251 réponses à ce sujet

[Livemmo]

Habelo wrote...

Omfg sigh...

The gaming industry used to be beautiful. Now there is almost only greed and people actually support it lol.

I support it only because it's Bioware and the product itself is always of high quality. If the quality were lacking then theres no way they would get away with releasing DLC on day one.

[Exodus]

I'll start with the dull note that Warden's Keep disappointed me. I didn't pay for extra items or the stash(we've got the toolset, we can make/add it ourselves and that goes for 'awesome' items too). I paid for what was going to be the future home of the last remnants of grey wardens(me and alistair...and bugbear(my mibari)). I wanted the keep. I wanted to make it my Guild Keep, what a huge disappointment after I cleared it out and only find out that it will only be used as a pit stop with only the stash being the real 'land mark'. This could have been something with added lasting value! Player's would have saved soveriegns to upgrade the keep. Recruited mages to add magical functionality. Instead it just feels like one of the feature creep products that wasn't hitting its milestones so they decided to tie it off at where it was and make it DLC instead.



Now to the meat and potatoes of what I'm trying to say. I would rather have a full out expansion than these nickel and dime me to death DLC's. Let's be honest, i'm on my 3rd play through, they release some DLC a few months from now so what. I have to play through a 7th time to experience this content? Or i'll just pop in an old save and goto the content and then play through the game with the 'added' value. No thank you.



Yes this is a consumer/capitalist world and the 'loudest' way you can prove your point is to not open up your wallet when the DLC wagon comes a callin but I'm not here to doom say the end of the gaming industry but I do say that this business model NEEDS to change.

[ksterker]

I guess in the end, market will sort it out. There'll be more and more casual games with 4-5 hour content sold for full price with bits and pieces of extra $10 DLC and people will happily pay for it.

And then there'll be the niché games that might not reach the polish todays games have, but perhaps will actually deliver the quality in story and gameplay some of us have come to expect from a game.

So while the majority will consume the latest installment with top-notch SFX and braindead plot, a few connoisseurs might huddle in a dark corner and enjoy Dwarf Fortress. Doesn't mean we can't get out the popcorn from time to time as well, but I feel that games like DA:O are becoming more and more rare.

Whether we'll buy any DLC EA will be throwing at us or not doesn't matter. DA:O with any number of DLC will still be less profitable than a MW2 or the 10th installment of NFL, NBA or what have you.

[Exodus]

ksterker wrote...

I guess in the end, market will sort it out. There'll be more and more casual games with 4-5 hour content sold for full price with bits and pieces of extra $10 DLC and people will happily pay for it.

And then there'll be the niché games that might not reach the polish todays games have, but perhaps will actually deliver the quality in story and gameplay some of us have come to expect from a game.

So while the majority will consume the latest installment with top-notch SFX and braindead plot, a few connoisseurs might huddle in a dark corner and enjoy Dwarf Fortress. Doesn't mean we can't get out the popcorn from time to time as well, but I feel that games like DA:O are becoming more and more rare.

Whether we'll buy any DLC EA will be throwing at us or not doesn't matter. DA:O with any number of DLC will still be less profitable than a MW2 or the 10th installment of NFL, NBA or what have you.

That's...a really scary thought.  Jesus it scares me...

[Eurypterid]

Akka le Vil wrote...

Paying for DLC doesn't mean better games in the future, it means more DLC in the future.

I woyuld say there's no evidence to suggest that DLC wouldn't contribute to better games in the future. The income from it could very likely help finance something better than if that income did not exist. Granted, it doesn't follow that it would mean better games either. But there's no reason to suspect it wouldn't.

I don't want DLC, I want good games. I will pay for games, certainly not for DLC.

DLC is an option, so you don't have to pay for it if you don't want to. DLC doesn't mean you won't still get a good game.

And CERTAINLY NOT for DLC that use offensive methods to bait and pressure buying.
If you're sheeps and enjoy being advertised in your games, then be tools but don't expect other to be. I'm certainly not going to support this kind of intrusive and unacceptable methods.

Why is it if someone disagrees with you, they're a sheep? Do you really find it that difficult to believe that perhaps some people are fine with this? (To add perspective, I'm not entirely thrilled about the way the NPC DLC vendors were implemented now that I've seen them in the game, but I really don't find it hard to believe that others like it. And I don't consider them sheep if they do).

If you don't like it, then by all means let BioWare know. But there's no need to heap scorn and insults on those that are fine with it.

[Livemmo]

I saw sheep

[TruReynar]

I have no problem with DLC. I just have a problem with DLC that I have to download every time I re-install windows, which I do every 6 months or so. And what about later when Dragon Age is just a distant memory for the industry and most people, but I want to play it again and there are no servers or the content has been erased and replaced with new stuff that you have to buy? We've paid for the Collector's editon and maybe some of the stuff we've paid for will just disappear.

[KalosCast]

I have no problem with DLC, I do however have a problem when companies pull a Bethesda and charge us money for zero-content addons (Oblivion's houses and horse armor, Fallout 3's Operation Anchorage), or worse yet charge us money for a proper ending to the game (Fallout 3's Broken Steel)



Besides, if you're opposed to the very concept of paying for additional content, the mod community is always free.

[slikster]

Those opposed to DLC in favour of expansion packs, you need look no further than piracy and the used game market to see why game companies are going this route.

[Girl Goblin]

marshalleck wrote...

"thin-skinned entitlement and monumental naivete."

Pretty much sums up a lot of what happens today, and not just in gaming.

Yes, exactly.

I'm happy to buy DLC.  I've bought it for other games in the past, and I'll continue to buy it in the future.  DA:O is the best game I've played in 10 years.  I'm happy to have more of it, and happy to pay for it.  Talent and hard work should be rewarded.

[MisterEcted]

I don't mind DLC at all as long as it's not something that really should have been in the game originally. My wife has been a fan of Sims games since day 1 and her biggest complaint with 3 is that they really stripped it way down - even more-so then vanilla Sims 2. However, if you get a really good game off the shelf and you get DLC that really adds something new and interesting to the game (and the price is right) then I'm all for it.

[slikster]

This is more a licence to use the content. You can't sell your drivers license on ebay.

[Zibon]

It doesn't help when all of the DLC items they put in are completely overpowered and way too easy to get.

It's a bit of a catch-22 for RPG's. You need the items to be worthwhile or else people will feel ripped off. But the content also needs to be accessible enough so that people don't feel like they wasted money on something they can't even use.

And then of course the cost/content ratio for DLC is way too high compared to a full game (or even an expansion.)

Modifié par Zibon, 19 novembre 2009 - 01:06 .

[Legion-001]

Livemmo wrote...

Obviously releasing DLC on day 1 was a slap in the face. I'm sure we all can agree on this. I highly doubt EA will be making that mistake again. Now, instead of having new content instantly, they'll throw it in the back room for a few months then release it. Either way, you're going to pay for it or just do without. With that said, nobody is forcing you to purchase anything and you know this very well. The FACT is, like it or not, companies arent going to just stop doing something thats making them money.

Don't be so sure that EA won't do this again, this must be at least the second or third time they've done it.

[Chastain]

Grow up and get decent paying jobs, complainers.



This game is great. I paid the same for this excellent game that I did for Two Worlds and Prince of Persia (XBox 360).



Those other games suck. DA is great. I don't mind paying more for more, and more importantly, better content. Game prices will continue to rise. New Intellivision cartridges back in the early '80s used to cost around 30 bucks.



It's hard to imagine the amount of man-hours put into creating DA. DLC costs extra, and it's worth it.

[slikster]

DLC is not like a DVD or book.



Most operating systems have licences too, I suppose you object to them as well? Here, instead of the OS being tied to the machine, DLC is tied to your username. If that is so objectionalbe to you, don't buy them.



And while I agree with you to some extent, I also believe in supporting the developers. DLC is about the only thing they can do to get revenue for a product used and enjoyed by second hand buyers.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

One of the things that upsets me about the way DLC is used in the modern market and the theoretical capabilities of DLC is that this was the chance to put expansion packs in console games. Instead Developers opted almost entirely for cheap, gimmicky crap like Horse Armour, Character Costumes and all sorts of vanity garbage. That said, I enjoyed the Dragon Age DLC but I would very much prefer spending $20-30 on a meaty content pack than buying multiple warden's keep type packs.

That said, I think there's a place for smaller DLC items. For example: the blood dragon armour in Dragon Age/Mass Effect 2 is a brillaint pre-order item because it encourages people who buy one game to purchase the other. I'm willing to bet that ME2 will equip with the DA armour as well. (Just in case there's some mystical group of people buying ME2 who haven't bought Dragon Age)

All in all: The industry needs to change it's model. Really, I think everything needs to go Digital and instead of selling disc they should sell redeemable download codes in stores. It's cheaper in the long run and has proven quite profitable for Steam and other services. Sony is already experimenting with this on the PSP Go, but I fear that will fail solely because of the Go hardware rather than the digital purchasing model.  This would also kill the second hand market, which I say good riddance because I haven't been able to sell a PC game second hand in a long ass time, why should console players?

Modifié par ITSSEXYTIME, 19 novembre 2009 - 01:45 .

[veryalien]

Wow, nine whole pages of "Waaaaah." I only read the first one and got tired of his writing style.



Bioware is doing fine. They have two franchises out. There's no need to worry. If you don't want the DLC don't feel obligated to buy it. There's a simple way for companies like Bioware to save money -- stop spending so much on marketing.

[Legion-001]

It wouldn't be so bad if the DLC was actually an ADDITION to the game, but as MisterEcted mentioned earlier with The Sims 3, what they've done is strip out parts of the game and are now selling them to us as DLC which is one of the reasons that the side quests in DA: O are so shallow.

[Akka le Vil]

Exodus wrote...

That's...a really scary thought.  Jesus it scares me...

Scary but probable. There is simply no financial incentive making big quality games when the mass market will buy overpriced small mindless game that just have a brand name or lots of marketing hype.

Only the passionates will still produce something of value, but we all know - just needing to look at movies and the blockbusters - that the mass market have awful tastes.

[Akka le Vil]

slikster wrote...

Those opposed to DLC in favour of
expansion packs, you need look no further than piracy and the used game
market to see why game companies are going this route.

Because DLC will lower piracy how ? [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/andy.png[/smilie]
If anything, it will INCREASE piracy. Your reasoning makes no sense.

Eurypterid wrote...

I woyuld say there's no evidence to suggest that DLC wouldn't contribute to better games in the future. The income from it could very likely help finance something better than if that income did not exist. Granted, it doesn't follow that it would mean better games either. But there's no reason to suspect it wouldn't.

DLC usually don't contribute to better games. You don't make a game better by adding little bits as an after-thought. You make a better game by making the content feels as a whole.

DLC is an option, so you don't have to pay for it if you don't want to. DLC doesn't mean you won't still get a good game.

Of course. That's precisely what I do. I only pointed that the reasoning "I'll buy DLC so the companies will make great games" is completely stupid.
If you buy DLC, they will release DLC. They will not transfer the means to make better game. A DLC is cheaper to produce and more expensive when you sell it than a good game. If people accept to pay more to have less, what would be the incentive to make better games ?

If you want better games, buy the good ones. If you want DLC, buy DLC (though it's still a pretty absurd decision as a consumer, as you're acting against your own benefits).
But buying DLC to have better games is downright stupid.

[Allen63]

Its a matter of "Value" to me.



I paid roughly $40 for DA:O -- but, most paid $45. If certain DA DLC costs $15, then it should extend the map and game play by about 1/3 to be worth it.



So, let's say roughly 1 extra hour of fun for each $1 of DLC. So far, DLC "list" prices seem too high.

[FlintlockJazz]

wrdnshprd wrote...

I have no problem with DLC, even day one DLC if done correctly.

That being said, those that do have a problem with it have a right to speak their mind on a SOCIAL FORUM just like the rest of us (as long as it is constructive of course). that is what this forum is for right?

last i checked this is a free country and we have a right to speak our minds. if you disagree with their view.. cool.. but that doesnt make them a 'whiner' or 'a person of entitlement' because you disagree with them.

Quoting this as I feel this is the most important and sensible post in this thread so far, and needs reposting.  That is all.

*Flies wrdnshprd as a banner against the encroaching darkness*