13369 réponses à ce sujet

[RDSFirebane]

Tar-Minastir wrote...

Many ppl have.  TB's video has over 550,000 views and 26,000 likes.  The redit article has even greater numbers of views/responses.  There is an article on PC world.  Hell, even forbes wrote an article.

Will it have an impact?  Who knows, but ppl are taking notice of the entire situation for good or ill.

I'll agree its getting out there but ya once the game comes out I think alot of this will start dieing off as everyone gets into the game and finds that they just made it seem wrose then it was.

But then they could be right no way of knowing till it comes out.

Modifié par RDSFirebane, 25 février 2012 - 09:21 .

[BaronIveagh]

shaneho78 wrote...

The boycott is meaningless. How well the game will sell will depend predominantly on how good it is. If the game is GOTY material, it is going to make most boycotters change their minds. If the game flops, then people will boycott it for the bad reviews and word of mouth, not because of day 1 dlc.

Um, I hate to bring this up, but on the few occasions that internet boycotts have gotten themselves together (and having a guy like the TB who brings star power to it) they have actually forced companies to change.  So...


No.  I choose to stand up and do soemthing.  Even if it's vote with my wallet.  And I've voted with my wallet not just against Bioware, but every EA game comming out I may have purchased.  And if enough people do it, then, yes, by god, we will win.


We did it before and we can do it again
And we will do it again
We've got a heck of a job to do
But you can bet we'll see it thru.
We did it before and we can do it again
And we will do it again
We're one for all and all for one
They'll get a licking before we're done
Millions of voices are ringing
Singing as we march along
We did it before and we can do it again
And we will do it again
We'll knock them over and then we'll get the guy in back of them
We did it before, we'll do it again

[RiouHotaru]

Tar-Minastir wrote...

deamon deathstone1 wrote...

I love just how you people want what I'm getting, for free. I paid good money for my extras, which included the bonus mission/character. Note the word BONUS.

It'll be a Zaeed/Kasumi type deal and you idiots (pardon my french) seem to think it's an integral part of the game they cut out and repackaged, to make some more cashy money.

So no you aren't getting From Ashes for free.

If it ends up being like Zaeed/Kasumi then I think most ppl won't have a problem w/ it, but how can a prothean be as inconsequential as those two?

There are two options.  Either it is inconsequential and thereby terrible writing (honestly how could you make a prothean meaningless in the ME universe) or it is of importance/consequence and is EA trying to milk their consumers for important content.

I want it to be as pointless as Zaeed/Kasumi, but I don't know how they can do that w/ out major screwups .

Why does he HAVE to be consequential?  Because he's a Prothean?  This still remains the single silliest argument.  I've even tried saying:

"Hey, what if he's like Shale?  You know, interesting side-character who adds depth to the lore, but whose presence isn't critical to the story.  What about that?"

And I've had several people comment:

"No, because he's a PROTHEAN.  That means he either MUST be critical or he's a stain on the writing!"

It boggles my mind that because he's a Prothean, he HAS to be of dire import.

And then Casey Hudson comes out and flat out says "He's not critical to the plot, yo.  Story is about Reapers, not Protheans."  And the opposition just goes "CAN'T HEAR YOUR LIES LALALALALALALALA!"

I just can't understand what's going through your heads.

[Tar-Minastir]

RDSFirebane wrote...

BaronIveagh wrote...

I view you 'IDGAF types to be little more then trolls at best and corproate stooges at worst.

Why because some of us could be happy with the game and the DLC and want to protect the company that as we see it is doing nothing wrong? ya that makes us Trolls for calling you out and challangeing your statments with our own.

Corproate stooges really?

I've yet to call you anything or even imply so how about showing the same respect and being civil?

I love the game I'm going to love the DLC and have as much right to defend it as you do to attack it.

The company does not need your help.  Bioware/EA are the big boys one the block.  Don't try and schmooze up to them to make yourself feel important.  

I've said it before, bioware needs your critisim more than your righteous support. Use your monetary support to tell them when have succeeded in producing a quality product, but don't let them get away w/ anything less. That is the best senario for all.

[RiouHotaru]

StElmo wrote...

BaronIveagh wrote...

CommanderCoffee wrote...
...
Uh-oh! The game needs to be re-certified because you just added content. Well, while it's there, might as well create some new DLC. Keep the developers busy.

Uh-oh! DLC was completed before the game's release! Better send it back to be re-certified. Well, we have plenty of time now, don't want the developers to not use their skills...

and here's where it falls apart, as if it's issued as free DLC the game would nto have to be recertified, so... no.

I'm going to put this simply to all of you. This is the message companies send to consomers through DLC.

1 - Day 1 FREE DLC  = "Here's a little something extra for being such good fans and buying the game new" = ACCEPTABLE

2 - Day 50 PAID DLC = "Here's something extra for those of you still hanging out for some more Mass Effect 3" = ACCEPTABLE

3 - DAY 1 PAID DLC ; "The game will not satiate you for long, so we have decided to release day one DLC so yhe hype manages to get us some sales before people realize this is a mediocre experience. " = UNACCEPTABLE

...You're joking on that third example, right?  Because that's just ridiculous.

[RDSFirebane]

Tar-Minastir wrote...

The company does not need your help.  Bioware/EA are the big boys one the block.  Don't try and schmooze up to them to make yourself feel important.  

I've said it before, bioware needs your critisim more than your righteous support. Use your monetary support to tell them when have succeeded in producing a quality product, but don't let them get away w/ anything less. That is the best senario for all.

Well I dont see what they are doing as wrong and I dont have any critisim I was anti multiplayer then I played it and it was fine.

I've got faith this will be a great game and untill I play it and see other wise I'll keep that stance.

[MissOuJ]

Tar-Minastir wrote...

If it ends up being like Zaeed/Kasumi then I think most ppl won't have a problem w/ it, but how can a prothean be as inconsequential as those two?

There are two options.  Either it is inconsequential and thereby terrible writing (honestly how could you make a prothean meaningless in the ME universe) or it is of importance/consequence and is EA trying to milk their consumers for important content.

I want it to be as pointless as Zaeed/Kasumi, but I don't know how they can do that w/ out major screwups .

How nice of you. So, because I forked up the extra money for the CE (equivalent of about $120 where I live) I should get someting pointless in exchange. Thank you.

I gambled and bought the CE. I didn't know about the Prothean. My gamble paid off - and now that it's been made a Day-1 DLC in stead of CE exclusive, people are complaining they should be getting him for free.

How's that fair in any shape or form?

Modifié par MissOuJ, 25 février 2012 - 09:35 .

[Tobey2011]

I'm still trying to find where I can pre-order the 2-3 patches they might release...

[Kithrus]

CommanderCoffee wrote...

oto wrote...

 The axium remains
"If it's done before release date, it should come with the game".

This 100%

This creates a problem.

Ever hear of a positive feedback loop? One action encourages another to occur, which encourages the first action to occur. 

So, the problem here is that the DLC "is part of the main game and should be included with the main game", as many people keep stating on this forum. Okay, add it into the game.

Uh-oh! The game needs to be re-certified because you just added content. Well, while it's there, might as well create some new DLC. Keep the developers busy.

Uh-oh! DLC was completed before the game's release! Better send it back to be re-certified. Well, we have plenty of time now, don't want the developers to not use their skills...

Repeat ad infinitum.

"But wait!" you clamor. "Surely it can just be released alongside the game as DLC, perhaps as incentive to buy new! Well, ME3's incentive to buy new is the multiplayer. If you buy used, you need to buy a code to play it. Probably something like $20. Isn't that what Cerberus Network was? 

Cerberus Network included a weapon, a set of armor, a character DLC and 2 mission DLCs. If we assume Zaeed is $7, like Kasumi, Firewalker and Normandy Crash site were, oh, $5.50, and the weapon and armor were $2, you've got $20 worth of DLC. So you got a lot of stuff for your $20.

Alliance Network. $20 for multiplayer that may assist single player. That's not too bad. Straight-up regular MP games already cost, let me find Counter Strike Source, $20, and CSS isn't as adaptive as ME3 MP. Really, you've got a nice bargain there.

Back on topic, there's the whole idea that things done before the game is release ought to be included. If there's no money involved in the exchange, then there is going to be a financial hit for whoever funds the DLC development. EA and Bioware realized this and made a choice: They included it in the Collector's Edition because the people buying that are likely repeat customers who have already invested $100 or more in the game series. Standard Edition repeat users did get the short end of the stick here, but then again those investing in the CE are taking a greater hit on our wallets. That was our choice, and quite frankly, its your choice if you buy the DLC or not.

HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT: This fallacy consists of offering a poorly
supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future if circumstances or
conditions were other than they actually were or are. The fallacy also involves treating
hypothetical situations as if they were fact.

You claim that it would be an endless cycle of a never ending game production but as mention nothing stops them from releasing said DLC free.

Thus addressing your other point that 'well the multiplayer takes up the slot of free encouragement to buy new....'

What games have gear limits now? we can only 'slot in' so much good stuff? When exactly are Bioware/EA not incharge of what they do with the game? The question here isn't so much that they can't do what they want but how they are treating their customers.

We are not walking wallets.

I run my own small company. I throw free stuff at my cliants all the time. It makes them feel loved and they come back to me when they want their floors repaired. I loss a bit this way cutting into my profits slightly but ultimately I have a 'fan base' if you will that are loyal to me.

Their PR departments have you blinded with a carefully crafted story of how the DLC was made after the fact by some seperate team so your guilted into feeling they are entitled to sell the DLC.

The heart of the problem is from the moment they sit down and plan the production of the game to the time they release it they are paid on the dime of the cost of the game in question.

Also if the DLC is not important and small then why is it worth 10 bucks and not 5 like all the other small dlc for mass effect 2?

If it is large and important like say arrival or shadow broker then why is it not included in the game or free?

[BaronIveagh]

RiouHotaru wrote...

Why does he HAVE to be consequential?  Because he's a Prothean?  This still remains the single silliest argument.  I've even tried saying:

"Hey, what if he's like Shale?  You know, interesting side-character who adds depth to the lore, but whose presence isn't critical to the story.  What about that?"

And I've had several people comment:

"No, because he's a PROTHEAN.  That means he either MUST be critical or he's a stain on the writing!"

It boggles my mind that because he's a Prothean, he HAS to be of dire import.

Um, we could start with how, based on previous games, his very existance would totally shift the balence of power for every Citidel race?   It the entire reaper thing was not going on, this would be the bigget event going on in the galaxy?  Remember that that majority of people not in power still think the protheans built all this mass effect stuff?  And that the protheans were by far more technologically advanced then any living species? 

The fact thath te hanar would consider him a living God alone would be a serious issue.

[LilyasAvalon]

Kings19 wrote...

Tazzmission wrote...

i wonder if he will be a biotic type prothean

*Minor spoilers* According to this list, he has biotic abilities.
http://social.biowar...3/index/8213000

Sweet! He just replaced Liara/Kaidan as my secondary biotic.

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 25 février 2012 - 09:29 .

[kingsims]

There are other EA games that don't have Day 1 DLC content like Amular and Syndicate (Which were released recently, Amular had armour pack nothing major if you got the game new)

I will compare this with another Game called Syndicate which is published by EA. This game has mutliplayer co-op and singleplayer portion like mass effect. The game has no Day 1 DLC and has pre-order bonus incentives instead that are "Cosmetic"

So don't give me this BS about "its okay" when other EA studios don't do it.

If the DLC was a MP map pack, Gun pack, Zaeed 2.0. Then you can have your exclusive CE content. But if the Squadmate was a rachni or prothean or reaper then your pushing it. I wouldn't mind it if my MP character had Gold guns

[LilyasAvalon]

I personally find it amusing people are still ****ing about this. Seriously, how many times has Bioware or EA or whoever done this? Get over yourselves, buy the bloody Prothean or not and just enjoy Mass Effect 3 in general. Seriously, it's 10 bloody dollars. It's not worth the 350+ page **** fit about it.

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 25 février 2012 - 09:32 .

[Tar-Minastir]

RiouHotaru wrote...
Why does he HAVE to be consequential?  Because he's a Prothean?  This still remains the single silliest argument.  I've even tried saying:

"Hey, what if he's like Shale?  You know, interesting side-character who adds depth to the lore, but whose presence isn't critical to the story.  What about that?"

And I've had several people comment:

"No, because he's a PROTHEAN.  That means he either MUST be critical or he's a stain on the writing!"

It boggles my mind that because he's a Prothean, he HAS to be of dire import.

And then Casey Hudson comes out and flat out says "He's not critical to the plot, yo.  Story is about Reapers, not Protheans."  And the opposition just goes "CAN'T HEAR YOUR LIES LALALALALALALALA!"

I just can't understand what's going through your heads.

If you can honestly say that the major driving force behind the myster of the first game and the antiogonists of the second can ever be inconsequential you are lying to yourself.

Have you even played the first two games?  Protheans were the key to everything and are lore wise of massive importance.  Well, I have this prothean who has expirenced the reapers first hand, but he won't tell me **** and his mission is about his missing teddy bear.  Does that make sense?

If the dlc was say a solarian or krogan and had to do with their past histories (krogan rebellions and whatnot), I would be disappointed, but wouldn't feel pressed into buying it.  I problably would buy it, but I wouldm't feel like I was missing something key to the history of the battles between the  biological species and the reapers and being coerced.

[CommanderCoffee]

Kithrus wrote...

CommanderCoffee wrote...

oto wrote...

 The axium remains
"If it's done before release date, it should come with the game".

This 100%

This creates a problem.

Ever hear of a positive feedback loop? One action encourages another to occur, which encourages the first action to occur. 

So, the problem here is that the DLC "is part of the main game and should be included with the main game", as many people keep stating on this forum. Okay, add it into the game.

Uh-oh! The game needs to be re-certified because you just added content. Well, while it's there, might as well create some new DLC. Keep the developers busy.

Uh-oh! DLC was completed before the game's release! Better send it back to be re-certified. Well, we have plenty of time now, don't want the developers to not use their skills...

Repeat ad infinitum.

"But wait!" you clamor. "Surely it can just be released alongside the game as DLC, perhaps as incentive to buy new! Well, ME3's incentive to buy new is the multiplayer. If you buy used, you need to buy a code to play it. Probably something like $20. Isn't that what Cerberus Network was? 

Cerberus Network included a weapon, a set of armor, a character DLC and 2 mission DLCs. If we assume Zaeed is $7, like Kasumi, Firewalker and Normandy Crash site were, oh, $5.50, and the weapon and armor were $2, you've got $20 worth of DLC. So you got a lot of stuff for your $20.

Alliance Network. $20 for multiplayer that may assist single player. That's not too bad. Straight-up regular MP games already cost, let me find Counter Strike Source, $20, and CSS isn't as adaptive as ME3 MP. Really, you've got a nice bargain there.

Back on topic, there's the whole idea that things done before the game is release ought to be included. If there's no money involved in the exchange, then there is going to be a financial hit for whoever funds the DLC development. EA and Bioware realized this and made a choice: They included it in the Collector's Edition because the people buying that are likely repeat customers who have already invested $100 or more in the game series. Standard Edition repeat users did get the short end of the stick here, but then again those investing in the CE are taking a greater hit on our wallets. That was our choice, and quite frankly, its your choice if you buy the DLC or not.

HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT: This fallacy consists of offering a poorly
supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future if circumstances or
conditions were other than they actually were or are. The fallacy also involves treating
hypothetical situations as if they were fact.

You claim that it would be an endless cycle of a never ending game production but as mention nothing stops them from releasing said DLC free.

You do not read, do you?

LOSS OF INVESTMENT. NO ROI. Face it, it might make sense to you to release it for free, but this company that publishes the game isn't you. It's EA. Electronic-Goddam-Arts. How could you not see something like this happening? If EA can't get return from an investment, they will not pour assets into it. That's why releasing "From Ashes" for free will not happen. It might suck, but its true.

[MissOuJ]

Tar-Minastir wrote...

I've said it before, bioware needs your critisim more than your righteous support. Use your monetary support to tell them when have succeeded in producing a quality product, but don't let them get away w/ anything less. That is the best senario for all.

I haven't seen much criticism. I've seen willful misinformation, entitlement and half-baked arguments. Ohh, and name calling, but that's from both sides of the fence.

Which reminds me: we're better than this. Let's all act civil.

[RDSFirebane]

Kithrus wrote...

If it is large and important like say arrival or shadow broker then why is it not included in the game or free?

Well would it make you guys feel better if they gave the DLC free and then patched so it was 10 to buy a code for multiplayer since they are giveing that to you free when most games now come with a code to get past x level new?

[Tar-Minastir]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Tar-Minastir wrote...

The company does not need your help.  Bioware/EA are the big boys one the block.  Don't try and schmooze up to them to make yourself feel important.  

I've said it before, bioware needs your critisim more than your righteous support. Use your monetary support to tell them when have succeeded in producing a quality product, but don't let them get away w/ anything less. That is the best senario for all.

Well I dont see what they are doing as wrong and I dont have any critisim I was anti multiplayer then I played it and it was fine.

I've got faith this will be a great game and untill I play it and see other wise I'll keep that stance.

I believe the game will be awesome as well, but I cannot condone their current business practices.  This is not about the cost or the quality of this particular game.  It is about condoning what is in my eyes unethical business practices and setting a precident for worse things to come.

[BaronIveagh]

CommanderCoffee wrote...

You do not read, do you?

LOSS OF INVESTMENT. NO ROI. Face it, it might make sense to you to release it for free, but this company that publishes the game isn't you. It's EA. Electronic-Goddam-Arts. How could you not see something like this happening? If EA can't get return from an investment, they will not pour assets into it. That's why releasing "From Ashes" for free will not happen. It might suck, but its true.

Well, we can always hope that EA gets disillusioned with trying to force RPGs to thier exploit the IP on an annual basis' buisness model and sells it to Bethesda or someone.

I'd love to see an ME game where every planet we land on was the size of Skyrim.


And, BTW: EA has never seemingly had a problem with this in the past.  They did, after all, greenlight Zaeed.

[Tar-Minastir]

RDSFirebane wrote...

Kithrus wrote...

If it is large and important like say arrival or shadow broker then why is it not included in the game or free?

Well would it make you guys feel better if they gave the DLC free and then patched so it was 10 to buy a code for multiplayer since they are giveing that to you free when most games now come with a code to get past x level new?

Yes, I would prefer that since to me story > multiplayer.  As for the shadow broker, it came much further down the line and was not desgned to spite the consumer, so it was ok in my book.  Like the forbes article said, these companies will continue to push the envelope in terms of what they can get away with.  I say we push back and keep them in line.

Modifié par Tar-Minastir, 25 février 2012 - 09:38 .

[DJBare]

TB on his soapbox again?, looks like I will have to cancel my pre-or.........nah just kidding, in fact, the more this goes on the more I want this game, the 9th cannot get here soon enough.

[Kithrus]

CommanderCoffee wrote...

Kithrus wrote...

CommanderCoffee wrote...

oto wrote...

 The axium remains
"If it's done before release date, it should come with the game".

This 100%

This creates a problem.

Ever hear of a positive feedback loop? One action encourages another to occur, which encourages the first action to occur. 

So, the problem here is that the DLC "is part of the main game and should be included with the main game", as many people keep stating on this forum. Okay, add it into the game.

Uh-oh! The game needs to be re-certified because you just added content. Well, while it's there, might as well create some new DLC. Keep the developers busy.

Uh-oh! DLC was completed before the game's release! Better send it back to be re-certified. Well, we have plenty of time now, don't want the developers to not use their skills...

Repeat ad infinitum.

"But wait!" you clamor. "Surely it can just be released alongside the game as DLC, perhaps as incentive to buy new! Well, ME3's incentive to buy new is the multiplayer. If you buy used, you need to buy a code to play it. Probably something like $20. Isn't that what Cerberus Network was? 

Cerberus Network included a weapon, a set of armor, a character DLC and 2 mission DLCs. If we assume Zaeed is $7, like Kasumi, Firewalker and Normandy Crash site were, oh, $5.50, and the weapon and armor were $2, you've got $20 worth of DLC. So you got a lot of stuff for your $20.

Alliance Network. $20 for multiplayer that may assist single player. That's not too bad. Straight-up regular MP games already cost, let me find Counter Strike Source, $20, and CSS isn't as adaptive as ME3 MP. Really, you've got a nice bargain there.

Back on topic, there's the whole idea that things done before the game is release ought to be included. If there's no money involved in the exchange, then there is going to be a financial hit for whoever funds the DLC development. EA and Bioware realized this and made a choice: They included it in the Collector's Edition because the people buying that are likely repeat customers who have already invested $100 or more in the game series. Standard Edition repeat users did get the short end of the stick here, but then again those investing in the CE are taking a greater hit on our wallets. That was our choice, and quite frankly, its your choice if you buy the DLC or not.

HYPOTHESIS CONTRARY TO FACT: This fallacy consists of offering a poorly
supported claim about what might have happened in the past or future if circumstances or
conditions were other than they actually were or are. The fallacy also involves treating
hypothetical situations as if they were fact.

You claim that it would be an endless cycle of a never ending game production but as mention nothing stops them from releasing said DLC free.

You do not read, do you?

LOSS OF INVESTMENT. NO ROI. Face it, it might make sense to you to release it for free, but this company that publishes the game isn't you. It's EA. Electronic-Goddam-Arts. How could you not see something like this happening? If EA can't get return from an investment, they will not pour assets into it. That's why releasing "From Ashes" for free will not happen. It might suck, but its true.

I did read and I discounted your arguement as flimsy by stating as a company owner I take hits to my wallet to ensure customer satisfaction. Unless you have some kind of numbers to throw at me that show me they would be taking horrid losses your only playing with maybes.

The differance between my theroy and yours is mine has past examples of Bioware doing just that. aka Shale and Zaeed. Yours is an assumption based on a guess at best that someones getting axed.

Which I firmly doubt.

[BaronIveagh]

MissOuJ wrote...

I haven't seen much criticism. I've seen willful misinformation, entitlement and half-baked arguments. Ohh, and name calling, but that's from both sides of the fence.

Which reminds me: we're better than this. Let's all act civil.

Actually, all those are from both sides of the fence.  So far neither side has really presented much of an argument for their cause.

[MissOuJ]

Tobey2011 wrote...

I'm still trying to find where I can pre-order the 2-3 patches they might release...

Patches and DLC... apples and oranges...

Patch = fixing stuff that is already in the game

DLC = adding completely new content to the game

[CommanderCoffee]

BaronIveagh wrote...

CommanderCoffee wrote...

You do not read, do you?

LOSS OF INVESTMENT. NO ROI. Face it, it might make sense to you to release it for free, but this company that publishes the game isn't you. It's EA. Electronic-Goddam-Arts. How could you not see something like this happening? If EA can't get return from an investment, they will not pour assets into it. That's why releasing "From Ashes" for free will not happen. It might suck, but its true.

Well, we can always hope that EA gets disillusioned with trying to force RPGs to thier exploit the IP on an annual basis' buisness model and sells it to Bethesda or someone.

I'd love to see an ME game where every planet we land on was the size of Skyrim.


And, BTW: EA has never seemingly had a problem with this in the past.  They did, after all, greenlight Zaeed.

ME2 didn't have MP. Without Cerberus, you don't get Zaeed. Cerberus comes with new copies, or else purchased for $20. It grants you a bunch of DLC. Any way you cut it, if you buy used, to get the "free DLC", you gotta pay $20.