Evercrow wrote...
50+ Achievements. Seems like a complete list to me.It's just tells you how big emphasis on multiplayer achievements is, if you almost can't see single-player ones in between.
Evercrow wrote...
50+ Achievements. Seems like a complete list to me.It's just tells you how big emphasis on multiplayer achievements is, if you almost can't see single-player ones in between.
Yeah, and I like it, I'm just trying to guess reasons why he sees only multiplayer trophies.Sorry, if I worded myself poorly,and confused any of you.obie191970 wrote...
Looks like most of them are either/or achievements - Reach level 15 in MP or level 50 is SP is the same achievement, for example.
Modifié par Evercrow, 27 février 2012 - 08:20 .
RiouHotaru wrote...To put it simply, this argument falls completely flat. Why? Because those other features you mentioned? Aren't optional. They are core features. You're fabricating a possible what-if scenario in an attempt to make the situation appear worse. It's true, there's a possibilty (though infintessimally small) that a company could decide to chop a game up like that. But it hasn't happened yet. Hasn't happened ever in the history of Bioware. And to say that we're "okay" with it implies they're doing something wrong.
If the anti Day-1 folks want to make an argument, do so without the slippery slope of "If you let them do this they WILL do this" or the "It's like buying a car with no wheels". None of those two examples fit, and you know it. It doesn't help your case.
Yate wrote...
Oh yeah, expect to see this account banned now, can't talk back without getting slapped after all!
Modifié par didymos1120, 27 février 2012 - 08:34 .
Modifié par LOST SPARTANJLC, 27 février 2012 - 08:35 .
Niemack Saarinen wrote...
Love this conspiracy talk.
/sarcasm.
rob593 wrote...
Niemack Saarinen wrote...
Love this conspiracy talk.
/sarcasm.
Conspiricies are only so because the masses deny they exist.
LOST SPARTANJLC wrote...
rob593 wrote...
Niemack Saarinen wrote...
Love this conspiracy talk.
/sarcasm.
Conspiricies are only so because the masses deny they exist.
Or they have yet to be proven
rob593 wrote...
LOST SPARTANJLC wrote...
rob593 wrote...
Niemack Saarinen wrote...
Love this conspiracy talk.
/sarcasm.
Conspiricies are only so because the masses deny they exist.
Or they have yet to be proven
Without denial there would be no need for proof
Modifié par MissOuJ, 27 février 2012 - 08:43 .
Fenris447 wrote...
Welcome to capitalism. A company can put out what they want, when they want, for the price they want.
A consumer can then decide if it's worth the price to them. You have no real voice but your wallet.
RiouHotaru wrote...
NeecHMonkeY wrote...
TheOptimist wrote...
It's perfectly acceptable. The character is not essential to the story. He is, and always was, planned as an add on DLC, as we have known since the first advertisements for the collectors edition came out. When they produced him is irrelevant. They produced a game with content X that they will sell for $60. This character is add on content Y, which is for sale for $10 more or included for free in the CE. If they cut up the game into a bunch of little pieces, as you apparently fear, then it becomes unplayable and no one buys it. IF YOU DO NOT WANT THE DLC, DO NOT BUY IT. But you are not entitled to a piece of content they have deemed as extra just because of when it was produced.
Let me ask you a serious question. If they'd kept this under raps and released it 3 months after the initial game, would you still be so upset? I rather doubt it. The only reason people care is because of when they THINK the DLC was made in conjunction with the real game (whether or not that has any basis in reality). I predict that in the future, Bioware will do exactly that, denying us content we could have had earlier but for the whining of people like you, who apparently believe they have some god given right to content that the developer has decided is not part of the core game.
Optional.
An interesting word that many people seem to think is a valid argument when defending EA/Bioware's decision to separate this content and sell it to us as an additional package on release day.
"It's entirely optional. Yo don't have to buy it, you know."
I wonder how many people would have bought the original Mass Effect had it's 'optional' content been sold as additional content on release day?
- Planetary exploration and the side missions that accompany it: Optional
- Additional Armor found throughout the game: Optional
- Additional Weapons found throughout the game: Optional
- Armor and Weapon Upgrades: Optional
- Cutsomizable Commander Shepard: Optional
- Dialogue and Outcome Altering Choices: Optional
- Wrex, Garrus and Liara and any missions directly associated with them: Optional
- Various Game Difficulty Settings: Optional
- Anything in the Options/Settings Menu: Optional
Starting to look like a pretty bare-bones game, isn't it? The same could be said of Mass Effect 2 or pratically any other game... but most of all, RPGs. RPGs are all about options and optional content. It's what most people enjoy about them, getting lost in another world and living another life. One of the selling points of Skyrim for many people was the fact that it had an infinite amount of optional side-quests to keep people busy and playing the game straight out of the box and at no extra charge.
I have no problem with DLC. I love picking up a new mission after I've bought and finished a game that makes me go back to play it again. I also don't mind paying the price at that time for something that the Devs have worked on after they've finished the main game. The GTA IV, Fallout 3, Red Dead Redemption and Oblivion packs all come to mind as being well worth the extra coin.
What if development was finished a year before a game was actually released and that remaining time was spent developing 'Optional' content to be released on Day One?
When you defend 'optional' content (that is actual content, not just weapon and character skins) that is released for a price on Day One simply because of the fact that it's 'optional', you're telling the Publishers/Developers that it's ok to start removing some of the things I mentioned above and charge you extra for them because they are after all, unnecessary to complete the game.
Is everyone ok with that?
...And this is what we like to call a Slippery Slope.
To put it simply, this entire post up here?
Is crap.
This is always the fallback argument: "But if this feature is optional, isn't this feature also optional? What about this one?"When you defend 'optional' content (that is actual content, not just weapon and character skins) that is released for a price on Day One simply because of the fact that it's 'optional', you're telling the Publishers/Developers that it's ok to start removing some of the things I mentioned above and charge you extra for them because they are after all, unnecessary to complete the game.
To put it simply, this argument falls completely flat. Why? Because those other features you mentioned? Aren't optional. They are core features. You're fabricating a possible what-if scenario in an attempt to make the situation appear worse. It's true, there's a possibilty (though infintessimally small) that a company could decide to chop a game up like that. But it hasn't happened yet. Hasn't happened ever in the history of Bioware. And to say that we're "okay" with it implies they're doing something wrong.
If the anti Day-1 folks want to make an argument, do so without the slippery slope of "If you let them do this they WILL do this" or the "It's like buying a car with no wheels". None of those two examples fit, and you know it. It doesn't help your case.
Modifié par BobSmith101, 27 février 2012 - 08:48 .
LOST SPARTANJLC wrote...
Fenris447 wrote...
Welcome to capitalism. A company can put out what they want, when they want, for the price they want.
A consumer can then decide if it's worth the price to them. You have no real voice but your wallet.
That's the way I see it , if you don't like your options don't buy based on your own individual reasons.
Fenris447 wrote...
I just don't understand where everyone gets this idea that they're entitled to anything. You don't have a RIGHT to the content. You buy your right to it. If $10 is too much for you, you don't get the content. Can someone tell me why they deserve the content at whatever price THEY want?
Yate wrote...
Wow. Just email EA your credit card info, why don't you?
Seriously, I can't believe you're all dumb enough to let EA get away with this. DUH, WAKE UP PEOPLES.
Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 février 2012 - 08:53 .
Fenris447 wrote...
I just don't understand where everyone gets this idea that they're entitled to anything. You don't have a RIGHT to the content. You buy your right to it. If $10 is too much for you, you don't get the content. Can someone tell me why they deserve the content at whatever price THEY want?
Retour en haut
