307 réponses à ce sujet

[Draconis6666]

wrdnshprd wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...
<>
or ppl are upset cause they think whining about it will get something for free [i hope it doesnt]

im expecting to get what was advertised.. if you look at the sticky, bioware advertised the game as 'complete, right out of the box'.

well if a CE buyer gets access to story content out of the box  that the SE player has to pay extra for, the SE is not exactly comple is it.

no it isnt.. you can try to tell yourself that it is.. more power to you... it doesnt make the above statement any less true.

But it is bioware that decides what the "complete" game they are selling you is, you can disagree that something else should be in it but that doesnt make them any less right either. Just because you feel that the game is incomplete without this DLC doesnt mean that bioware is any less right in saying that it is complete without it. The argument here is a difference of opinoin on what makes a complete game and in that regard both sides are right and both sides are wrong depending on how you look at it.. That doesnt mean bioware is obligated to change their opinion and give you anything though because you disagree with their opinion of what is a complete game.

[robmokron]

Scary Shepard wrote...

robmokron wrote...

it actually is a new purchase incentive.. for CE

How? The CE is both more expensive and at the time of writing is nigh-impossible to obtain on consoles.

buy a used version if the CE edition and tell me in prothy is in there =)

[Survivalist]

It might have already been said but the flaw in the "how game development chart" is that the "day one dlc" could be included in the budget for the game. In fact that would be some good marketing, if they secretly budgeted for day one dlc then offered it for free...
Anyway my opinion (not that anyone cares) is that bioware are perfectly entitled to release this dlc, it's business. However I personally believe it offers exceeding poor value for money so will not be buying it, this is the reason I don't buy most dlcs -they are overpriced for the content they add. I could come up with analogies but cba.

[Scary Shepard]

Cody211282 wrote...

Your veiw of DLC and mine are a bit diffrent and I'm totoaly ok with that, I just think it's wrong for something that was made at the same time to cost moeny since I'm already paying for it. Then again I am also again the "true end of the game" DLC like Arivial and to a lesser extent LotSB, those both felt like they were ripped out and should have been in the main game.

I'm perfectly fine with them coming back to a project and releasing a cool side quest here or there, like BDTS or GoA to add on to the game. But stripping out story and stuff you have already worked on to jack up the price of the game rubs me wrong.

No problem. I think such marketing tactics do capitalise on the completionist tendencies and vulnerability to "one-upmanship" that unfortunately are inherent to many of us gamers; it's cunning and depending on your views, underhanded also. But then again, products are promoted to make the most money from their target audiences. Always will be.

[Scary Shepard]

robmokron wrote...

Scary Shepard wrote...

robmokron wrote...

it actually is a new purchase incentive.. for CE

How? The CE is both more expensive and at the time of writing is nigh-impossible to obtain on consoles.

buy a used version if the CE edition and tell me in prothy is in there =)

I think I'm missing your point somewhere. From Ashes will be code linked on the CE just like any DLC, so 9/10 used copies won't have it. The CE is far more expensive that the SE, so it makes no sense financially to buy it just for the DLC either.

[Cody211282]

Draconis6666 wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...

Scary Shepard wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...

Considering it was being made at the same time the game was being worked on I would say someone decided to take it out, move it to a DLC team to take care of and then not even bother to try to hide it.


I honestly think most people are missing what I'm upset about.

Let me indulge in my car metaphor again.

When I bought my Golf 2 years ago, the nice people at Volkswagen were also offering an additional enhancement to the car called ACC, which would give me variable suspension. When the car was being developed, needless to say the ability to have such technology in the car was also being developed at some expense.

If I was to take it, it would have cost me £1000 extra. However, I did not for one second think that I was entitled to it, simply because I was paying for the initial product. Nor did it occur to me that simply because it was developed along with the car itself, that it was somehow "removed" from the initial design along the way. It was always intended to be optional.

It was an accessory. Additional. I declined because I didn't want it. It didn't devalue the car for me in any way: I still love it to pieces.

This DLC was developed alongside ME3. ME3 will still be functional regardless of whether you buy it- that decision is yours alone to make.

If upon finshing ME3 I decide "wow, this game sure would have felt incomplete without that DLC" then I will gladly retract everything I've said. I'd also eat my hat at the same time mind.

But the ACC probably also cost extra becuase the parts are higher quality, plus they are replacing something with a higher quality product then what is alreay there instead of adding something new to it. This would be like hearing that being able to roll down your windows cost extra(with rolling them back up being a bit more as well).

Now I know that the game isn't incomplete. I know this peice of DLC is a side thing(or at least I really really hope) but so are the side quests, extra weapons, fish tank, and vangaurd class. I don't need them to complete the game but that doesn't mean it's not part of what was part of the game and since it was being worked on durring the same time should be added in.

Also I like talking to you more then the other one, I think he might be rabbid.

It also doesnt mean that it SHOULD be added in. Not everything worked on during the production of a game makes it into the game. They arent obligated to give you everything they worked on during the development, and in fact in amost no case wil you get that. There is tons of stuff that is worked on during development that is never even seen becasue its cut for one reason or another. You're right everything you mention is optional to the game and any of it could be cut, but if its cut so that the game can be finished by its deadline so that you can buy it in stores on the date they say you will be able to. Then worked on separately to be completed during the phase of development where it is no longer possible to add content to the main game build, (which is why you get day 1 patches etc) there is no obligation for them to provide you that content for free.

When you pay them the $60 for the game your paying them for their work during the game's development cycle your not paying for their work developing something else that has its own development cycle. If they chose to give that to you as free DLC then thats their option as a business. you feel they should include it, they feel otherwise. Thats all it comes down to really, they decided that they think you should have to pay for their work outside normal development and some people disagree. That doesnt make them wrong and it doesnt make you wrong either, the nature of the consumer market is that both sides can be right.

If you as a consumer think it should be included you can chose to tell them that you think its not worth what they are asking you to pay for it and refuse to pay. That doesnt mean they are wrong either though, they are still entitled to sell their work however they want. As long as people are willing to pay them for it then they are right from their standpoint. Consumerism is not a black and white thing where one side is wrong and the other is right.

OK sorry if I seem a bit short with you but Ive had this convo a lot recently so I'm going to bold the peices I want to talk about, to see more of what I'm saying look at my convo with Scary Shepard .

"It also doesnt mean that it SHOULD be added in. Not everything
worked on during the production of a game makes it into the game. They
arent obligated to give you everything they worked on during the
development, and in fact in amost no case wil you get that. "

Very Good point, and I agree a big part of making a good story is editing. But the problem here isn't that it was cut and discarded. It is that it was cut and moved to a diffrent team to be sold as DLC when in fact it should have just been in the main game anyway just like the rest of the side quests. I am also fine with them offering this as incentive to buy new instead of used, that way people who actualy buy the game still get the everything that is in the game.


When you pay them the $60 for the game your paying them for
their work during the game's development cycle your not paying for their
work developing something else that has its own development cycle.

And my problem with this is since it was ment to be day one DLC, and thats how it was planned from the get go, it reaks of having been removed from the main game. No I don't have any proof but with how long it takes to add in something like this and the fact that it was planned to be in the CE it just heavily points to that, or at least thats what I see I could be wrong.

If you as a consumer think it should be included you can chose
to tell them that you think its not worth what they are asking you to
pay for it and refuse to pay. That doesnt mean they are wrong either
though, they are still entitled to sell their work however they want. As
long as people are willing to pay them for it then they are right from
their standpoint. Consumerism is not a black and white thing where one
side is wrong and the other is right.

If you couldn't tell my biggest problem is I fell very ripped off. I understand that they could sell this game mission by mission if they wanted to but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.Also i really should point out that I love the hell out of the free market, what I don't love is people saying that I'm being an entitled brat or that I'm not a fan just because I don't agree with blindly throwing money at any franchise that I have liked in the past.

[robmokron]

Survivalist wrote...

It might have already been said but the flaw in the "how game development chart" is that the "day one dlc" could be included in the budget for the game. In fact that would be some good marketing, if they secretly budgeted for day one dlc then offered it for free...
Anyway my opinion (not that anyone cares) is that bioware are perfectly entitled to release this dlc, it's business. However I personally believe it offers exceeding poor value for money so will not be buying it, this is the reason I don't buy most dlcs -they are overpriced for the content they add. I could come up with analogies but cba.

not that i wont buy dlc (i have ce) this veiw point is the best so far against dlc. I can agree that 10 dollars for 2-4 hours of content when a 60 dollar game is around (multiplayer no included) is 30+ hours. your paying for 15% of the game for like 5 percent content

nice post

Modifié par robmokron, 24 février 2012 - 10:10 .

[Red Son Rising]

wrdnshprd wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...
<>
or ppl are upset cause they think whining about it will get something for free [i hope it doesnt]

im expecting to get what was advertised.. if you look at the sticky, bioware advertised the game as 'complete, right out of the box'.

well if a CE buyer gets access to story content out of the box  that the SE player has to pay extra for, the SE is not exactly comple is it.

no it isnt.. you can try to tell yourself that it is.. more power to you... it doesnt make the above statement any less true.

ME2 is a perfect example because its complete at launch. optional dlc like zaeed was available at launch but wasnt essential to completing the game. kasumi and overlord came later and again, they are completely optional

its absurd to think dlc shudnt be worked on or planned prior to launch day especially in narrative based games. dialogue has to be recorded, assets created and none of this happens overnight

the process works. it looks like ME3 will have more dlc and be supported more thuroughly because they planned ahead and worked on the dlc while the team was still there. i hate dlc 6-8mo out, gimme dlc faster

[robmokron]

Scary Shepard wrote...

robmokron wrote...

Scary Shepard wrote...

robmokron wrote...

it actually is a new purchase incentive.. for CE

How? The CE is both more expensive and at the time of writing is nigh-impossible to obtain on consoles.

buy a used version if the CE edition and tell me in prothy is in there =)

I think I'm missing your point somewhere. From Ashes will be code linked on the CE just like any DLC, so 9/10 used copies won't have it. The CE is far more expensive that the SE, so it makes no sense financially to buy it just for the DLC either.

im proving that from ashes is a new buy incentive, buying the CE used will not give you from ashes. thats my ppoint. may sound dumb, but its true

[Cody211282]

Scary Shepard wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...

Your veiw of DLC and mine are a bit diffrent and I'm totoaly ok with that, I just think it's wrong for something that was made at the same time to cost moeny since I'm already paying for it. Then again I am also again the "true end of the game" DLC like Arivial and to a lesser extent LotSB, those both felt like they were ripped out and should have been in the main game.

I'm perfectly fine with them coming back to a project and releasing a cool side quest here or there, like BDTS or GoA to add on to the game. But stripping out story and stuff you have already worked on to jack up the price of the game rubs me wrong.

No problem. I think such marketing tactics do capitalise on the completionist tendencies and vulnerability to "one-upmanship" that unfortunately are inherent to many of us gamers; it's cunning and depending on your views, underhanded also. But then again, products are promoted to make the most money from their target audiences. Always will be.

Oh I'm fine with them trying to make money off of me, hell I want them to try. I just want something new and worth the money I'm investing into it.

[Cody211282]

Red Son Rising wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...
<>
or ppl are upset cause they think whining about it will get something for free [i hope it doesnt]

im expecting to get what was advertised.. if you look at the sticky, bioware advertised the game as 'complete, right out of the box'.

well if a CE buyer gets access to story content out of the box  that the SE player has to pay extra for, the SE is not exactly comple is it.

no it isnt.. you can try to tell yourself that it is.. more power to you... it doesnt make the above statement any less true.

ME2 is a perfect example because its complete at launch. optional dlc like zaeed was available at launch but wasnt essential to completing the game. kasumi and overlord came later and again, they are completely optional

its absurd to think dlc shudnt be worked on or planned prior to launch day especially in narrative based games. dialogue has to be recorded, assets created and none of this happens overnight

the process works. it looks like ME3 will have more dlc and be supported more thuroughly because they planned ahead and worked on the dlc while the team was still there. i hate dlc 6-8mo out, gimme dlc faster

I would love to agree with this but they did say arivial was the "true ending" of ME2, you cant say somethings complete then come back and add a major plot point and change when it ends.

[Draconis6666]

Survivalist wrote...

It might have already been said but the flaw in the "how game development chart" is that the "day one dlc" could be included in the budget for the game. In fact that would be some good marketing, if they secretly budgeted for day one dlc then offered it for free...
Anyway my opinion (not that anyone cares) is that bioware are perfectly entitled to release this dlc, it's business. However I personally believe it offers exceeding poor value for money so will not be buying it, this is the reason I don't buy most dlcs -they are overpriced for the content they add. I could come up with analogies but cba.

Its not just budgeting though its development time, what that chart shows is that if you add the development time for that content into the main game your extending the development cycle and the entire game takes longer to be completed. Which is really the point, day one DLC could definatly be included into the main game if you wanted to wait a month more for the entire game.

As for DLC being overpriced for the content they add i think thats a subjective statement, and if you think so then by all means your right. If you dont want to pay that much for it then its overpriced for you. From my personal standpoint I would much rather pay $10 for 3hrs of DLC content that i can reuse than $9-10 for a  ticket to see a 2 1/2 hour movie one time, to me the value of what i get for $10 is far better than the value of alot of other things i could spend that $10 on. You disagree and thats fine, thats your right as a consumer, and its part of the reason I agree with DLC. You have the option to say, "I dont want that and I dont want to pay for it"  instead of them just taking longer to make the game putting all the DLC into the base game and chargnig you more for it which they could easily do instead.

[wrdnshprd]

Draconis6666 wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...
<>
or ppl are upset cause they think whining about it will get something for free [i hope it doesnt]

im expecting to get what was advertised.. if you look at the sticky, bioware advertised the game as 'complete, right out of the box'.

well if a CE buyer gets access to story content out of the box  that the SE player has to pay extra for, the SE is not exactly comple is it.

no it isnt.. you can try to tell yourself that it is.. more power to you... it doesnt make the above statement any less true.

But it is bioware that decides what the "complete" game they are selling you is, you can disagree that something else should be in it but that doesnt make them any less right either. Just because you feel that the game is incomplete without this DLC doesnt mean that bioware is any less right in saying that it is complete without it. The argument here is a difference of opinoin on what makes a complete game and in that regard both sides are right and both sides are wrong depending on how you look at it.. That doesnt mean bioware is obligated to change their opinion and give you anything though because you disagree with their opinion of what is a complete game.

well ill ask you guys the same question i asked the people in the sticky..  what if bioware decided to include liara or ashley as the day 1 DLC?  would you be ok with that.. wouldnt bioware still be deciding what was compete and what was not?

now before you get the flamethrower out, my only point in asking this question was to illustrate that it shouldnt matter WHAT content was monetized at launch, but that the content WAS monetized at launch.

[nitefyre410]

Cody211282 wrote...
*snip*

*snip*

If you couldn't tell my biggest problem is I fell very ripped off. I understand that they could sell this game mission by mission if they wanted to but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.Also i really should point out that I love the hell out of the free market, what I don't love is people saying that I'm being an entitled brat or that I'm not a fan just because I don't agree with blindly throwing money at any franchise that I have liked in the past.

 

^QFT  

matter that is so excellently started this is for

I may not be entitled to content or what bioware may deem  as a complete game ..  but Bioware is damn sure not entitled to get my money just because I'm a  fan of the series...

I'm consumer and customer  1st and  a fan second.

[littlezack]

Cody211282 wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...

wrdnshprd wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...
<>
or ppl are upset cause they think whining about it will get something for free [i hope it doesnt]

im expecting to get what was advertised.. if you look at the sticky, bioware advertised the game as 'complete, right out of the box'.

well if a CE buyer gets access to story content out of the box  that the SE player has to pay extra for, the SE is not exactly comple is it.

no it isnt.. you can try to tell yourself that it is.. more power to you... it doesnt make the above statement any less true.

ME2 is a perfect example because its complete at launch. optional dlc like zaeed was available at launch but wasnt essential to completing the game. kasumi and overlord came later and again, they are completely optional

its absurd to think dlc shudnt be worked on or planned prior to launch day especially in narrative based games. dialogue has to be recorded, assets created and none of this happens overnight

the process works. it looks like ME3 will have more dlc and be supported more thuroughly because they planned ahead and worked on the dlc while the team was still there. i hate dlc 6-8mo out, gimme dlc faster

I would love to agree with this but they did say arivial was the "true ending" of ME2, you cant say somethings complete then come back and add a major plot point and change when it ends.

I don't recall them ever saying that or anything like that. I remember them saying it was the bridge between the two games, but the ending? 

[Red Son Rising]

i want dlc released on a regular basis in a timely fashion. i dont want traditional expansion packs that show up a year or two after the fact. i like dlc, i dont want another game.. ooh, wait a min

BOLD STATEMENT
if BW listened to gamers we'd get ME games like ubisoft does the Assassins Creed series: new game every year, barely any dlc in between. 

QUESTION
would gamers be happier if ME3 had no dlc and ME4 came out 8-12mo later?

id be furious. i want my games to be supported not abandoned for the next shiny new thing a few months later. i want MMO style support for my single player games and i have no problem PAYING FOR IT

im not asking for a handout. im not asking ppl to work for free and give away something theyve dedicated a year or two of their lives to finish. 

Modifié par Red Son Rising, 24 février 2012 - 10:21 .

[Red Son Rising]

littlezack wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...
I would love to agree with this but they did say arivial was the "true ending" of ME2, you cant say somethings complete then come back and add a major plot point and change when it ends.

I don't recall them ever saying that or anything like that. I remember them saying it was the bridge between the two games, but the ending? 

i avoided mentioning arrival deliberately. its pretty obvious they wanted to do something different for the ending and either ran outta time or didnt figure out how/what to do until well after the main game happened

thats exactly the situation i want to avoid. i dont want dlc that rewrites the game because it was incomplete at launch. i think ME2 was complete and they decided to retcon the ending after launch. and i hate em for it

[edit] sorry for double post. im not a regular rage poster, having a lot of trouble keeping up with the pace

Modifié par Red Son Rising, 24 février 2012 - 10:22 .

[TheStoner]

Red Son Rising wrote...

i want dlc released on a regular basis in a timely fashion. i dont want traditional expansion packs that show up a year or two after the fact. i like dlc, i dont want another game.. ooh, wait a min

BOLD STATEMENT
if BW listened to gamers we'd get ME games like ubisoft does the Assassins Creed series: new game every year, barely any dlc in between. 

QUESTION
would gamers be happier if ME3 had no dlc and ME4 came out 8-12mo later?

id be furious. i want my games to be supported not abandoned for the next shiny new thing a few months later. i want MMO style support for my single player games and i have no problem PAYING FOR IT

im not asking for a handout. im not asking ppl to work for free and give away something theyve dedicated a year or two of their lives to finish. 

The problem isn't dlc it's charged dlc produced pre-launch. We could certainly do without that.

[Tsantilas]

I'm calling bull**** on this. This still doesn't explain why core content ended up being developed separately and sold as DLC rather than being part of the main game. What does different teams being payed have to do with anything? Yeah yeah the DLC content was developed separately and by a different team. So what? What does that have to do with anything?

The game will be out on day 1. The DLC will be out on day 1. Take DLC content-> add into game and release in the core game since they'll both be ready at the same goddamn time. EA wants money. That is all it's about. Or do you expect me to believe that they can't afford to pay the developers unless they get an extra 10 bucks on top of the 60? Greed. End of.

[wrdnshprd]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Cody211282 wrote...
*snip*

*snip*

If you couldn't tell my biggest problem is I fell very ripped off. I understand that they could sell this game mission by mission if they wanted to but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.Also i really should point out that I love the hell out of the free market, what I don't love is people saying that I'm being an entitled brat or that I'm not a fan just because I don't agree with blindly throwing money at any franchise that I have liked in the past.

 

^QFT  

matter that is so excellently started this is for

I may not be entitled to content or what bioware may deem  as a complete game ..  but Bioware is damn sure not entitled to get my money just because I'm a  fan of the series...

I'm consumer and customer  1st and  a fan second.

now this i can stand behind.

[DomainFairy]

Red Son Rising wrote...

i want dlc released on a regular basis in a timely fashion. i dont want traditional expansion packs that show up a year or two after the fact. i like dlc, i dont want another game.. ooh, wait a min

BOLD STATEMENT
if BW listened to gamers we'd get ME games like ubisoft does the Assassins Creed series: new game every year, barely any dlc in between. 

QUESTION
would gamers be happier if ME3 had no dlc and ME4 came out 8-12mo later?

id be furious. i want my games to be supported not abandoned for the next shiny new thing a few months later. i want MMO style support for my single player games and i have no problem PAYING FOR IT

im not asking for a handout. im not asking ppl to work for free and give away something theyve dedicated a year or two of their lives to finish. 

Looks like a BW employee Derek Larke does'nt agree with the "game a year" scenario. And I have to agree with him although I totally want more sequels and expansion packs than dlc.
darklarke.com/2012/02/24/65/

[Red Son Rising]

[edit]im ignoring all mention of BW being in it for the money. its ridiculous and unreasonable to expect a business to operate like a charity. if they dont make money they wont make games 

ive always found it funny whe ppl treat gaming like a glorified fanservice. video games are a multibillion dollar industry: none of these companies are in business because they just wanna make ppl smile

its always about the money, welcome to the real world

TheStoner wrote...

Red Son Rising wrote...

i want dlc released on a regular basis in a timely fashion. i dont want traditional expansion packs that show up a year or two after the fact. i like dlc, i dont want another game.. ooh, wait a min

BOLD STATEMENT
if BW listened to gamers we'd get ME games like ubisoft does the Assassins Creed series: new game every year, barely any dlc in between. 

QUESTION
would gamers be happier if ME3 had no dlc and ME4 came out 8-12mo later?

id be furious. i want my games to be supported not abandoned for the next shiny new thing a few months later. i want MMO style support for my single player games and i have no problem PAYING FOR IT

im not asking for a handout. im not asking ppl to work for free and give away something theyve dedicated a year or two of their lives to finish. 

The problem isn't dlc it's charged dlc produced pre-launch. We could certainly do without that.

i cant do without it. the problem is ppl didnt reserve the CE edition thats obviously made for the fans and BW decided to charge everyone else for that content. its not in the $60 game, its in the $70 version: pay the difference

Modifié par Red Son Rising, 24 février 2012 - 10:30 .

[Luxure]

People still forget that this DLC was supposed to be CE exclusive. But they still **** the bed about it.

[Draconis6666]

Cody211282 wrote...


OK sorry if I seem a bit short with you but Ive had this convo a lot recently so I'm going to bold the peices I want to talk about, to see more of what I'm saying look at my convo with Scary Shepard .

"It also doesnt mean that it SHOULD be added in. Not everything
worked on during the production of a game makes it into the game. They
arent obligated to give you everything they worked on during the
development, and in fact in amost no case wil you get that. "

Very Good point, and I agree a big part of making a good story is editing. But the problem here isn't that it was cut and discarded. It is that it was cut and moved to a diffrent team to be sold as DLC when in fact it should have just been in the main game anyway just like the rest of the side quests. I am also fine with them offering this as incentive to buy new instead of used, that way people who actualy buy the game still get the everything that is in the game.


When you pay them the $60 for the game your paying them for
their work during the game's development cycle your not paying for their
work developing something else that has its own development cycle.

And my problem with this is since it was ment to be day one DLC, and thats how it was planned from the get go, it reaks of having been removed from the main game. No I don't have any proof but with how long it takes to add in something like this and the fact that it was planned to be in the CE it just heavily points to that, or at least thats what I see I could be wrong.

If you as a consumer think it should be included you can chose
to tell them that you think its not worth what they are asking you to
pay for it and refuse to pay. That doesnt mean they are wrong either
though, they are still entitled to sell their work however they want. As
long as people are willing to pay them for it then they are right from
their standpoint. Consumerism is not a black and white thing where one
side is wrong and the other is right.

If you couldn't tell my biggest problem is I fell very ripped off. I understand that they could sell this game mission by mission if they wanted to but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.Also i really should point out that I love the hell out of the free market, what I don't love is people saying that I'm being an entitled brat or that I'm not a fan just because I don't agree with blindly throwing money at any franchise that I have liked in the past.

Very Good point, and I agree a big part of making a good story is editing. But the problem here isn't that it was cut and discarded. It is that it was cut and moved to a diffrent team to be sold as DLC when in fact it should have just been in the main game anyway just like the rest of the side quests. I am also fine with them offering this as incentive to buy new instead of used, that way people who actualy buy the game still get the everything that is in the game.

I would agree with this point if all the work was done during development, but if it isnt which we have no evidence that it was in this case. Then the issue becomes should they delay the entire game to finish this content and put it into the game? Expecialy in the case where DLC is worked on by members of the same team that work on the original game. If you add the DLC content into the main build of the game, that adds development time to the main game. Those people who work on the DLC have to work on the DLC in addition to the content they are already working on. You cant just magicaly insert the content into the game and not increase the development time, everything takes time adding more content adds more time which means yes we probably could have gotten the From Ashes DLC with the game, but we'd be buying the game 2-3 weeks later most likely. Considering that ME 3 was already late in terms of its original development plan its not that hard to see why they wouldnt do this.


And my problem with this is since it was ment to be day one DLC, and thats how it was planned from the get go, it reaks of having been removed from the main game. No I don't have any proof but with how long it takes to add in something like this and the fact that it was planned to be in the CE it just heavily points to that, or at least thats what I see I could be wrong.

You are right here in that it easily could have been, but the problem with this goes back to something I mentioned earlier in that this suspicion makes it nearly impossible for Developers to "win" either way. If they cut content and dont pre plan for it later as DLC then they have to do all the DLC pre production and develeopment after release, at which point people complain that there is "not enough DLC" or "DLC is taking too long". If they attempt to correct this by deciding at the time they cut something "hey this should be DLC later, lets plan for that so we can do the pre production and early development early and get it out to the consumers as soon as possible" people complain that it aws cut from the game for the sole reason of selling it.  There is of course the option that exactly what you say is true also and they cut content simply to sell, but I hope you can see my point in that either way they cant really win.



If you couldn't tell my biggest problem is I fell very ripped off. I understand that they could sell this game mission by mission if they wanted to but that doesn't mean I have to be happy about it.Also i really should point out that I love the hell out of the free market, what I don't love is people saying that I'm being an entitled brat or that I'm not a fan just because I don't agree with blindly throwing money at any franchise that I have liked in the past.

Agree completely and if thats what you thought I was trying to say, I apoplogize i wasnt attempting to say that you are acting like an entitled brat because you dont want to blindly spend your money. Because indeed thats nothing of the sort its simply being a reasonable consumer. What I was saying is that the problem with the issue is that for every person like you who simply isnt sure that they feel the product is worth the value being asked there are just as many who just want stuff for free because they want it. I was in no way trying to say that you are one of those people, but they definatly exist.  As a business they have to do what they can to make money, as a publicly traded buisness they are even more obligated to do so, they have responsibilities to their share holders to increase the value of those shares. Unfortunately the policies they use to achieve this will never please everyone. You feel that you are being ripped off and thats your right as a consumer, and you are 100% right. If you feel your being ripped off then from  your point of view you are and thats all there is to it. 

[Unfallen_Satan]

I am just fed with certain DLC. Overlord was great. I defeated the Collectors and discovered a separate adventure involving Cerberus AI experimentation. LotSB was just as engrossing, maybe more because I like Liara, but there is no question it is core game content. Not helping Liara would be like not giving a damn after Ash got abducted by Collector's. If From Ashes deal with side story involving Prothean history and have no bearing on the Reaper invasion, I gladly buy it because I want to know more. If it's clear that the FA content is experienced by Shepard during the course of ME3 story, and if you don't have the DLC you know you missed something essential, then I am mad.

I don't honestly care if it's Day 1, Day 100, or Day -10. It's the type of DLC released. There was a lot of criticism over this point, over the content of the DLC, but it's being drowned by louder complaints over the fact that most of the code is in the game and and it's Day 1. However, the criticisms over content is a bit premature because most don't know the exact content in From Ashes.

Modifié par Unfallen_Satan, 24 février 2012 - 10:29 .