192 réponses à ce sujet

[Monstruo696]

AshedMan wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...
Obviously, they can wait.  What the hell is the point of making PC users wait if it's done?

Why
did we wait 9 months for Dragon Age in the first place?  It was
finished for the PC back in February.  We had to wait because EA wanted
all platforms to release at the same time. 

Releasing Full Game =/= Patching Game

slikster wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...
DLC is like ordering a $50 burger and then noticing each french fry is $1.

I've never seen a burger I could make my own french fries with.  Your analogy = not good.

Are you naturally dense? 

Burger + Fries Combo

Burger = Full Game
French Fry = DLC

[Seifz]

Monstruo696 wrote...

AshedMan wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...
Obviously, they can wait.  What the hell is the point of making PC users wait if it's done?

Why
did we wait 9 months for Dragon Age in the first place?  It was
finished for the PC back in February.  We had to wait because EA wanted
all platforms to release at the same time. 

Releasing Full Game =/= Patching Game

slikster wrote...

Monstruo696 wrote...
DLC is like ordering a $50 burger and then noticing each french fry is $1.

I've never seen a burger I could make my own french fries with.  Your analogy = not good.

Are you naturally dense? 

Burger + Fries Combo

Burger = Full Game
French Fry = DLC

Have you ever eaten at a Hooters?  The burgers come with beans or coleslaw.  You have to purchase the fries, if you want them.  Every fastfood restaurant on Earth does the same thing, though you get a slight discount if you buy everything as a "combo".  I'll bet almost anything that the DLC is packaged into a "combo" at some later date.

Anyway, they might wait to patch the PC if they decide that the bad press and whining about "PC players have it better, console users are second-class citizens" is worse than the "can we has a patch yet?!" whining on the forums.   Of course, the dexterity fix and archery buffs might actually be complete right now and in testing.  Or, maybe they're just not releasing the patch until they have more fixes to bundle into it.  They probably don't want to be releasing a patch every few days just to fix one bug as that makes tech support quite the nightmare.

[Monstruo696]

Seifz wrote...



Have you ever eaten at a Hooters?  The burgers come with beans or coleslaw.  You have to purchase the fries, if you want them.  Every fastfood restaurant on Earth does the same thing, though you get a slight discount if you buy everything as a "combo".  I'll bet almost anything that the DLC is packaged into a "combo" at some later date.

"TL;DR:  I am dense." -Seifz

You're discussing semantics.

I didn't mention any DLC combos, I was merely trying to explain my analogy.  You buy a $50 Burger and the side dishes (beans, coleslaw, fries, whathe****haveyou) are over priced.  That was my point.

[Psython]

Just some opinions on the topic.

Original post was very interesting and some responses also. I personally agree with the DLC naysayers.

Burger and fry analogy is just a sophmoric way of obfuscating the true nature of DLC. We all know that DLCs give you less value for the money. If you pay $60 for a 60 hour game then the dlc should reflect the original value of the product. A $10 dlc should give you 10 hours of playtime or equivalent value. Otherwise you are being nickel and dimed. This is because the original product's value should already reflect the development cost of the original product. Why would the development cost for Warden's Keep be higher than the core game. Conversely, one would, of course, expect it to be less costly because of less marketing and the engine and toolkit are all ready to go. Also DLC can borrow art assets from the core game. People who dont care about this issue either dont value money, are sheep and will buy it based on advertising, or are so used to being ripped off by businesses they accept it as the status quo. However, there are some people who do understand this issue and buy the DLC anyways because they are willing to spend lots of money for even a little bit of extra content. Some people would prefer an alternative to dlc but are such big fans they will buy it anyway even though they know its destroying the market. I think there is honor in that but those people are a small minority. Most people will fall into the sheeple catagories, which is clearly why DLC is so profitable anyways. If most people demanded a fair deal, then DLC would not have the same profit margin it does in reality.  

This next part of the post is actually maybe something you dont know. This is targeted at the people who accept DLC as the status quo and just the reality of the economy. These people think passion projects dont exist and that businesses are never altruistic. Like serfs in the middle ages, they would gladly sell out and give the barons their land and money. Instead of fighting, they accept. I now hope to inspire these realists to fight the good fight with some concrete real world examples that may shatter their frail psyche. Who says there is no such thing as modern free DLC? 

1) Tripwire interactive: developers of red orchestra and now killing floor. Killing floor used to be a zombie killing UT mod and became a high profile steam release in 2009 after tripwire picked up the IP. Know that this game is pretty popular and is, in my opinion, better in many ways than LFD. The following FREE DLC was added to the game. 
-Official maps nearly doubled (new maps better than old) 
-new specimens (enemies)
-Major beneficial changes to the gameplay
-2 new classes
-melee class and 5 weapons
-explosives class and 3 weapons
-Weapon count nearly doubled (for all classes).
-Redesigned interface and hud. 
-ETC.
Basically more changes then what was added in left for dead 2 for free.
Also, 2 $1 DLC that add player models (DLC done right in terms of value)

2) Relic games: developed dawn of war 2. owned by major publisher vivendi. Solid game when released. Innovative strategy game with solid multiplay and ok single player. This game basically doubled in content over the years for FREE
-More than doubled the map count!
-MAJOR gameplay changes
-Added a 2x2 complete gametype
-Redesigned icons in battle
-Added wargear to single player and balanced it
-Added the last stand mode and interface. (A complete stand alone gametype)
Relic has NOT charged a penny for any content added so far. They are working on a full and meaty expansion (gasp) for this game. 

3)TF2     

4)LFD
-added crashcourse mini campaign for free which is longer than wardens keep!

5) The Witcher: This game is similar to DAO (relatively speaking)
- added 2 minicampaigns in directors cut (each about 2 hours long)(made by the devs)
-included 5 other fan made modules
-released the directors cut with the graphical update and extra content for FREE as a giant patch or to buy new in stores.


In summary, some major companies do free DLC. Not all are out there to screw us. I love DAO, so much. But, Wardens keep and stone prisoner suck in terms of value. I dont feel like I am getting my money's worth AT ALL. Especially, when I look at what certain other developers are doing in terms of free dlc it is even worse. I do not love bioware or DAO enough to pay a premium for extra content. So I said no to expensive, short DLC. Then again, I am very frugal and dont support shady business. Neither should you if you care about games. The furture of games looks bleak indeed with these crazy (but so logical) pricing schemes. Dont be a serf, take what you deserve based on honor! Not what some company with a doughnut on a string thinks you deserve. It is not honorable if the cost/ reward balance of the core game is drastically different than the cost/reward for DLC.

** I am not trying to demean or be a jerk here, I am trying to describe how I feel about DLC. So please be chill.

Modifié par Psython, 21 novembre 2009 - 04:20 .

[flamingdts]

SamoanX wrote...

you didn't get lied to your just angry you where wrong

What? Where are you getting your facts from? Your butt?

When did I say I was lied to? You did not comprehend what I said properly, so I did it for you. 

My god you talk like a 10 year old. Heck, you even think like one. 

Seifz wrote...
Have you actually used the hotfix or even read what that page says?  It makes the game more difficult, which is something that they need to correct before they release an official patch.  It's not done.

Even ignoring that, there's another problem.  Let's say that the patch is done.  Now what?  Does BioWare release it for the PC and listen to the console users whine for a month until MS/Sony approve it for the 360/PS3, or do they hold it until it's available for all platforms?

No I haven't used the hotfix, and I don't plan to since I don't want to mess around with my game files. That being said, no I haven't heard much about the game being more difficult.

Now IF the patch is done, then there is nothing wrong with releasing it on one platform first. This is done for almost every other game I know, where some platforms receive an update first before another. Some games are released in certain platforms first before another, what difference does it make?

Modifié par flamingdts, 21 novembre 2009 - 04:25 .

[CChocobo]

Well the way i see it, since this game has high replayability, i see no issue with DLC. It adds to the game so for another playthrough, more areas to explore, weapons/items, characters, quests etc. Why dislike something that will add to the overall gameplay? I can understand the cost factor, some people look at the content versus the cost. I know i've done that, especially when i purchased Halo ODST. which was priced a full $60 something, yet it wasn't worth it for the campaign IMO. Short campaign plus Halo 3 multiplayer (which you already have if you have Halo 3) = not worth the price of a full game, maybe an expansion at 30 bucks sure. So yes i can see where people on the other side of the spectrum are coming from. But the way I look at it is, this is an RPG with HIGH replayability, it's not just linear and straightforward like a game like say Halo or many games out there. So because of that i welcome any DLC that will enrich the experience of future playthroughs.

just my 2 cents..

[EriusB]

The issue with release the patch on one platform and not the other does not stem from a decision from bioware. The decision is EA's, they own the right to distribute the game. If they wanted Bioware could create 50 hours of free DLC but if EA told them to charge money for it they would have to and it would be illegal for them to distribute it otherwise. The same goes for patches, if EA decides the patch has to wait then the patch has to wait. And never has it been stated the patch is complete. The hotfix for dex is experimental and has some adverse effects on the game. Also a patch has to be put through the QA department before it can be released.



As for the cost of DLC. From the start let's make one thing clear. Games are a luxury and no-one can violate your rights by charging any amount for it. I am actually a proponent of open source software and development and largely use linux for anything I do aside from playing games. I dislike how Microsoft charges 300 dollars for an operating system, as it is something that is becoming more and more necessary in every day life. I believe that it should be free as it is a utility. Something that you can't even do without if you go to school these days (or you have to jump through hoops if you try). Turn around and look at games. I am perfectly happy paying 50-60 dollars for a game as they are nothing more than a luxury, a form of entertainment. You don't suffer if you don't have it. Take for example an expensive watch. I can buy a very useful and good looking watch for 50-100 dollars. (I could build a sundial if I wanted to) Then you turn around and people pay thousands of dollars for a watch with few features simply because of who makes it.



Also to people comparing the price of the game to the cost of dlc that is slightly silly. I can go to a vending machine and buy an 8 oz soda for a dollar or I can go to the grocery store and buy a 32 oz for 2.50. It's about the package and price it costs to manufacture. What do you think would cost more? Having 3 separate sessions with a voice actor or having 1 longer session. I bet in total the 1 session would last less time than the 3 separate sessions and you would get more done. So more = less when it is a larger quantity however less = more in smaller quantities as in bulk it is cheaper to manufacture. Bioware has also stated that it plans to make both large and small scale dlcs. And I bet you those dlcs that are 5-6 hours long aren't going to cost 35-42 dollars (if you want to compare it to the length of wardens keep) as noone would buy it. So if you want longer dlcs you will get it, and for a price you think is more fair. If you want shorter but more frequent dlcs you will get that as well and the overall price will be more. I also wouldn't be surprised to see the dlcs packaged and sold together later for reduced price.



And for people complaining about stone prisoner, who actually bought it? If you purchased the game new you got it for free. If you pirated the game noone wants to hear it. If you bought it used it is your fault for paying 50-60 dollars for a used game or if you got a good deal on it then be happy you got a superb game at release for dirt cheap.

[immortallogic]

EriusB wrote...

The issue with release the patch on one platform and not the other does not stem from a decision from bioware. The decision is EA's, they own the right to distribute the game. If they wanted Bioware could create 50 hours of free DLC but if EA told them to charge money for it they would have to and it would be illegal for them to distribute it otherwise. The same goes for patches, if EA decides the patch has to wait then the patch has to wait. And never has it been stated the patch is complete. The hotfix for dex is experimental and has some adverse effects on the game. Also a patch has to be put through the QA department before it can be released.

As for the cost of DLC. From the start let's make one thing clear. Games are a luxury and no-one can violate your rights by charging any amount for it. I am actually a proponent of open source software and development and largely use linux for anything I do aside from playing games. I dislike how Microsoft charges 300 dollars for an operating system, as it is something that is becoming more and more necessary in every day life. I believe that it should be free as it is a utility. Something that you can't even do without if you go to school these days (or you have to jump through hoops if you try). Turn around and look at games. I am perfectly happy paying 50-60 dollars for a game as they are nothing more than a luxury, a form of entertainment. You don't suffer if you don't have it. Take for example an expensive watch. I can buy a very useful and good looking watch for 50-100 dollars. (I could build a sundial if I wanted to) Then you turn around and people pay thousands of dollars for a watch with few features simply because of who makes it.

Also to people comparing the price of the game to the cost of dlc that is slightly silly. I can go to a vending machine and buy an 8 oz soda for a dollar or I can go to the grocery store and buy a 32 oz for 2.50. It's about the package and price it costs to manufacture. What do you think would cost more? Having 3 separate sessions with a voice actor or having 1 longer session. I bet in total the 1 session would last less time than the 3 separate sessions and you would get more done. So more = less when it is a larger quantity however less = more in smaller quantities as in bulk it is cheaper to manufacture. Bioware has also stated that it plans to make both large and small scale dlcs. And I bet you those dlcs that are 5-6 hours long aren't going to cost 35-42 dollars (if you want to compare it to the length of wardens keep) as noone would buy it. So if you want longer dlcs you will get it, and for a price you think is more fair. If you want shorter but more frequent dlcs you will get that as well and the overall price will be more. I also wouldn't be surprised to see the dlcs packaged and sold together later for reduced price.

And for people complaining about stone prisoner, who actually bought it? If you purchased the game new you got it for free. If you pirated the game noone wants to hear it. If you bought it used it is your fault for paying 50-60 dollars for a used game or if you got a good deal on it then be happy you got a superb game at release for dirt cheap.

Erius, dont give yourself carpel trying to explain to these people the finer workings of business 101 they will complain and try to rebel but they will still throw down like the rest of us...HEY GUYZ your willing to Q_Q over 5 dollar dlcs? oh no I'm gettting nickel and dimed..this is a luxury go do something usefull and put those mildly above average IQs to something that is actually worth fighting for like healthcare or the overage fee conspiracy riping apart lower middle class families. when you manage to pull away from your mundane existances as office managers and IT jerks go home  and try to enjoy the dlc you paid a whopping 7 diollars for..yes grab your mountain dew, slide the difficulty to casual and and ready you scene skipper finger

[HoratioSanz]

Psython wrote...

Just some opinions on the topic.

Original post was very interesting and some responses also. I personally agree with the DLC naysayers.

Burger and fry analogy is just a sophmoric way of obfuscating the true nature of DLC. We all know that DLCs give you less value for the money. If you pay $60 for a 60 hour game then the dlc should reflect the original value of the product. A $10 dlc should give you 10 hours of playtime or equivalent value. Otherwise you are being nickel and dimed. This is because the original product's value should already reflect the development cost of the original product. Why would the development cost for Warden's Keep be higher than the core game. Conversely, one would, of course, expect it to be less costly because of less marketing and the engine and toolkit are all ready to go. Also DLC can borrow art assets from the core game. People who dont care about this issue either dont value money, are sheep and will buy it based on advertising, or are so used to being ripped off by businesses they accept it as the status quo. However, there are some people who do understand this issue and buy the DLC anyways because they are willing to spend lots of money for even a little bit of extra content. Some people would prefer an alternative to dlc but are such big fans they will buy it anyway even though they know its destroying the market. I think there is honor in that but those people are a small minority. Most people will fall into the sheeple catagories, which is clearly why DLC is so profitable anyways. If most people demanded a fair deal, then DLC would not have the same profit margin it does in reality.  

This next part of the post is actually maybe something you dont know. This is targeted at the people who accept DLC as the status quo and just the reality of the economy. These people think passion projects dont exist and that businesses are never altruistic. Like serfs in the middle ages, they would gladly sell out and give the barons their land and money. Instead of fighting, they accept. I now hope to inspire these realists to fight the good fight with some concrete real world examples that may shatter their frail psyche. Who says there is no such thing as modern free DLC? 

1) Tripwire interactive: developers of red orchestra and now killing floor. Killing floor used to be a zombie killing UT mod and became a high profile steam release in 2009 after tripwire picked up the IP. Know that this game is pretty popular and is, in my opinion, better in many ways than LFD. The following FREE DLC was added to the game. 
-Official maps nearly doubled (new maps better than old) 
-new specimens (enemies)
-Major beneficial changes to the gameplay
-2 new classes
-melee class and 5 weapons
-explosives class and 3 weapons
-Weapon count nearly doubled (for all classes).
-Redesigned interface and hud. 
-ETC.
Basically more changes then what was added in left for dead 2 for free.
Also, 2 $1 DLC that add player models (DLC done right in terms of value)

2) Relic games: developed dawn of war 2. owned by major publisher vivendi. Solid game when released. Innovative strategy game with solid multiplay and ok single player. This game basically doubled in content over the years for FREE
-More than doubled the map count!
-MAJOR gameplay changes
-Added a 2x2 complete gametype
-Redesigned icons in battle
-Added wargear to single player and balanced it
-Added the last stand mode and interface. (A complete stand alone gametype)
Relic has NOT charged a penny for any content added so far. They are working on a full and meaty expansion (gasp) for this game. 

3)TF2     

4)LFD
-added crashcourse mini campaign for free which is longer than wardens keep!

5) The Witcher: This game is similar to DAO (relatively speaking)
- added 2 minicampaigns in directors cut (each about 2 hours long)(made by the devs)
-included 5 other fan made modules
-released the directors cut with the graphical update and extra content for FREE as a giant patch or to buy new in stores.


In summary, some major companies do free DLC. Not all are out there to screw us. I love DAO, so much. But, Wardens keep and stone prisoner suck in terms of value. I dont feel like I am getting my money's worth AT ALL. Especially, when I look at what certain other developers are doing in terms of free dlc it is even worse. I do not love bioware or DAO enough to pay a premium for extra content. So I said no to expensive, short DLC. Then again, I am very frugal and dont support shady business. Neither should you if you care about games. The furture of games looks bleak indeed with these crazy (but so logical) pricing schemes. Dont be a serf, take what you deserve based on honor! Not what some company with a doughnut on a string thinks you deserve. It is not honorable if the cost/ reward balance of the core game is drastically different than the cost/reward for DLC.

** I am not trying to demean or be a jerk here, I am trying to describe how I feel about DLC. So please be chill.

Nicely said, I completely agree with the fact that we pay 50ish for this game, get maybe 40-80ish hours of gameplay. So when we pay 7 bucks and get 30 minutes of nothing with a few items/spells, we damn right should feel insulted and nickel and dimed.

I hate to say it, but when you see an EA logo on start up of many games these days and of the last few years, you generally know what to expect. A bigger name title, that is either rushed, forced, missing some things, having other things shoved down our throat, or the needing a few things that you can "convienently" buy for more money to make said game "better". Cough, Sims 3, Cough.

And I can add about 20 more games to that list with FDLC... Ya, never heard FDLC before?

FREE DOWNLOADABLE CONTENT, AKAPatches with Content, AKA Used to be the NORM.

Do't hear much about those anymore, I mean with EA being the same company that said the PC is "Bastard" of the gaming business. I'm sorry but any company that had EA as a publisher it's hard to beleive that them adding DLC is anything but a way to nickel/dime us out of more money.

And after seeing the DLC of this game so far, most obviously WK, how can I think otherwise?

Modifié par HoratioSanz, 21 novembre 2009 - 07:28 .

[EriusB]

Dawn of War 2 is a great game and the updates they have given to it are great, however how much time and effort did it take to make those updates? A couple maps? And a gamemmode which has been previously implemented for free by modders in many popular RTS to date. How much do you think it cost to make? Also compare the amount of money that went into production of DA to DoW2. Cinematic storytelling and developing a game engine are the most expensive portions of creating a game. Dragon age uses a new engine and has how many hundreds of hours of storytelling and voice acting packed into it? Also DoW2 uses the same game engine as Company of Heroes, which in turn had how much free DLC? I can tell you which cost alot more to make, and yet they have the same price. Also the largest part of the updates to the witcher could not have been charged for, and were a thank you and a sorry from the developers for flaws in the original game. As in poor translations, voice acting and numerous bugs. And they re-released the game with these additions in a package saying "Hey we fixed it, you should buy it now" It wasn't like they were doing it without profit in mind. As I can tell you I purchased the witcher after they fixed it, not before. (And it turned into a great game) None of the DLC for DA fixes anything missing from the game, unless you want to claim the party storage but a dev released a free module for that. About TF2 and Dead rising, both used an already existing game engine and the updates have been very few and far between and had relatively low production cost as they didn't need to sit there and bring in voice actors and write a script and make sure everything fleshed out.

[HoratioSanz]

EriusB wrote...

Dawn of War 2 is a great game and the updates they have given to it are great, however how much time and effort did it take to make those updates? A couple maps? And a gamemmode which has been previously implemented for free by modders in many popular RTS to date. How much do you think it cost to make? Also compare the amount of money that went into production of DA to DoW2. Cinematic storytelling and developing a game engine are the most expensive portions of creating a game. Dragon age uses a new engine and has how many hundreds of hours of storytelling and voice acting packed into it? Also DoW2 uses the same game engine as Company of Heroes, which in turn had how much free DLC? I can tell you which cost alot more to make, and yet they have the same price. Also the largest part of the updates to the witcher could not have been charged for, and were a thank you and a sorry from the developers for flaws in the original game. As in poor translations, voice acting and numerous bugs. And they re-released the game with these additions in a package saying "Hey we fixed it, you should buy it now" It wasn't like they were doing it without profit in mind. As I can tell you I purchased the witcher after they fixed it, not before. (And it turned into a great game) None of the DLC for DA fixes anything missing from the game, unless you want to claim the party storage but a dev released a free module for that. About TF2 and Dead rising, both used an already existing game engine and the updates have been very few and far between and had relatively low production cost as they didn't need to sit there and bring in voice actors and write a script and make sure everything fleshed out.

Please use the enter key once in a while, my head is spinning.

And we get it, you love DA:O, but stop comparing it to other game's engine. First you said DoW2 engine came from CoH, RELIC MADE BOTH GAMES. Then you keep bringing up DA engine, you don't think they are gonna get any proceeds from other companies to use it? Really? That's NO justification for crappy DLC.

Your argument is so flawed and coupled with the giant paragraph of doom, I may vomit.

And just because you "think" you can find reasons why "5" games' FDLC was not "amazing". You forget there are like 150 more games that released FDLC as well. Are you gonna go through that entire list and say bad, no, short, non-orgiinal engine, blah, blah, blah.

We get it. You love DA, you love Bioware, you want to print pictures of the it's DLC and lather yourselvf with it. You would pay 200 dollars for it, like some of these people. WE GET IT.

But stop using flawed arguments which don't releate to justify it's price.

None of your argument has anything to do with the fact that DA's DLC is short and a very obvious attempt at nickel/diming. Just because their engine was self-developed doesn't have any BEARING on the DLC price.

Give me a break.

[Dnarris]

I'm noticing that DLC discussion threads are being slowly desolved.



That's a shame you can debate the addition or lack of nudity forever and a day, but DLC....

[Monstruo696]

EriusB wrote...

Dawn of War 2 is a great game and the updates they have given to it are great, however how much time and effort did it take to make those updates? A couple maps? And a gamemmode which has been previously implemented for free by modders in many popular RTS to date. How much do you think it cost to make? Also compare the amount of money that went into production of DA to DoW2. Cinematic storytelling and developing a game engine are the most expensive portions of creating a game. Dragon age uses a new engine and has how many hundreds of hours of storytelling and voice acting packed into it? Also DoW2 uses the same game engine as Company of Heroes, which in turn had how much free DLC? I can tell you which cost alot more to make, and yet they have the same price. Also the largest part of the updates to the witcher could not have been charged for, and were a thank you and a sorry from the developers for flaws in the original game. As in poor translations, voice acting and numerous bugs. And they re-released the game with these additions in a package saying "Hey we fixed it, you should buy it now" It wasn't like they were doing it without profit in mind. As I can tell you I purchased the witcher after they fixed it, not before. (And it turned into a great game) None of the DLC for DA fixes anything missing from the game, unless you want to claim the party storage but a dev released a free module for that. About TF2 and Dead rising, both used an already existing game engine and the updates have been very few and far between and had relatively low production cost as they didn't need to sit there and bring in voice actors and write a script and make sure everything fleshed out.

This is by far the stupidest, most uninformed post in the whole thread.

It clearly shows you have NO IDEA of what the hell you are talking about.

[Fershizzel]

DLC is over priced in every game that uses it. same goes with micro transactions. it would not be bad if shale or wardens keep was $1.00 but companies are trying to milk consumers for every penny they got. I love Bioware games to date but I wont buy anymore DLC after what they have pulled in DAO.

people need to realize that the customer in the end makes the rules. if you dont like it for any reason dont buy it then the companies will have to figure out how to make it a more attractive deal.

customers controll the market not the companies.

[JaegerBane]

Monstruo696 wrote...
This is by far the stupidest, most uninformed post in the whole thread.

It clearly shows you have NO IDEA of what the hell you are talking about.

Monstruo, while I'm having trouble figuring out what the guy's point is too, let's not stick ourselves on pedestals and denounce posters from our pulpits.

I mean, you *are* the person who came up with the absurd burger/fries - game/dlc analogy, after all - it's not like you have a brilliant grasp of what's going on either.

(And just to point out, burgers generally cost more when ordered with fries. If you really are trying to claim DLCs are analagous to individual french fries I'm going to assume you're deliberately misunderstanding the concept. )

Modifié par JaegerBane, 21 novembre 2009 - 09:16 .

[HoratioSanz]

Fershizzel wrote...

DLC is over priced in every game that uses it. same goes with micro transactions. it would not be bad if shale or wardens keep was $1.00 but companies are trying to milk consumers for every penny they got. I love Bioware games to date but I wont buy anymore DLC after what they have pulled in DAO.

people need to realize that the customer in the end makes the rules. if you dont like it for any reason dont buy it then the companies will have to figure out how to make it a more attractive deal.

customers controll the market not the companies.

Well said.

Too bad most customers these days do whatever "someone" tells them to do. Meaning, continually going with the norm, "keeping up with the jones", and wahtever other stupid lingo relates.

Generally not much changes, unless something becomes so blatantly obvious that even monkeys with sticks could figure it out, does anyone actually clamour for change.

So we're stuck with what has taken trend in the gaming world, and will continue to muddle along on our knees begging "please sir I'd like another". Add in the crowd who willingly and happily take these "prison-style poundings", with flawed reasonings and downright admittance and content with the norm, and you can only expect more asinine business models to pop up.

The consumer can be a "sell out" too you know.

Modifié par HoratioSanz, 21 novembre 2009 - 09:57 .

[JaegerBane]

HoratioSanz wrote...
Too bad most customers these days do whatever "someone" tells them to do. Meaning, continually going with the norm, "keeping up with the jones", and wahtever other stupid lingo relates.

Generally not much changes, unless something becomes so blatantly obvious that even monkeys with sticks could figure it out, does anyone actually clamour for change.

So we're stuck with what has taken trend in the gaming world, and will continue to muddle along on our knees begging "please sir I'd like another". Add in the crowd who willingly and happily take these "prison-style poundings", with flawed reasonings and downright admittance and content with the norm, and you can only expect more asinine business models to pop up.

The consumer can be a "sell out" too you know.

Yeah. Damn those customers and their preference for making up their own mind.

With respect, Horatio, you're skating dangerously close to painting yourself as a member of some elite few qualified to judge all. Whether or not you honestly have such a high opinion of yourself, it does make your points all the less acceptable irrespective of what you're saying.

It's a democracy, Horatio. The only decision that you have any right to make is whether you yourself part with your cash. Anything else is, frankly, none of your damn business. Build a bridge and get over it.

[EriusB]

Well I can see I didn't formulate my last response too well as I wrote it while running out the door. To Monstruou, namecalling contributes nothing to a discussion. And while you may not agree with me I have some idea what I am talking about, though my response was not well thought out.

What I was getting at was production costs. What is involved in making the DLC, and the different business models used. For the Witcher what they did was fix a flawed gem and rerelease it to generate more income. Yes they gave it away for free to existing customers but they would have been crucified for trying to sell it as DLC (except for the additional adventures). Another one of my favorite game series uses a similar model, the X series by egosoft. They release the game and then patch it adding in some bonus content here and there and then rerelease it in a new box to attract new customers. However while I love both these games and support both the companies behind them I would not if it were not for their patching as the games were severely flawed on release. But at the same time they have a different publisher, and as I stated earlier the publisher calls the shots. Even if bioware wanted to make free DLC EA might not let them.

To Haratio I never said the DLC wasn't good, I just stated why I thought it wasn't sold. I enjoy all the games that were mentioned and The Witcher is one of the best rpgs I've played in a long time. Dawn of War 2 is great but I thought it was severely lacking in maps especially compared to the first game on release and they have remedied that through patches which I am glad. I simply responded to the examples given and did not discuss the last game as I have no experience with it.

And don't talk about flawed arguments and then make baseless assumptions about what I do or do not want to do, as well as throw insults.

I don't "love" bioware, I don't buy everything they sell. I never bought the DLC for mass effect and I never touched Jade Empire as they never interested me, and I thought neverwinter nights was a poor campaign but I thoroughly enjoyed and used the toolset to great extent. So far they have released 1 DLC that anybody has really had to pay for, Warden's Keep. I would not have paid for Shale's dlc but it was given away for free to all paying customers, as well as the blood dragon armor. Bioware is really trying to nickel and dime us there. They didn't have to give it away for free but they did. I bought Warden's Keep and enjoyed it for the story (don't really care about the items you get). There are some flaws with it like not being able to enter it again afterwards and I think it would have been more appropriately priced at 5 dollars, however demonizing bioware for ****ty DLC is not an appropriate response. The Warden's keep is not the best DLC I have seen but it is far from the worst, Oblivion's DLC was atrocious and had very little production value or cost. (Ooh an armor model for 2.50)

As it stands, I am not that interested in Return to Ostigar as I don't see that much story potential and i'm not interested in items, but noone really knows what exactly is in it yet, and attacking bioware for something that hasn't been released or discussed in detail is slightly premature and baseless. The price is 5 dollars; maybe they listened and are offering something equivalent to Wardens Keep for less, maybe not. Wait and see.

In the end, you can accuse people of being sheep for buying something saying they are doing it because they think it is cool, or they are "keeping up with the times".  I bought warden's keep after reading about it and understanding the production cost and marketing behind, thought it was slightly more than it should have been but enjoyed it anyways.  People have the free will and choice to buy what they want.  There are sheep on both sides, those who won't buy it because they know "DLC is bad" because that is what they hear, and won't bother to investigate it for themselves.  On the other end there are those who will gobble up anything sold to them without ever analyzing the cost.  By throwing out accusation after accusation about how the DLC is terrible and overpriced and trying to get everyone to agree with you, you are just trying to create your own herd of sheep.  Noone really redicules the sheep that agree with them do they?

Modifié par EriusB, 21 novembre 2009 - 11:42 .

[deviltaz1970]

i am wondering how i access the dlc on the ps3 . logging into this site it states i correctly entered the codes for collectors edition yet i was never prompted to download anything and it says there is nothing to download. how do i access this extra content as it is stating one item should have been available from the start but i haven't got it in my inventory. is there a glitch with the ps3 collectors edition . i live in australia but i purchased collectors from play asia so it is hong kong version. is this the problem can i not access these extras living in australia?

Modifié par deviltaz1970, 21 novembre 2009 - 11:35 .

[HoratioSanz]

deviltaz1970 wrote...

i am wondering how i access the dlc on the ps3 . logging into this site it states i correctly entered the codes for collectors edition yet i was never prompted to download anything and it says there is nothing to download. how do i access this extra content as it is stating one item should have been available from the start but i haven't got it in my inventory. is there a glitch with the ps3 collectors edition

There's been a lot of "gltiches" with DLC in general from what I've read, thankfully I didn't have any or that would have been another can of beans I could have ranted on about.

But for you, I'd check the Tech Support forum.

[deviltaz1970]

HoratioSanz wrote...

deviltaz1970 wrote...

i am wondering how i access the dlc on the ps3 . logging into this site it states i correctly entered the codes for collectors edition yet i was never prompted to download anything and it says there is nothing to download. how do i access this extra content as it is stating one item should have been available from the start but i haven't got it in my inventory. is there a glitch with the ps3 collectors edition

There's been a lot of "gltiches" with DLC in general from what I've read, thankfully I didn't have any or that would have been another can of beans I could have ranted on about.

But for you, I'd check the Tech Support forum.

ok cheers for that will do thought i was going mad it said it unlocked made a few twirly signs then stopped but nothing downloaded at all with any of the codes.

[deviltaz1970]

HoratioSanz wrote...

deviltaz1970 wrote...

i am wondering how i access the dlc on the ps3 . logging into this site it states i correctly entered the codes for collectors edition yet i was never prompted to download anything and it says there is nothing to download. how do i access this extra content as it is stating one item should have been available from the start but i haven't got it in my inventory. is there a glitch with the ps3 collectors edition

There's been a lot of "gltiches" with DLC in general from what I've read, thankfully I didn't have any or that would have been another can of beans I could have ranted on about.

But for you, I'd check the Tech Support forum.

Hey mate thanks for the tip , it's not a glitch it is just that the content is set to release with euro release date of november 21st . it hasn't shown up on site yet it is the 21st here but not 21st in europe so not sure there might just be the euro server even for australia so will just have to wait.

[EriusB]

deviltaz1970 wrote...

HoratioSanz wrote...

deviltaz1970 wrote...

i am wondering how i access the dlc on the ps3 . logging into this site it states i correctly entered the codes for collectors edition yet i was never prompted to download anything and it says there is nothing to download. how do i access this extra content as it is stating one item should have been available from the start but i haven't got it in my inventory. is there a glitch with the ps3 collectors edition

There's been a lot of "gltiches" with DLC in general from what I've read, thankfully I didn't have any or that would have been another can of beans I could have ranted on about.

But for you, I'd check the Tech Support forum.

Hey mate thanks for the tip , it's not a glitch it is just that the content is set to release with euro release date of november 21st . it hasn't shown up on site yet it is the 21st here but not 21st in europe so not sure there might just be the euro server even for australia so will just have to wait.

Can't say much for the PS3 DLC but I had an issue with one of the PC DLCs that required a game restart.  I imagine though that while your game is the hong kong version it is going through the localized Australian PSN in which case it will probably download on release date for Australia.

[Shailent]

SkippyMcGee88 wrote...

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...

Oh come on. Leave Obama out of this. If McCain had been elected it would have been vice versa, and you know it. Choosing an american president is all a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils.

That aside. I agree about the DLC, it used to be a patch. But those were smaller addons, like a new weapon for example. Rarely anything big. And that was because the companies had no reason to keep making a game after it was released. They had nothing to gain apart from maybe selling 1 or 2 more games a week due to new content. DLC has motivated companies (Motivated by money ofcourse) to keep developing a game after release, not just finishing it, throwing it out and applying a minor bug fix patch now and then. Now they actually put a little soul into the extra content, making that singleplayer game worth a few more of your hours. My two cents, and I must say I loved the Fallout 3 DLC, it was to me exciting new content and worth the money.

But it's sad it's purely money motivated.