165 réponses à ce sujet

[Dannyboy9876]

It's to discourage people from buying used games, which is perfectly acceptable, IMO.

[KLUME777]

Paul Sedgmore wrote...

The content for Shale and Sabastian missed the date for content complete and if these games were released last generation they would have just been cut, never to see the light of day. Plus those two characters we released for free if you bought a new copy of the game, and if you didn't neither were critical to the game and you could enjoy it and complete it without ever needing those characters.

For Shale, yes, what you said was true. He didn't complete his dev cycle, and he was free for a new copy for the game. I liked Shale and didn't have a problem with him being DLC character, because it felt legitimate. You WILL miss out on enjoyment if you don't have him. 

For Sebastion though, your a BioDrone if you really think he couldn't make his dev time. Because he was never made for the original in the first place. He was advertised as an extra bonus months before, something they could have put in the game. He WASN"T free to everyone, only those who pre-ordered the Signature edition. Therefore legitimate customers missed out, because he was fairly important at the end.

Sebastien is a clear rip-out from the main game, and i cannot see Bioware doing something like this when they were making a great like KoTOR. Imagine if HK-47 was a DLC character? Just imagine?


I see it like this: Shale missed his dev time and was therefore cut. Some genius decided to implement him as free* DLC. Fair enough, and it worked, too.

So much, that Bioware decided to have Zaeed cut and used for DLC (who may or may not have been in the original game, or maybe was thought up of for DLC later on, since he has a minimal impact on the game compared to Shale), and later Kasumi.

Then, when DA2 comes along, they decide right off the bat to mark a DLC character before they even write the characters since it's now company policy. They also make it not free, and only available in the SE, since they know the game will be bad and they want people to buy the game months before it is released.



Sorry, wall of text.

[marshalleck]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

There's a case to be made about the whole second-hand sales market. But from a consumer perspective it isn't inherently evil. It gives gamers the chance to play and try games they might never get a chance to otherwise. It promotes a more social aspect of buying video games (from a game sharing perspective).

I buy any game I know I'll love new. The problem is, with todays game prices, it's too expensive to "try" games that might be O.K. or "Meh". They're expensive and most gamers are on a budget. Sure we'll shell out $80 for a ME3 collectors edition because we already know it's going to be a really big deal to us. But can you say you're as generous when you know very little about the game?

The OP is striking at a point that has been well debated as of late. Is it right to rip content from a game in order to boost new game sales? What about players whose systems are not connected to the internet, as it requires online registration with gamer tags? It is no longer an 'incentive to buy new' so much as it is a 'punishment for not buying new'. And I have to agree it is not a path we should really be treading.

I'm all for rewarding developers. I believe it should be, by law as a third party seller, pay a portion of used sales to the developers (though an inherently smaller portion of the games cost, in order to make it a viable business model). This won't happen. But one can hope.

I believe developers should always get their piece of the pie. I just don't think they should participate in punishing consumers in order to get it and instead concentrate on providing incentives. Not that they should have to but there are only so many options.

1. Nobody is "ripping" content from the game no matter how badly you want this to be true so you can justify and validate your anti-DLC bias;
2. Games aren't that expensive in the first place, and if you're struggling to come up with the money for one perhaps you should be doing something like working in your free time instead of playing video games if your income is so low. Also, there's always places like Gamefly so you can try before you buy.
3. It's not punishment, no matter how much you want it to try to frame it as. See point 1. It's an incentive to not buy used.

[DocLasty]

In cases like Zaeed and Kasumi, we're talking about characters and content that was never meant to be a part of the game and was designed to be DLC from the get-go. It's painfully obvious that neither of them were meant to be in the main game from the start.

The first time I played ME2, I didn't have internet access and had to play the game without it. It was a great experience, and if I didn't know Zaeed existed, I would never have been the wiser. As long as the DLC is just extra stuff and not required to get the core experience, I'm fine.

[Apollo Starflare]

DocLasty wrote...

In cases like Zaeed and Kasumi, we're talking about characters and content that was never meant to be a part of the game and was designed to be DLC from the get-go. It's painfully obvious that neither of them were meant to be in the main game from the start.
.

I don't know if we can be certain of that. I remember when the devs were first discussing ME2 and called it 'the dirty dozen in space' and such, could easily be taken to mean that the original outlines for ME2 included all 12 squadmates, but due to time constraints/resources or whatever they got cut/demoted to DLC content.

Not proof by any means, but I remember a bunch of people thinking ME2 would have 12 squadmates earlier on.

[Lumikki]

Not sure how to say this.

I have nothing agaist have addional characters later, even if I do prefer them all to be in ogrinal game included.

Selling DLC in day 1 after the game is published means only one thing, company wants more money. Because there isn't even single other reason why that content could not been included inside the published game in first place. Other reason why there is sometimes free DLC in day 1, is that company wants players to make online connection to company account, so they can profile players behaviors.

I have nothing agaist selling addional story content them for money, but how the DRM is forced to us as have to have online connection is what basicly forcing me to to say NO to every damm DLC. It's not acceptable require online internet connection for single player game. It's fine require internet connection verify DRM one time when content is installed, but not as online as tracking players.

Modifié par Lumikki, 18 juin 2011 - 03:07 .

[Ramus Quaritch]

Sebastian was available for free only if you pre-ordered the game before sometime in January (a few months before the game came out). He only came free with the Signature Edition. Otherwise, you had to pay for him and he was a full character for the game too. That I don't like as much. Shale and Zaeed were great additions in my book. I do not know how they added in Kasumi so late, though.

[darklordpocky-san]

*spoiler*

Shale be a lady

she's just not the squishy type. . .

[Paul Sedgmore]

KLUME777 wrote...

Paul Sedgmore wrote...

The content for Shale and Sabastian missed the date for content complete and if these games were released last generation they would have just been cut, never to see the light of day. Plus those two characters we released for free if you bought a new copy of the game, and if you didn't neither were critical to the game and you could enjoy it and complete it without ever needing those characters.

For Shale, yes, what you said was true. He didn't complete his dev cycle, and he was free for a new copy for the game. I liked Shale and didn't have a problem with him being DLC character, because it felt legitimate. You WILL miss out on enjoyment if you don't have him. 

For Sebastion though, your a BioDrone if you really think he couldn't make his dev time. Because he was never made for the original in the first place. He was advertised as an extra bonus months before, something they could have put in the game. He WASN"T free to everyone, only those who pre-ordered the Signature edition. Therefore legitimate customers missed out, because he was fairly important at the end.

Sebastien is a clear rip-out from the main game, and i cannot see Bioware doing something like this when they were making a great like KoTOR. Imagine if HK-47 was a DLC character? Just imagine?


I see it like this: Shale missed his dev time and was therefore cut. Some genius decided to implement him as free* DLC. Fair enough, and it worked, too.

So much, that Bioware decided to have Zaeed cut and used for DLC (who may or may not have been in the original game, or maybe was thought up of for DLC later on, since he has a minimal impact on the game compared to Shale), and later Kasumi.

Then, when DA2 comes along, they decide right off the bat to mark a DLC character before they even write the characters since it's now company policy. They also make it not free, and only available in the SE, since they know the game will be bad and they want people to buy the game months before it is released.



Sorry, wall of text.

Fair enough I forgot that it was only in the sig edition that Sabatian was free, however he has no impact on the overall story of DA2 except throughing a hissy fit about what happens at the end, you are not really missing anything by not having the content. You do realise that games go content complete months before release and they don't add anything in during the run up to release right?

Both Zaeed and Kasumi are clearly designed as DLC characters as they are throw away in regards to the plot.

[Puzzlewell]

darklordpocky-san wrote...

*spoiler*

Shale be a lady

she's just not the squishy type. . .

You beat me to it. I was just about to say "Shale is a she..."

[SalsaDMA]

In all honesty, with the way DLCs are used by now, I'm surprised authorities haven't stepped in and started looking things over.

Considered the way different sectors have been strong armed into changing their price routines, and still are being examined now and then, it's a wonder that the usage of DLCs to obscure prices for a given product haven't been brought to attention yet. Maybe it's because it's still a relatively new thing in the industry (seen in a broad perspective), and authorities just haven't realized the extent DLCs are starting to be used by companies to obscure products versus prices.

[nitrog100]

I agree with you about the forcing you to buy new, but it doesn't necessarily stomp out the used game industry. You can still save money in a month or so when the game+activation code becomes cheaper than buying new. It sucks, but at least you're getting more content over time.

[Parah_Salin]

SalsaDMA wrote...

In all honesty, with the way DLCs are used by now, I'm surprised authorities haven't stepped in and started looking things over.

Considered the way different sectors have been strong armed into changing their price routines, and still are being examined now and then, it's a wonder that the usage of DLCs to obscure prices for a given product haven't been brought to attention yet. Maybe it's because it's still a relatively new thing in the industry (seen in a broad perspective), and authorities just haven't realized the extent DLCs are starting to be used by companies to obscure products versus prices.

Exactly.

it's just dishonest and annoying, and makes me feel like I'm getting an unfinished product or a tacked-togeather product. It's not a moral thing with me, it's more of a "I know they are sacrificing quality" issue. Personally I think when a company is going to make afew million off a game, and the developers are all working a job alot of us wish we could work, and some of the fact that some of them got to meet seth green, I think putting out the best quality product you can is important. It's made even more annoying because, we see they've made that content, it's there, it's finished from day 1, but they're making us pay extra for it.

I also think that ME is such an innapropriot series for this since besides DLC, it's a very immersive world. In addition the ME series has reached beyond your traditional gaming market, and has fanbases in 2 different genres, so it's not like they're hurting for gross sales.

[Cancer Puppet]

If the content is free for those who buy new, and available to everyone else then I don't mind. I don't like permanently exclusive retailer bonuses though. Having items like the Blackstorm from ME2 as retailer exlusives makes sense...for a couple months. After that they should be put up for sale like everything else. The same goes for in-game content from collector editions as well. Physical bonus items such as art books or sound tracks I can understand. Eventually though, all in-game assets should become available for purchase. I'm still annoyed that I can't buy the collector gear from me2 for 360, but I could download the game for pc and get it for free.

[Bozorgmehr]

What's next? We have to pay for game patches too?

[Bogsnot1]

Bozorgmehr wrote...

What's next? We have to pay for game patches too?

Nah, they'll just go Microsofts route and start charging yuo for tech support.

[Wintermist]

I don't mind DLC. But by the time they usually come out I'm already bored with the game anyway, such was the case with Mass Effect 2.

[Rune-Chan]

Guns wrote...

I don't like buying gas. Guess I should just stop going to work.

Poor example, a more accurate one would be cars not including windows that can be wound down, but you can pay extra to have that option. Sure, you don't need it, but it sure make it a lot more pleasant, and it's something that probably should have been included with the car in the first place.

[Nexpeed]

Lemme guess, The Illusive man for a DLC in ME3

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Parah_Salin wrote...

Personally I think when a company is going to make afew million off a game, and the developers are all working a job alot of us wish we could work, and some of the fact that some of them got to meet seth green, I think putting out the best quality product you can is important. It's made even more annoying because, we see they've made that content, it's there, it's finished from day 1, but they're making us pay extra for it.

Please tell me you really aren't as dumb as this paragraph makes you out to be? Especially the part about Seth Green and paying for content on day 1 (when you are referring to ME2).

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

It's always blatantly obvious that the character is developed with
the rest of the game and characters, and then is torn out like pages
from a book and used to persuade people into buying new.

It's not obvious at all. Zaeed was free, and Kasumi was CLEARLY developed after the game was released.

It's just a ploy to hinder piracy, or encourage people to pre-order.

Modifié par Spaghetti_Ninja, 18 juin 2011 - 05:14 .

[Spaghetti_Ninja]

SalsaDMA wrote...

In all honesty, with the way DLCs are used by now, I'm surprised authorities haven't stepped in and started looking things over.

Considered the way different sectors have been strong armed into changing their price routines, and still are being examined now and then, it's a wonder that the usage of DLCs to obscure prices for a given product haven't been brought to attention yet. Maybe it's because it's still a relatively new thing in the industry (seen in a broad perspective), and authorities just haven't realized the extent DLCs are starting to be used by companies to obscure products versus prices.

Yeah, let's call the Cyber Police. I can get you in touch with a guy, they can back-trace Bioware and make them stop putting out DLC. Consequences will never be the same!

[Someone With Mass]

Fun fact: BioWare didn't record Kasumi's lines at all. Her VA had to go to a local studio, record the lines there and then send them to BioWare.

[WizenSlinky0]

marshalleck wrote...
1. Nobody is "ripping" content from the game no matter how badly you want this to be true so you can justify and validate your anti-DLC bias;
2. Games aren't that expensive in the first place, and if you're struggling to come up with the money for one perhaps you should be doing something like working in your free time instead of playing video games if your income is so low. Also, there's always places like Gamefly so you can try before you buy.
3. It's not punishment, no matter how much you want it to try to frame it as. See point 1. It's an incentive to not buy used.

Attitude much? You're dripping with it and I really don't appreciate it.

I've gotten every single ME DLC except arrival. I have no aversions to paying for good, strong content to add onto a game. But now imagine all of those sexy DLC's were avaliable day 1. You might start to wonder how and why those are not simply included in the main game. They were completed, obviously. Therefore yes they yanked it out of the game in order to push new game sales which indirectly punishes gamers that live on a budget for their hobby.

I don't struggle to come up with the money to buy one game. But who buys one game? The costs add up when the economy is down and the middle class is getting hit harder and harder across the globe *shrug* If you can't appreciate Budgeting, fine, lucky you. But some people need to be careful how much money they waste paying for games they don't even know if they like.

Services like gamefly are making the grounds easier to traverse but they haven't reached a point where they can legitmately replace second hand sales.

An incentive to not buy used would be discounts on future DLC content or free content farther down the line. Offering day 1 DLC that obviously could have been in the actual game is no longer an "incentive" but a "punishment".

I buy the vast majority of my games new, with the occasional used older game that I didn't feel like trying years back, but am willing to shell out 10-20 bucks to try a new experience. So it doesn't particularly effect me. But I can totally see where people are coming from and I sympathize.

And I really, really do hate eating up my bandwidth for 2 hours downloading the DLC.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 18 juin 2011 - 05:20 .

[onelifecrisis]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Fun fact: BioWare didn't record Kasumi's lines at all. Her VA had to go to a local studio, record the lines there and then send them to BioWare.

Maybe that's why they're so bad.