316 réponses à ce sujet

[Sr.Prize]

If you have a problem with things like dlc and redeem codes, blame the used game market. It's a double edge sword.

[obie191970]

Ar7emis wrote...

DarkPsylocke26 wrote...

Stop complainting about the DLC because no one is forcing you to buy the DLC.

Stop misinterpreting my argument. I'm not saying I'm being forced to do anything, I'm saying that because one might decide not to buy a DLC that's simply disc-locked content then that person is denied an essential part of the game and therefore loses out on the overall experience.

This isn't disc locked - It's apparently a 600 MB download.  I know in the past one of the devs has posted on here that the game is basically finished a couple of months prior to release and the last couple of months are spent on testing.  During that time they can assign a team to work on day 1 DLC that otherwise wouldn't be developed.  I'm assuming that's the case here seeing it isn't part of the disc based product.

[NICKjnp]

Regular DLC released several months after the game increases the replay ability. Day one DLC is a rip off...I hate day one DLC. It should have been in the game. It shows that the developers just removed it from the main game in order to charge you more money.

[dirtybirds]

EAware has the right to dictate the terms of sale. You can agree to buy or not.

If it is really a self-destructive strategy in the long term, the money will be short-lived. Sometimes these things have to play-out in real-time, and a company has to experience real losses. This is often because some on the inside are more committed to their vision then they are to evaluating the facts. They are unwilling to project a future based on what consumers want and instead sell what they rationalize that consumers don't know they want yet, but will want (there was only one Steve Jobs, and his ghost is not employed by EA) in the future.

Or maybe Day One DLC is the wave of the future, and we all have to destroy our completionist mentalities, i.e., our love for games....hmm, great. Let us keep in mind that DLC is least objectionable in MP games, adding new maps, etc. And it is most objectionable in single-player RPG games.

The other alternative is that while being a bad idea, people buy into anyway through the long term. And I say, if that is what happens, then we probably have worse things to worry about than this corner of the state of gaming, because that lack of judgement on the part of a majority of consumers will manifest itself in larger economic and political ways.

In either case, you have no control. So just sit back and watch it all unfold.

Modifié par dirtybirds, 22 février 2012 - 03:51 .

[sangy]

I can see how some might not agree with DLCs but they are definately here to stay. I think you'll see a lot more of it for more games in the future.

If a game is good and has a decent playthrough with a satisfying ending, it's all good. DLC just adds to the experience. Some just gotta have it all. For a game I love, it's usually worth it. Games I don't care too much about, I don't bother giving DLC a thought.

Mass Effect DLCs are worth it IMO. Though, I'd much rather they work on building up expansions after release to have a good amount of content to add to the games, rather than just some items and a quest or two. Either way, it's your decision.

[Texaboose]

My biggest gripe with DLC is cost vs. value. Especially where we're paying $60 for base game, DLC is normally waaay overpriced.

An armor pack (ie. texture pack) which is $5, while community modders offer their superior ones for free? Not worth it. EA/Bioware should be giving away that sort of thing for free as a way of connecting that with fanbase.

Something like LotSB, I thought was really well done, with good VA and plot, was worth the extra $10 (or however much it was) for an extra hour of gameplay. On the otherhand, DA:A should have been good, and would have been good if it wasn't for the $60 pricetag. It's an freakin' expansion and should not have sold as much as a new game.

Modifié par Texaboose, 22 février 2012 - 03:52 .

[Random citizen]

CDproject knows how to handle dlc.

[Lucky Mame]

Ah but really. In Mass Effect 3 case this is just.. horrible. They stripped probably one of the biggest things in the ME universe and made it a DLC. That's okay. If you buy the normal version as new, you'll have to pay for it.That's well.. I'm not sure. In ME2 the online pass thingy worked and I thought it was fine. I believe those who bought DAO as new got day one dlc for free? But the best part of this is.. that it's going to cost a bit too much. When MS released the DLC on Xbox Marketplace(before it was pulled) it cost 800 Microsoft points. That's around 10€/$/£/etc. I could understand that if this was released way after the release but as a day one dlc.. really? I'm not forced to buy it but because I know this is a big part of the game, my game experience would be lesser if I didn't do it.

[eye basher]

I only buy downloads for the games i really like and only if it's good.

[The Dark Knight of Steel]

what is this the hundreth thread about dlc

[Lucky Mame]

Texaboose wrote...

My biggest gripe with DLC is cost vs. value. Especially where we're paying $60 for base game, DLC is normally waaay overpriced.

Well, at least you're paying 60$. In Finland new game costs 70€. That means 92,5$ and then add the price of DLC. Yeah. It's pretty expensive.

[Random citizen]

dirtybirds wrote...

EAware has the right to dictate the terms of sale. You can agree to buy or not.

If it is really a self-destructive strategy in the long term, the money will be short-lived. Sometimes these things have to play-out in real-time, and a company has to experience real losses. This is often because some on the inside are more committed to their vision then they are to evaluating the facts. They are unwilling to project a future based on what consumers want and instead sell what they rationalize that consumers don't know they want yet, but will want (there was only one Steve Jobs, and his ghost is not employed by EA) in the future.

Or maybe Day One DLC is the wave of the future, and we all have to destroy our completionist mentalities, i.e., our love for games....hmm, great. Let us keep in mind that DLC is least objectionable in MP games, adding new maps, etc. And it is most objectionable in single-player RPG games.

The other alternative is that while being a bad idea, people buy into anyway through the long term. And I say, if that is what happens, then we probably have worse things to worry about than this corner of the state of gaming, because that lack of judgement on the part of a majority of consumers will manifest itself in larger economic and political ways.

In either case, you have no control. So just sit back and watch it all unfold.

If you mean "Short-lived" as in another decade or two, perhaps. The funny thing with hooking people on great stories or any other form of addictive stuff is that they can be expected to pay a lot more, and put up with a lot more then any ordinary customer. They will get pissed, but continue to hand over their money.

[Farbautisonn]

I generally like the DLC's. They arent (for ME2s case at least) high art and the pinnacle of storytelling (I thought the DAO DLC's were pretty good though) and I support the gaming studio buy buying entertainment for hours. I spend more money on a hefty weekend out on the town than I do a combinded Game+DLCs. A nice dinner, drinks, cabfare to and from venues... it adds up.

Aside from the pure "cost/benefit" analysis I support bioware. The storytelling company I like and have followed for more than a decade. I get more lore, more backdrop better insight. Im, if not happy, then content with the dlcs.

Take the DLC's for New Vegas. Loved em. Thought them to be essential and very entertaining, even if the final dlc dropped the ball for me and was kind of a "meh... cheated" experience. Especially compared to Dead Money.

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 22 février 2012 - 04:03 .

[woods26]

I like DLC and I'll be buying the day one DLC. But sometimes I think that if it was developed alongside the game, why not include it? Why not use those resources towards the actual game first?

[Stompi]

DLC itself doesn't ruin anything. Story DLC often motivates me to return to games I haven't played in months. But having 10 million different preorder DLCs so you can't get everything without being totally insane sucks. As do simple armor or weapon packs.

Modifié par Stompi, 22 février 2012 - 04:10 .

[Texhnolyze101]

woods26 wrote...

I like DLC and I'll be buying the day one DLC. But sometimes I think that if it was developed alongside the game, why not include it? Why not use those resources towards the actual game first?

Because than they can't gip you duh

[Blarty]

Day One DLC is an atrocity = Everyone who thinks that software is developed using the Waterfall Model and that all parts of the team involved in constructing a game, simply sit on their backsides when their bit is finished.....

Although I see the release of day one DLC (when it is actually Day 1 DLC - not what was already developed for the CE and released along side the game so standard owners don't complain about not having access to CE content) as rather tacky, the simple fact is, the chance of Day 1 DLC gets larger when a game release date goes back... because people have the time to develop it, or the DLC, that's designed to be DLC, is ready on time but it happens to be before general release date.

If you're that bothered by it, and want that authentic wait-ages-for-DLC-to-come-out experience, don't buy it for a couple of months, nothing is making you download it on day 1.

[Farbautisonn]

woods26 wrote...Why not use those resources towards the actual game first?

-I think I know why and its the standard response: "Money".

Now I know thats an ugly word to some, and especially those that hate the concept of DLC's but the studio has to make a profit. It has to make enough money to satisfy the shareholders and it has to make enough to keep and cater to good employees. If not the good employees leave and then you are left with an overall sub-par product. Or the company goes ****** up as shareholders abandon their shares.

The quality of the DLCs ofcourse has to validate spending those extra monies on them. If you release sub par DLCs just to rob the zealous fanbase, then you will end up going broke. In most cases anyway. No names mentioned, none forgotten.

The main game prices are fixed. People play a certain amount for a certain game and are used to that price level. Going above that is risky business as you risk the clientele abandoning their product. Personally I wouldnt mind paying 500-1.000 $ per game if I got epic games that had sterling storywriting, months of replayability and tons of good content. But I am a serious minoirity. No gaming studio would ever dare go down that road. So we are left with a main game that is the "staple experience" and then have to spend the same or double the amount for the complete experience. I dont mind that. Thats economics.

[DWTHEBEST]

GIJooTheWarHero wrote...

I agree!

Lair of the Shadow Broker soooo ruined Mass Effect 2, you don't even know!

i think ur retard, if u dont like it, dont play it...

[mkonrad6288]

DLC is saving games. The next step is to stop charging me $59 for a DVD I'll use once because consoles historically demand it, and let me buy a core game. Then I can play it for awhile, and if it has no replay merit to me, I don't have to buy all the extra DLC they charge for individually that wasn't even available at launch.

What is unfortunate on the DLC is that the product quality is all over the map. Sometimes it's pretty new graphics, but rarely does it integrate well into the product as launched. You'd have to change the overall story to adapt to DLC present or not present and handle either condition. So those extra squadmates you may get in ME2 are "imperfectly" integrated.

[Blarty]

DWTHEBEST wrote...

GIJooTheWarHero wrote...

I agree!

Lair of the Shadow Broker soooo ruined Mass Effect 2, you don't even know!

i think ur retard, if u dont like it, dont play it...

I think ur not understanding sarcasm

[Tezzajh]

I hate launch dlc I always feel that they have chosen a misson that was intended to be in the game but decided to pull it to make extra money, because if you compare the launch dlc characters of dragon age shale and sabastion they both had lines that made them feel they were supposed to be there, but the characters in mass effect 2 like zaed and kusmi who were introduced later didnt have hardly anything to say.

[Cambot96]

 You do know the from ashes DLC is a 613mb download, too big to be a "key" for on disc content. 

I hate the argument of "why didnt they just put it in the game?", these people misunderstand the game development process where the game itself is finished 2-4 months in advance in order to fix bugs, test, the videogame equivalent to  proofreading basically. When bioware set the march release date, they put themselves under pressure to release a finished project by then, meaning stuff is going to be on the cutting room floor in order to meet that date. However through DLC this can be finished  by a side team, side by side with the "proof readers" in that period before release. Yes some DLC is just a cashgrab, but always remember that videogames are a long expensive process, some DLC is actually trying to extend the experience love without having to wait for a sequel. Also for those who argue that their taking core story content out the game, is talking out their ass, the core experience will be full and what bioware intended, the only time ive ever doubted this is the rather dubious importance "arrival" has to mass effect 2's story.

[Phaedon]

Ar7emis wrote...
Now? Now we get stuck with having to download 57 'optional' sidequests, characters, and missions that, while being 'optional', alter the game dramatically. Why?

Because money...

They are altering the game because...money? Well, alright. If you say so.

If you don't think that the product is by itself worth its price then don't buy it. If you don't think that the DLC are worth their price, don't buy them either.

Anything else is just an attempt at explaining yourself. To yourself. 


So...what makes you think that the original game doesn't have enough content for your tastes, anyway?

[Daywalker315]

GIJooTheWarHero wrote...

I agree!

Lair of the Shadow Broker soooo ruined Mass Effect 2, you don't even know!

Edit: Saw sarcasm reference above. Hope that's what that was. Because if not you're crazy!

Modifié par Daywalker315, 22 février 2012 - 04:51 .