno... entitelment?

Patches are there to fix things. Bugs. Balance issues. Performance. They are not there to add new content, never were. If a developer released some extra fluff just because they wanted to, kudos to them. But, and this is key, new actual content costs money to make. We may be entitled to getting the game patched up so that we get the product as it was meant to be sold, but I fail to see where this endless demand for free loot comes from.

[hangmans tree]

I dont like to repeat myslef but...

About armour - as I understand this is the loot for pc, yes? DUMBEST IDEA ever...imo. What justifies retriving kings armour and put it on onself? To bring back the armour and place in the tomb/grave/memento display, that's understandable, but to treat it as loot? And what about damage the armour recived when an ogre crushed Cailan (sp?)? Do we have a handy anvil close by and skills for repair? I wonder. As far as I'm concerned this is not logical and thought through.



To keep it short: kings armour as remembrance - yes,



as a new armour set to use - NO. I will change my opinion if this is well justified in the dlc's plot.

Nobaody else sees this black hole in the logic behind the script/idea? It seems its only to suck your money...like light and time alike.

[hangmans tree]

new actual content costs money to make

The Witcher->DLC->for free...and accually couple of hours worth.

[Xeper84]

sacred2 new armor new weapons... two worlds new weapons + new faces ... Drakensang new armor and some other stuff + NWN2 some new monsters + DoW2 new maps, new game mode... Left 4 dead new map + new gamemode....

and now we 're getting 1 hour of gameplay for 7$?

[romankalik]

hangmans tree wrote...

new actual content costs money to make

The Witcher->DLC->for free...and accually couple of hours worth.

I believe I said it before - The Witcher had no DLC per-se. It had zero-budget proof-of-concept modules, one being a tiny short affair that meant to show the scripting capabilities, the other the two-hours' worth mini-adventure you speak of, that had no-voice acting, little to no new textures and models, and was probably just whipped together by two bored developers who wanted to show folks that the D'jinni toolset was good to go.

Yes, it was a nice gesture. It was also a free gesture. A much nicer gesture was to make the re-release content for The Witcher, which had more game models, better gestures for the NPC's, more fluid battle animations and (finally!) a good inventory system. Giving people who had already bought the game the Enhanced Edition content for free in mega-patch format was fairly awesome, but it was still part of re-releasing the game in a better final form. They just did the decent thing and didn't try to rip-off the old customers with content from the "new" final version of the game.

I reiterate - actual new content costs money to make, and that expediture needs to be justified to the people who hold the purse-strings.

Modifié par romankalik, 20 novembre 2009 - 01:01 .

[hangmans tree]

adventures got finally voiced...but as you say it was with EE. Nevertheless gameowners could dl it for free...as the rest of the content as well.

[Ghandorian]

Funny thing is the market goes where the people want it to. If people did not want the DLC they would not buy it and companies would not make it. Micro-transactions and this similar dlc model seem to be what the Majority of people purchase despite the vocalizations of others.



I have no interest in the Asian gaming system. Not the stories, graphics or business model. Do I see it as a threat to Old School gaming? You bet I do. But I know the success of that way of gaming is tied directly to the ever growing consoles, and the younger, larger, gaming market. DAO may well be the last kick at the can for CRPG fans.

[pulcherrima]

romankalik wrote...
I reiterate - actual new content costs money to make, and that expediture needs to be justified to the people who hold the purse-strings.

I have no problem with paying for new content...... however, lets make yet another cofee analogy:

Lets say you are used to pay $2 for a cup of good cofee. You enjoy the coffee and you are happy.
Now, the coffee seller comes up with this GREAT idea, of selling you coffee BY THE SPOONFUL, so you can have 30 spoonfuls instead of a cup of cofee, there is a gotcha, he charges 0.5$ per spoon, so you will end paying 15$ for the same product that you were used to buy for $2.

Now hear the coffee fanboys:
"Its high quality!", "I will support this coffee shop!", "0.5$ is nothing!"

Well, the spoonful may be worth for you, it doesnt change the fact that it is a rip off.

[romankalik]

pulcherrima wrote...

Lets say you are used to pay $2 for a cup of good cofee. You enjoy the coffee and you are happy.
Now, the coffee seller comes up with this GREAT idea, of selling you coffee BY THE SPOONFUL, so you can have 30 spoonfuls instead of a cup of cofee, there is a gotcha, he charges 0.5$ per spoon, so you will end paying 15$ for the same product that you were used to buy for $2.

Now hear the coffee fanboys:
"Its high quality!", "I will support this coffee shop!", "0.5$ is nothing!"

Well, the spoonful may be worth for you, it doesnt change the fact that it is a rip off.

Except the seller is actually selling you the same cup of good coffee as before, for the same $2, and at the same time adding another service. He adds extras, a bit of this, a bit of that, none of which you actually have to buy to enjoy the original cup of coffee.

And of course, the analogy is actually quite rubbish. Coffee is bought on a regular basis - games are released in intervals of years.

You think it's a ripoff? Don't buy it, mate. It's how this sort of thing works, really.

[Ghandorian]

pulcherrima wrote...

romankalik wrote...
I reiterate - actual new content costs money to make, and that expediture needs to be justified to the people who hold the purse-strings.

I have no problem with paying for new content...... however, lets make yet another cofee analogy:

Lets say you are used to pay $2 for a cup of good cofee. You enjoy the coffee and you are happy.
Now, the coffee seller comes up with this GREAT idea, of selling you coffee BY THE SPOONFUL, so you can have 30 spoonfuls instead of a cup of cofee, there is a gotcha, he charges 0.5$ per spoon, so you will end paying 15$ for the same product that you were used to buy for $2.

Now hear the coffee fanboys:
"Its high quality!", "I will support this coffee shop!", "0.5$ is nothing!"

Well, the spoonful may be worth for you, it doesnt change the fact that it is a rip off.

Now those spoonfuls where hot and fresh brewed. Just a sip at time of always fresh, just perked.

But look down the counter! There is yesterdays old coffee, cold and quite getting moldy. It's on sale! You can buy 30 spoonfuls bundled together for the low low price of $1.50! Thats cheaper than a fresh cup even!  See where I'm going with this? Check back around the Christmas of 2011 and see how much all the content produced this yes is going for in a bundle pack?

Price <-----> Demand

People want it All  and they want it Right Frigging Now!

So yea that comes at a premium price. I think it is amazing that content is being produced so quickly. Every fool knows that we will pay more for ten adventures, one piece at a time. And everyone also knows that we can play the game without ever adding a single piece of DLC to it. We have a choice and we are free to make it. Nobody is making a choice for you. Each of us is free to buy the DLC or NOT.

I really do not see the problem despite all the crying. DLC is not patches. It is not substitutes for patches. Patches are bug related and they are being rolled out separately, by a separate team with a separate agenda.

[Akka le Vil]

Ghandorian wrote...

Funny thing is the market goes where the people want it to.

Wrong.
The market goes where the most profits is to be made, and people follow or not.
Big difference.

The market isn't going to do what please the most people. The market is going to do what increase the most the profits right to the point where people say "enough".
And seeing the delusional and absurd idea of many people here, the "enough" will be WAY past the rip-off line.

[Eurypterid]

Akka, you really need to let go of the idea that just because people disagree with you they're deluded and absurd. You can certainly disagree with them, and you have a right to your opinion, but let's try to keep the premise that if they have a different viewpoint, they're deluded out of the equation, shall we?

[Akka le Vil]

There is opinions, which may vary ("I like DAO !", "I don't like DAO !"). They can be discuted, and you can even often say that someone is wrong or right, but they are still quite subjective, so there is not necessarily a real, objective line separating the "true" one from the "false".



And there is reasonings, which are subject to logical errors.

Someone who says that buying DLC will encourage the creation of good and long game is delusional at best, and probably just stupid. Because it's a logical absurdity. DLC are short and expensives, they offer better return on investment than long game with extensive quality efforts.

How rewarding the short and expensive DLC will push developpers to invest into long and relatively cheaper games ?

It's like saying "the less I work a day, the more my boss pay me for each hour of work, it's a smart move from him, I'll work more in the end".



It's not "disagreeing" or "agreeing", it's being dumb and having idiotic reasoning with no logic whatsoever.

[KalDurenik]

Like i said... I don't like DLC atleast not for the price they want. I will complain because i don't like it. Im not going to understand why people want to pay more for less. However people are never the less allowed to do what they want and spend money on what they want. EA will push this to the edge. EA and bioware want to make money. People are allowed to agree or disagree aslong as people don't insult eachother.



The End

[thrice00]

I've got no problem with DLC but warden Keep was not long enough for me not even an hour. You can't even return in your keep afterward. All the npc LIVE outside the keep ?!?!?!

[Allen63]

I'm not "opposed" to DLC.



I simply won't buy it because its not worth it (on an entertainment/dollar basis).



Many good comments have already been made, that DLC is a business model designed to "take advantage" of customers -- rather than provide them real value. Its probably not a good idea to support such business models. In the long run, we'll start getting "less for more" -- oh, that's already happening.



When DLC provides "real value", I'll buy it.

[Zem_]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Because it's a logical absurdity. DLC are short and expensives, they offer better return on investment than long game with extensive quality efforts.

You are assuming that they can simply offer such "short and expensive" DLC forever without ever needing to develop new and complete games.   I am quite sure these same arguments you're making now were probably made when Horse Armor was released for Oblivion and yet the imminent death of PC gaming has yet to occur.  New games are still being made with DLC being merely supplemental.  DLC can extend the life and increase the profit margin of a game, certainly, but there's no evidence it can REPLACE the need for new games. 

The flawed assumption in your logic is that if people will buy one DLC at such a price, they will keep buying forever.  You can't make this assumption.  People are not automatons who will simply repeat the same action forever.  They'll lose interest.  An extra one hour adventure isn't going to have the same appeal to someone who's already played the game through three times as it did on release day.  That well will run dry.  Count on it.

[Akka le Vil]

Zem_ wrote...

The flawed assumption in your logic is that if people will buy one DLC at such a price, they will keep buying forever.  You can't make this assumption.  People are not automatons who will simply repeat the same action forever.  They'll lose interest.  An extra one hour adventure isn't going to have the same appeal to someone who's already played the game through three times as it did on release day.  That well will run dry.  Count on it.

I hope so.
But when I see people happily paying for a third DLC in a row that is a complete rip-off, I'm thinking that the "bored" part will be far too removed to make milking through DLC a bad financial move.

After all, game with shorter and shorter lifespan are continually produced without "boring" the public, and have even become the new norm - amusingly enough, DAO is completely outside that norm, having a very large lifespan, but it's an exception, and an exception that will become rarer and rarer if the DLC model works.

I would have really liked to have DAO succeed strongly and its DLC fail epicly.  Would have sent the message "do long, good games, don't do short, bad DLC". Now the message sent is quite mixed "big games work, but DLC work too, and even after two DLC that are downright rip-off, people still plan to buy the next one which promise to be even more laughable".
The "bored" part certainly seems to take a long time to come in.