286 réponses à ce sujet

[Halfdan The Menace]

TS2Aggie wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Zaeed? Kasumi? Liara becoming the [spoiler here]? Arrival?

I didn't play any of these. I'm never going to play any of these until they start handing them out for free or in a big package deal. So what happens to my game at the start of ME3? One of these was even apparently critical to the beginnig narative of ME3.

If you try to import an ME2 game without DLC, armed men will invade your home, kidnap you, drag you off to a remote undisclosed location and tickle you mercilessly with a griffin feather until you relent.

[Mako Zalos]

nhsk wrote...

Well Liara isn't the SB anymore (probably Feron took over), so if you never helped her she probably got the info from somewhere else and took him down alone, problem solved.

When did anyone say Liara wasn't the Shadowbroker? It's confirmed that she is.

[MissMaster]

I have not played all of the DLC's yet but I will....

Once I remember to get Microsoft Points.

[whywhywhywhy]

happy_daiz wrote...

I will never understand why people aren't willing to pay for DLC. The bottom line is that it's a choice: pay for it, or don't, no skin off my back either way.

I will continue to support the developers that put their hearts and souls into extra content, so that you, the user, will have more to enjoy (complain about).

The problem with DLC is too little of it is good, like the gta4 DLC that's good DLC for people who are fans of the game.  It was more in the vein of a expansion too little DLC is designed this way and DLC is only looked at as a means for the company to sucker more money out of a gamer.

in me1 I could give my character different armor and etc that made for good gameplay, then they ripped that out of me2 and started selling outfit packs.  Not only does that affect my gameplay they are now expecting me to pay for textures and or a palette change.  It's a ripoff.

Companies could easily make tons of money off of DLC if they went about it the right way and made solid editions to their games.  Too many times some crappy DLC is made as a quick way to make a buck and it's becoming the status quo, I refuse to accept this.  Others have spoken out against and refuse to buy crappy dlc as well.

[littlezack]

There's good DLC that's worth the money, then there's bad DLC that isn't. Just like there's good games and bad games.

And the outfit in ME2 aren't needed in the least bit. They're okay if you want them for certain characters, but it's not like they enhance your gameplay experience or anything.

[whywhywhywhy]

your missing the point they removed armor to sell outfits.  LOTSB should have been part of me2, your involvement with Liara makes no sense, DLC is good when not made under circumstances that devolve gameplay or the content.

Modifié par whywhywhywhy, 30 juin 2011 - 08:10 .

[happy_daiz]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

The problem with DLC is too little of it is good, like the gta4 DLC that's good DLC for people who are fans of the game.  It was more in the vein of a expansion too little DLC is designed this way and DLC is only looked at as a means for the company to sucker more money out of a gamer.

in me1 I could give my character different armor and etc that made for good gameplay, then they ripped that out of me2 and started selling outfit packs.  Not only does that affect my gameplay they are now expecting me to pay for textures and or a palette change.  It's a ripoff.

Companies could easily make tons of money off of DLC if they went about it the right way and made solid editions to their games.  Too many times some crappy DLC is made as a quick way to make a buck and it's becoming the status quo, I refuse to accept this.  Others have spoken out against and refuse to buy crappy dlc as well.

I wasn't thinking of it in that way, so thank you for making it more clear. I agree, there IS a lot of crap DLC out there, and it isn't worth paying for. I typically look at DLC as a "satisfaction not 100% guaranteed" item in the first place, so I am equipped to deal with the consequences - whether it's a great DLC, or something just...meh. It's kind of like gambling - never take more money to the casino than you can afford to lose.

I would argue (not with you, just in general) that refusing to pay for DLC, just for the sake of refusing to pay; or thinking it should just be included in the original sale price is rather idealistic, and somewhat naive. Expect eternal disappointment with that philosophy, as companies exist to make money.

You bring up a good point, though. If DLC is deemed "crap" by a certain percentage of its buyers, should the company give a refund? How long would it take before the average gamer would always say it was crap, just so it would be free? I can't imagine that would fly for long, as developers would be eating the cost. 

Personally, I've often thought that after a certain point in time, pay DLC should be reduced in price, then eventually made free. Like any other commodity, its retail value should change according to the market.

Great things to ponder, thanks.
 

[the_one_54321]

Your commentary has inspired me to change my decision and purchase all available DLC for ME2. Thank you for your insight.

/sarcasm

[chris2365]

DLC is just another way to get money after a game has been released. Often, DLC is part of the full game until they cut it out to sell it later.

However, as someone who has just purchused Arrival, Lotsb, Overlord and Kasumi, I can safely say that they are worth your money, if you are a big ME fan. The DLC that Bioware released for ME2 was above the quality of a regular DLC. I think you should give them a try, or if money was a concern, just wait for a sale.

[Savber100]

I'm tired of people acting like DLCs are just a solely market-grabbing maneuver from greedy companies.

If Bioware really was greedy, they would strip out the ending and force you to pay extra to see how it ends, They would have pumped out countless of DLCs for DA2 (rather releasing a feeble OPTIONAL alternate costume pack) and give you a ok ending in ME3 for not buying ME2's DLCs.

As long as DLCs are optional and no one is coerced to buy them, DLCs are FINE. If anything, blame the market for wanting them. If no one buys them, DLCs won't exist.

Modifié par Savber100, 30 juin 2011 - 08:43 .

[happy_daiz]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Your commentary has inspired me to change my decision and purchase all available DLC for ME2. Thank you for your insight.

/sarcasm

Buy them or don't. It's a free market.

[Haristo]

dude, ME2 DLC's are awesome... why don't you just... you know.. BUY THEM ?

Whining.

[Candidate 88766]

Even if you disagree with the principle of DLC, there are some pieces I think you should make an exception for. LotSB is one of those pieces.

[Mister Mida]

You know, if you want to know what happens in the DLC you might as well go to the ME wiki.

[the_one_54321]

Savber100 wrote...
If Bioware really was greedy, they would strip out the ending and force you to pay extra to see how it ends,

Arrival???

Haristo wrote...
dude, ME2 DLC's are awesome... why don't you just... you know.. BUY THEM ?

Whining.

Because I'm not stupid.

Dumb consumer.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 30 juin 2011 - 09:19 .

[ME-ParaShep]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Savber100 wrote...
If Bioware really was greedy, they would strip out the ending and force you to pay extra to see how it ends,

Arrival???

Haristo wrote...
dude, ME2 DLC's are awesome... why don't you just... you know.. BUY THEM ?

Whining.

Because I'm not stupid.

Dumb consumer.

I know Haristo's comment was "stupid" in general, but why is buying ME 2's DLC stupid? I'm sure you mean that as a preference (hopefully), but I'd like an explanation considering that I bought Overlord, LotSB, and Arrival.

[the_one_54321]

ME-ParaShep wrote...
I know Haristo's comment was "stupid" in general, but why is buying ME 2's DLC stupid? I'm sure you mean that as a preference (hopefully), but I'd like an explanation considering that I bought Overlord, LotSB, and Arrival.

I think that DLC as a  concept as a whole is thoroughly unwise for any consumer to embrace. I was just responding to his inane comment with an equally derisive tone.

[MELTOR13]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Savber100 wrote...
If Bioware really was greedy, they would strip out the ending and force you to pay extra to see how it ends,

Arrival???

Arrival shipped over a year after ME2 came out, and had absolutely nothing to do with the main game storyline, other than the Reapers being involved. BioWare didn't 'strip the ending' to ME2 and force you to buy Arrival. Because Arrival isn't the ending to ME2. It's a side story that leads into ME3. 

Please don't spread lies and opinions as fact. 

[ME-ParaShep]

I agree. Although I suppose that if the consumer has the budget to purchase. I'm sure many people have jobs that allow ample money to be spent on personal pleasures. $15-$20 on one game's DLC is fine if a person has more than enough to spend in their life. To that end, I think in some cases it is stupid and in others it is not stupid to purchase DLC in order to please someone's desires. Stupid because that person's wasting money on something that should be better invested in. Not stupid because that person is doing it to gain more intel and experience of a gaming universe to behold better content in future installments. E.G. LotSB, Arrival, and possibly Overlord's effects and transitions in ME 3.

[Xeranx]

the_one_54321 wrote...

ME-ParaShep wrote...
I know Haristo's comment was "stupid" in general, but why is buying ME 2's DLC stupid? I'm sure you mean that as a preference (hopefully), but I'd like an explanation considering that I bought Overlord, LotSB, and Arrival.

I think that DLC as a  concept as a whole is thoroughly unwise for any consumer to embrace. I was just responding to his inane comment with an equally derisive tone.

I honestly think you should have stopped once you got your answer.  There's no reason for this to continue on as long as it did considering you said you will not buy dlc.  After you said that, that should have been it.  Anyone else who wants to look on you as some kind of freak for not wanting to buy dlc can go spin on a stool for hours on end because it's your decision to buy them or not.

You've already expressed your refusal to buy dlc.  No one and nothing will move you to go against that.  The dlc will have an effect in ME3 and the developers will apply default decisions to your game.  That's it.  Rather than feed your headache, starve it and let this die.

[the_one_54321]

MELTOR13 wrote...
Please don't spread lies and opinions as fact.

I'm sure that the thousands of people that never gave arrival a good look and don't know what it's about will start ME3, imediately shout WTF???!!! and then totally agree with what you just said.

Xeranx wrote...
You've already expressed your refusal to buy dlc.  No one and nothing will move you to go against that.  The dlc will have an effect in ME3 and the developers will apply default decisions to your game.  That's it.  Rather than feed your headache, starve it and let this die.

You certainly have a point. I suppose sometimes I have something of a masochistic streak.

[wizardryforever]

I didn't read all ten pages of this, but you know that Cerberus network is free, right?  Zaeed, Normandy crash site, Firewalker are all good additions to the game.  Short, but it is free.  There's also stuff like the Cerberus armor, the eviscerator shotgun, and the arc projector.  Cool stuff, all free.  Why exactly do you not have them?

DLCs are essentially micro-expansions.  They add on a little to the game with each one as opposed to all at once.  There are a few good things about this:  They let you cherry pick which parts you want, while expansions make you take the bad with the good if you want an addition.  They come out incrementally, so you can do new stuff in the game every couple of months instead of all at once.  And it is much cheaper to make lots of DLC than it is to make a full expansion, meaning there will be more content ultimately.

I do believe that some DLC should be lower priced than it is, but asking for all of it to be free is like asking for the developer to make an expansion and have it be free.  It makes no business sense, and the developer is a business.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Xeranx wrote...

You've already expressed your refusal to buy dlc.  No one and nothing will move you to go against that.  The dlc will have an effect in ME3 and the developers will apply default decisions to your game. 

That would be fine as long as the game doesn't assume that it was Shepard who made those decisions.

If my Shepard decided not to do those things (I'm thinking particularly to LotSB), then the game shouldn't tell me what my character did.

Since playing the DLC requires that I choose among the scripted paths, not playing the DLC is the only way to choose a different path - that of not performing the actions.

The game's "default" choices should be events that took place in Shepard's absence.

[MightySword]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
That would be fine as long as the game doesn't assume that it was Shepard who made those decisions.

If my Shepard decided not to do those things (I'm thinking particularly to LotSB), then the game shouldn't tell me what my character did.

Since playing the DLC requires that I choose among the scripted paths, not playing the DLC is the only way to choose a different path - that of not performing the actions.

The game's "default" choices should be events that took place in Shepard's absence.

I don't think there are any difference between DLC and core content here. I know there is a comic strip to help people with the decisison carrying from ME -> ME2 for the PS3, if I remember correctly the 360 version didn't have it, at lauch time at least. So without a ME's save, you have to abide to the default choices. Now why you don't have a save? Didn't play ME, your save is lost, your HDD is fried ...etc... just like here the choice of using DLC is yours, pro and cons but I think this is up to the player's responsibility. It would be nice if the developers can handle it, but I won't fault them.

And it's not the first time either, I mean ... the BGI -> BGII was the same.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The primary benefit of DLC over core content is that it's optional. You don't have to do it. The game's core content pretty much has to be played. You can't play ME without become a Spectre. That's not optional. But whether you deal with the Batarian terrorists in BDtS, that's optional. DLC are side-quests. You can skip them.

That's what I like about DLC. If they're not side-quests, then I want them in the game. I don't mind paying extra for side-quests. I'll happily pay extra for side-quests. But I don't want the game to assume I completed them when I didn't. If I bought LotSB, but didn't play through it with this particular Shepard, then when I import that Shepard into ME3 I don't want the game to tell me what my Shepard did. I know what my Shepard did, and it wasn't that.