941 réponses à ce sujet

[TheMadCat]

Can people please stop bringing up these BG expansion packs. If you're going to talk economics realize it is not feasible to do today what they were able to do back in the late 90's for the same level of cost. Full voiced dialogue, 3D animations, added 3D models, much for detailed lighting and effects just to name a few things. The time, money, and manpower needed to make a 30 hour expansion for BG 2 is at most an 1/8th of what it would take to make a 30 hour expansion these days.



Why do you think the expansion pack is pretty much becoming extinct? What used to be a great cash ins for companies just isn't worth it in terms of production cost vs. profit. What expansions do come out are 95% of the time stand-alones which is just the original game with a few added items, units, new buildings depending on the genre maybe and a new campaign that lasts a couple of hours.

[ITSSEXYTIME]

Also for the last ****ing time: Gameplay hours don't translate into monetary value. Retail game prices are effectively fixed afterall. Do you think Bioware is going to release 0.10 cent DLC's just because they only include that amount of content compared to the base game?



learn some economics before you whine.

[Atertract]

Mozi wrote...
- BGII - ToB cost what, 30 bucks? I think I got more than 20 times the gameplay out of that then Warden's Keep. I fear that DLC will add up to be more money for less gameplay than a simple, old-fashioned expansion pack.

Great example, considering DA's spiritual-successor relationship to BG.  ToB was a near-essential, significant, expansive addition to BGII, exactly what these DLCs aren't, and for less money in the long run.

[MrGOH]

Atertract wrote...

Mozi wrote...
- BGII - ToB cost what, 30 bucks? I think I got more than 20 times the gameplay out of that then Warden's Keep. I fear that DLC will add up to be more money for less gameplay than a simple, old-fashioned expansion pack.

Great example, considering DA's spiritual-successor relationship to BG.  ToB was a near-essential, significant, expansive addition to BGII, exactly what these DLCs aren't, and for less money in the long run.

ToB was cool and all, but it would have been better as a full sequel. I mean, it lasted about 15-20 hours for 30 bucks while BG2 was $50 and lasted 80 hours. So ToB was a ripoff because it was 3/5 the price but only 1/4 of the length.

[Dnarris]

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Also for the last ****ing time: Gameplay hours don't translate into monetary value. Retail game prices are effectively fixed afterall. Do you think Bioware is going to release 0.10 cent DLC's just because they only include that amount of content compared to the base game?

learn some economics before you whine.

I'd like to hear an intelligent explaination of consumer value in relation to DLC, retail game prices, and standardized pricing from you. Rather than a complaint about other posts.

[Badgirl22]

Here is my 2cents.......



I have been playing Bioware games on xbox/x360 for a while and so far I don't have any complaints.



Coming from a background of playing loads of different MMO's, spending $5 on an extra dungeon with some new loot is fine with me. After all there many MMO's about that charge alot more just for a piece of armour. At the end of the day its down to whether you want buy small DLC while waiting for the big ones.



I for one enjoy the game so any DLC that can extend my playing time is welcome. Also keep in mind these mini-DLC help to fund bigger DLC projects, so have patience.



In the end it boils down to 2 simple facts. Either buy then or don't buy them complaining about it won't make much difference in the grander scheme.

[Kevin Lynch]

Value is perception. That's why all marketing has to do is get enough people to perceive that they are getting whatever they require from DLC. If businesses didn't make money with DLC, they wouldn't do it. The downfall of retail expansions (which I still would rather have) is testament to the fact that it didn't make business sense. The consumer loses because the consumer didn't give the business model the demand it needed to succeed. So we have a new business model.



People don't need to like it. I don't favour DLC at all (WK being the first DLC I've ever bought aside from an extra table for PS3's Zen Pinball). But complaining isn't going to change the fact that DLC will stick around as long as people buy it and the businesses make money offering it.



Debate cost/benefit all you like; it's only going to waste yourself some time.

[TearsoftheForest]

I don't understand the line saying 'second chance to get dog again' Course I have only had a chance to play the human noble and dog has just always been there. maybe on others you have to make sure you find him.

[Badgirl22]

TearsoftheForest wrote...

I don't understand the line saying 'second chance to get dog again' Course I have only had a chance to play the human noble and dog has just always been there. maybe on others you have to make sure you find him.

For elf/dwarf races there is a quest you need to complete in Ostagar before you can get the dog.  If it isn't done before the war begins you lose the chance to get the dog for those races.

[Mozi]

TheMadCat wrote...

Can people please stop bringing up these BG expansion packs. If you're going to talk economics realize it is not feasible to do today what they were able to do back in the late 90's for the same level of cost. Full voiced dialogue, 3D animations, added 3D models, much for detailed lighting and effects just to name a few things. The time, money, and manpower needed to make a 30 hour expansion for BG 2 is at most an 1/8th of what it would take to make a 30 hour expansion these days.

Why do you think the expansion pack is pretty much becoming extinct? What used to be a great cash ins for companies just isn't worth it in terms of production cost vs. profit. What expansions do come out are 95% of the time stand-alones which is just the original game with a few added items, units, new buildings depending on the genre maybe and a new campaign that lasts a couple of hours.

I guess I can understand that, but I'd rather pay even more for a cohesive, larger expansion for a game than a bunch of bite-sized chunks which (so far) use overpowered items as a draw as opposed to a continuation and expansion of the main story.

[chasethesunset]

Lookin cool! Ever since I got past Ostagar I've been wondering what it looks like after being taken over by the darkspawn.

[deathbeast793]

sugasugaki wrote...

Looks really lame. Going back to the same area, except with snow textures. Can loot golden armor that can be had from mods already. Beginning to think Bioware thinks we're suckers.

Yes, well us respectable, non-cheating gamers and loyal fans do not use hacks or mods to get stuff for free. I will proudly support Bioware by buying this DLC. Also if you think it is lame

• Don't buy it
  
• Don't post comments saying it sucks    
  
• Instead post a persuasive paragraph as to why we shouldn't buy it (include details [not stupid ones], give good points [becuase it sucks, its the same place redone, ect. are not GOOD points], be sincere and nice, if people dont listen to you then too bad, don't be mad at bioware (or maybe "the grinch" will take your copy of the game)
  
• If you dont like what the company creates for you to buy then a) make it yourself in the toolset     don't buy it     c) don't buy their games
  
•   Most people are sensitive and don't like you bad mouthing stuff they like/created (I am sure it doesn't bring pleasure to the Bioware employees when you say the stuff that they spend their time doing isn't good enough for you)  

 So would all you people just bug off and leave Bioware alone and go make this stuff for your self in the toolset.

Modifié par deathbeast793, 21 novembre 2009 - 01:16 .

[ITSSEXYTIME]

Dnarris wrote...

ITSSEXYTIME wrote...

Also for the last ****ing time: Gameplay hours don't translate into monetary value. Retail game prices are effectively fixed afterall. Do you think Bioware is going to release 0.10 cent DLC's just because they only include that amount of content compared to the base game?

learn some economics before you whine.

I'd like to hear an intelligent explaination of consumer value in relation to DLC, retail game prices, and standardized pricing from you. Rather than a complaint about other posts.

I just think it's silly to say "I spent $50 on Dragon Age and got X hours out of it, therefore a $5 DLC should give me Y".  However, it simply doesn't scale like that.  The retail prices are set at $49.99 for PC gamers regardless of the amount of content, and there are plenty of games that have less gameplay hours to the dollar than Dragon Age.  Instead of measuring the value of a DLC or a game by the amount of gameplay hours you get (which vary depending on player skill and other variables) you should weigh it based on whether or not you would enjoy the content itself, regardless of length.

I enjoyed Warden's Keep a fair bit, and my entire game experience benefited from playing through that because of the additional skills and items.  Some people were a bit disappointed by it though, and for them it wouldn't have been worth the money. (probably because they were expecting something like Oblivion's DLC where you get your own place and upgrade it and what not)  The value of warden's keep isn't measured by playtime but by the raw quality of the content experience and a personal, subjective value or worth.  

The monetary value is determined by what Bioware will think people will pay.  For the majority of people, $5 is a fine price for Return to Ostagar. If you're really hesitant, just wait until a couple of reviews come out for it and people say what they think about it.  Ultimately though people just need to stop looking at it was a "Gameplay hours = X amount of money" and rather a "Am I fine with spending $5 for this content and supporting the game developer?"

The only time people should be concerned about playtime is with a retail game, because the prices are fixed and thus when deciding to purchase one game over another then the gameplay hours can be a pretty important decision factor.  When it comes to DLC it's an entirely different issue, because the purpose of DLC is to support the developers of your favourite games and to get a little bit of content in return.  The reason expansion packs have ceased to exist isn't because of DLC but because of development cost.  DLC is the solution to this problem, because when people buy DLC the developer has both the resources and the demand to develop a full on expansion pack.

In short: Buy DLC if you want to support the developers, don't worry so much about whether or not you're getting the bang for your buck in content because the purpose of DLC isn't to replace expansion packs but to enable developers to pursue the idea of expansion packs and sequels in the future.  Between Second-hand sales (you'll notice stone prisoner is designed to combat this) and piracy as well as the cut services like Steam take, development cost are quite substantial and hard to pay for.  With big titles like Dragon Age this is less of an issue as it has been selling very well.

[deathbeast793]

I agree, either buy it or don't instead of coming here and complaining and putting Bioware's work done. I think you whiners owe Bioware an appology for coming to their site just to complain. Yes, sometimes criticism can make things better, but not by whining, complaining, and putting down others.

Modifié par deathbeast793, 21 novembre 2009 - 01:23 .

[Red-Cell]

money money money



Games selling better than they ever had but developers can't feed their families or stay in business unless they charge you $7 for a storage chest



OH THE HUMANITY!

[deathbeast793]

Exactly, thats is what I am asking, why don't they get that its optional and not to buy it and to not complain. I think the answer might be that they don't think they are getting the full game then.

[KouriRyu37]

How about you fix the game that's there instead of churning out more and more DLC for us to pay for?

[deathbeast793]

I agree with Feraele, from the time I played a bit at a friends house I believe it is a great game. I would very much like to see more DLC, I dont care how trivial you might think they are, I like Bioware, I like the game, and I will get the DLC's ( sooner or later) so that I can play more of the game.

[TheMadCat]

KouriRyu37 wrote...

How about you fix the game that's there instead of churning out more and more DLC for us to pay for?

Once again, the team that does patches and the team that does DLC are seperate. One teams work has no affilation or impact on the other teams. They can release a dozen DLC's in a week and it has no effect on the progress of the patch just as they can make a dozen patches and it has no effect on the progress of the DLC.

[deathbeast793]

KouriRyu37 wrote...

How about you fix the game that's there instead of churning out more and more DLC for us to pay for?

But they are fixing it, that is why they have released a patch, to fix problems, they can do both things, and besides is might take a while to fix the whole problem. Would you rather have a half fixed problem or a completly fixed problem?

[deathbeast793]

TheMadCat wrote...

KouriRyu37 wrote...

How about you fix the game that's there instead of churning out more and more DLC for us to pay for?

Once again, the team that does patches and the team that does DLC are seperate. One teams work has no affilation or impact on the other teams. They can release a dozen DLC's in a week and it has no effect on the progress of the patch just as they can make a dozen patches and it has no effect on the progress of the DLC.

Yes, and it is a good idea too, as it allows us to get new content and patches.