227 réponses à ce sujet

[Moonshadow_Dark]

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

It's easy to say EA is simply taking advantage of response, it sucks because the individual is smart and the population is stupid, leaving little choice if you want to experience the full extent of a game.

But the population is made up of individuals.

What just happened?

It's actually a really simply explained social phenomenon, an easily understandable common example being peer pressure. Got to have the popular thing, got to shell out big to get it. It's really no different than other popular things that happen to be expensive. But with video games the bar wasn't always so high.

So what you're saying is get enough smart people together and eventually they will do do someting stupid and roll with it.


That actually makes sense.

I'm serious, it does.

Modifié par Moonshadow_Dark, 25 février 2012 - 08:19 .

[Farbautisonn]

Abirn wrote...

Activision has singlehandedly ruined Blizzard.  For that alone they are the all time worst company and cannot be dethroned from it.  EA appears to be trying at times, not so much at other but at least sometimes they try.  

If you want a company that is doing it right  look at valve. 

-Id beg to differ. Starcraft 2 was good. And the storyline was intact. You were able to sit back into that chair and enjoy the story from the word "Go". Diablo is on the way and whilst I never liked that IP it seems to be more or less precisely what the fans are looking for. WoW... Well. Its not my style. I played casually for a couple of years and whilst it wasnt that bad, it wasny my thing. Alot of people swear by it though and just as Bioware was the gold standard for storytelling, WoW has become the gold standard for MMORPG's.

EA has Origin, Westwood and Bullfrog plus a plethora of other companies an IPs on their concience. You might have such a strong feeling for Blizzard as it was that you feel it is worse. I undestand. I have that emotion for Bloware, and I fancied Bullfrog and Westwood alot. But I am going to propose that EA has more on her concience. And that this is the reason why EA has the reputation it has.

[THEE_DEATHMASTER]

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

It's
easy to say EA is simply taking advantage of response, it sucks because
the individual is smart and the population is stupid, leaving little
choice if you want to experience the full extent of a game.

But the population is made up of individuals.

What just happened?

It's
actually a really simply explained social phenomenon, an easily
understandable common example being peer pressure. Got to have the
popular thing, got to shell out big to get it. It's really no different
than other popular things that happen to be expensive. But with video
games the bar wasn't always so high.

So what you're saying is get enough smart people together and eventually they will do do someting stupid and roll with it.


That actually makes sense.

I'm serious, it does.

I wouldn't dare suggest anything of the sort because it's not feasible (dumb people will always be the majority in our pampered human way of life). I'm just saying things are the way they are and they make sense, but it still sucks.

Modifié par THEE_DEATHMASTER, 25 février 2012 - 08:22 .

[Cody211282]

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

It's easy to say EA is simply taking advantage of response, it sucks because the individual is smart and the population is stupid, leaving little choice if you want to experience the full extent of a game.

But the population is made up of individuals.

What just happened?

It's actually a really simply explained social phenomenon, an easily understandable common example being peer pressure. Got to have the popular thing, got to shell out big to get it. It's really no different than other popular things that happen to be expensive. But with video games the bar wasn't always so high.

So what you're saying is get enough smart people together and eventually they will do do someting stupid and roll with it.


That actually makes sense.

I'm serious, it does.

Mob mentality is a scary thing.

[Moonshadow_Dark]

Cody211282 wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

THEE_DEATHMASTER wrote...

It's easy to say EA is simply taking advantage of response, it sucks because the individual is smart and the population is stupid, leaving little choice if you want to experience the full extent of a game.

But the population is made up of individuals.

What just happened?

It's actually a really simply explained social phenomenon, an easily understandable common example being peer pressure. Got to have the popular thing, got to shell out big to get it. It's really no different than other popular things that happen to be expensive. But with video games the bar wasn't always so high.

So what you're saying is get enough smart people together and eventually they will do do someting stupid and roll with it.


That actually makes sense.

I'm serious, it does.

Mob mentality is a scary thing.

Indeed. That's how Frankenstein's monster died.

HE DID NOTHING WRONG!

Except choke that little girl.

But that was an accident!

[Homebound]

you know we could fix this by simply putting our foot down and not buying any game that has/supports DLC anymore.

[Cainne Chapel]

Honestly... I just dont care and buy what I like, Corporate ethics or "image" be damned.

As long as the company isn't kicking puppies and punching babies. If its something I enjoy I buy it and honestly its REAL hard for me to hate EA or activision or Microsoft or sony or anything company honestly. After all its not like I can sustain myself off of video games (they help... but I need more than just video entertainment in my life).

Although I do commend people for taking a stand... I have to wonder why we/they haven't taken a stand when Horse armor was released? or any other of a plethora of corporate missteps have been done in the past in regards to gaming?

Honestly DLC doesn't bother me, because I either A) Dont buy a VAST majority of it or only Buy ones that interest me as finances and mood fits.

ME3 DLC however interests me very much so I'll buy it. I see no reason to deprive myself of it because I can afford it and I like it. So I'll fill the coffers of EA in this respect. But a vast majority of DLC simply holds no interest for me so I neither get upset nor really care when its released or how much it costs.

People will pay for things they enjoy bottom line. If people can buy cigarrettes, luxury cars, GPSs (which dont NEED to be in cars but do help), Expensive meals, designer clothes, etc etc, I say let him and the market as a whole will figure it out and adjust itself accordingly.

[Moonshadow_Dark]

Hellbound555 wrote...

you know we could fix this by simply putting our foot down and not buying any game that has/supports DLC anymore.

But then we'd have free time.

Free time to spend with our families and significant others.

Who want to talk.

Outside.

In the sun.

*preorders games and shuts the door*

[Abirn]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Abirn wrote...

Activision has singlehandedly ruined Blizzard.  For that alone they are the all time worst company and cannot be dethroned from it.  EA appears to be trying at times, not so much at other but at least sometimes they try.  

If you want a company that is doing it right  look at valve. 

-Id beg to differ. Starcraft 2 was good. And the storyline was intact. You were able to sit back into that chair and enjoy the story from the word "Go". Diablo is on the way and whilst I never liked that IP it seems to be more or less precisely what the fans are looking for. WoW... Well. Its not my style. I played casually for a couple of years and whilst it wasnt that bad, it wasny my thing. Alot of people swear by it though and just as Bioware was the gold standard for storytelling, WoW has become the gold standard for MMORPG's.

EA has Origin, Westwood and Bullfrog plus a plethora of other companies an IPs on their concience. You might have such a strong feeling for Blizzard as it was that you feel it is worse. I undestand. I have that emotion for Bloware, and I fancied Bullfrog and Westwood alot. But I am going to propose that EA has more on her concience. And that this is the reason why EA has the reputation it has.

Complaints about day 1 dlc aside.  Acitvision has caused blizzard to do what is unthinkable in the industry.  If you think the outrage over from ashes is bad, if bioware did what blizzard did to Mass effect 3 the outcry would be 100x worse than what you see on these forums.

They took starcraft 2,  chopped it up into 3 parts and are selling each part for the price of a full game.  I have 100% no doubt that activision was trying to see what they could get away with, hiding behind the good reputation of blizzard.  If any other company decided to do that the **** strom on the internet would be on levels never seen before.  From ashesby far pales in comparason to that.

I'm not saying EA is suddenly a good guy, but its my opinion that activision is worse.

Modifié par Abirn, 25 février 2012 - 08:37 .

[Confused-Shepard]

You know you are practicing bad business when Forbes Magazine criticizes you
Fans are at fault for being so accommodating and gullible, EA is at fault for abusing their trust

[GuardianAngel470]

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...
No the reason they don't make games. Is because. They are making. HATS.

When was the last time you saw a part 3 of a Valve game? NEVER.

When was the last time you saw Valve release a new hat bundle? JUST LAST WEEK!

Seriously, Gabe Newell has a headwear fetish and someone needs to do something about it.

Right, clearly GOTY Portal 2 was just a hat bundle. You clearly aren't interested in having a conversation about real facts. So, have fun. 

Real fact: Valve is hat crazy.

Real fact: Gabe Newell is making bank off of it.

Real fact: STILL NO HALF LIFE 3 OR HALF LIFE 2 EPISODE 3.

It has been like 4 YEARS. That is like 50.000 in Gamer years. I want my damn part 3 already!

Valve comparisons are invalid. Valve is a private company owned by GabeN and his staff. They have absolute creative freedom and can, if they so choose, drive their company into the ground and stop producing anything without pissing off so much as one shareholder.

They can ignore industry trends, popular game mechanics, and take 9 bajillion years to come out with a game because they aren't required by anyone but themselves to make a profit.

To the best of my knowledge, Valve is the only major game developer like that. They are their own publisher, distributor, and developer.

They can do this because of Steam (in my opinion). Bioware can never, ever hope to emulate them. 

[Rorschachinstein]

Breaking the camels back

[LivingHitokiri]

Suprez30 wrote...

I don't agree. Video game before were not exploited like today for more reason than just ' They did not know how much gamer loved their game  and patati patata' . Take a moment to look at how many copies  Super Mario bros Sold .. Done it? Great , we can continue.


It's because of the internet and the industry changed a lot with it. When he compare video game vs going to cinema per hours .. I am sorry Bob . But  I don't  only go  to the cinema for the movies but for the social aspect of it and watching it on a big ass screen. if they charged me 10 bucks to watch it on a  30 inch screen I would stay at home and rent it. Entertainement value ain't  always measurable per $$/hours in most case.

I can make my own spaghetti for 1/5 the prices you get it at the restaurant. I go there for other reason than just eating.


Mass Effect price tag was 40.00$ . Now I pay 70.00$ (PC) . But it's the same THING. Are you starting to figure thing out by now? Where I am going? WHich become  higher with every other DLC..
Some gamer are just addicted or want to keep/stay a 'gamer' .. Know what I mean? They know , we know  that we're [vulgarity] but we keep buying them. I have seen this before..

OR

They want to finish the story because their friend Bob(bob can be anyone) will finish it. Just watch the reaction of the PC communities when their version is released later.  If they say 'This version will be improve' . We will be happy. But if they told us ' Wait for 3 month and we wil lgive you the same crap'.. What the F...K?

People want their stuff when it's 'FLASHY' and 'NEW'. Some will wait for the ultimate super collection in 1 years for 39.99$..But they're rare.

If you had some backbone you could say no. If you really wanted to make a difference you would take those 70 dollars and send it to a charity organization.

My rant is over. I disagree. If we talk about it it's because our subconcious tell us that something is fishy and there's something fishy. So we have the right and we should complain.

You sir, just won the day.
While i agree with the article at some extend  but i highly disagree on his value per hour example.
Each individuals  value their entertainment different and by simply trying to come and throw in couple of mathematics doesnt prove anything.
There is no money per value in entertainment,hence the companies are exploiting this fact in order to make more of it.

[Moonshadow_Dark]

GuardianAngel470 wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...

scyphozoa wrote...

Moonshadow_Dark wrote...
No the reason they don't make games. Is because. They are making. HATS.

When was the last time you saw a part 3 of a Valve game? NEVER.

When was the last time you saw Valve release a new hat bundle? JUST LAST WEEK!

Seriously, Gabe Newell has a headwear fetish and someone needs to do something about it.

Right, clearly GOTY Portal 2 was just a hat bundle. You clearly aren't interested in having a conversation about real facts. So, have fun. 

Real fact: Valve is hat crazy.

Real fact: Gabe Newell is making bank off of it.

Real fact: STILL NO HALF LIFE 3 OR HALF LIFE 2 EPISODE 3.

It has been like 4 YEARS. That is like 50.000 in Gamer years. I want my damn part 3 already!

Valve comparisons are invalid. Valve is a private company owned by GabeN and his staff. They have absolute creative freedom and can, if they so choose, drive their company into the ground and stop producing anything without pissing off so much as one shareholder.

They can ignore industry trends, popular game mechanics, and take 9 bajillion years to come out with a game because they aren't required by anyone but themselves to make a profit.

To the best of my knowledge, Valve is the only major game developer like that. They are their own publisher, distributor, and developer.

They can do this because of Steam (in my opinion). Bioware can never, ever hope to emulate them. 

You know what industry trend they should follow?

FINISHING WHAT THEY STARTED.

Imagine how tweaked you would be if Bioware said "Hey guys, Mass Effect 2 was cool and all but instead of making Mass Effect 3, we're gonna just derp around for years and never tell you how it ends. lol enjoy these hats!"

It's like what Square Enix is doing with Kingdom Hearts 3. I do not like cliffhangers. Finish the BUCKING story already! What the HELL!?!

Modifié par Moonshadow_Dark, 25 février 2012 - 08:49 .

[Cody211282]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

You know you are practicing bad business when Forbes Magazine criticizes you
Fans are at fault for being so accommodating and gullible, EA is at fault for abusing their trust

You forgot the mention that zelots are at fault for white knighting for a friken publicy owned multibillion dollar company. Seroiusly the devotion of some peope rival most cults.

[Homebound]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

You know you are practicing bad business when Forbes Magazine criticizes you
Fans are at fault for being so accommodating and gullible, EA is at fault for abusing their trust

/thread

[Admortis]

If DLC had comparative gameplay/cost to the game proper, I would endorse it fully.

Of course typically the cost/gameplay hours ratio of DLC is a little cost heavy.

[Rorschachinstein]

This industry took of like rocket fire. It's only roughly 25 years old if you don't count the collapse that came before. And it's rivaling other industries in revenue, with the strongest purchasing ratio of any consumer out there at it's heart(young adults).

[GuardianAngel470]

Rorschachinstein wrote...

This industry took of like rocket fire. It's only roughly 25 years old if you don't count the collapse that came before. And it's rivaling other industries in revenue, with the strongest purchasing ratio of any consumer out there at it's heart(young adults).

It's actually more profitable than the movie industry in the US. Mind boggling really when you think about it.

[Vincent-Vega]

Great article, couldn't agree more.
I preordered the ME3 CE months ago and while I also admire everybody who won't buy ME3 or the dlc, I just can't do it. The first two games were just too good and I don't wanna wait longer than necessary to see the end of the trilogy.
But I most certainly will buy the next bioware game months after release when it's cheaper.

It's a bit like eating meat. While I admire vegetarians who don't eat it due to moral or health reasons, it just tastes too damn good.

Modifié par dr_age86, 25 février 2012 - 09:42 .

[Paula Deen]

Yeah, the article was spot on. What bothered me about the DLC was that it's either quite integral to the story/lore (which makes its very nature of being DLC absurd and unethical), or it's superfluous...which is horrible writing, planning, and a waste of an excellent plot element and character.

Even that, though, wasn't quite the breaking point for me: it was the absurd $10 price tag. I bought the Kasumi pack, and I still don't regret that purchase, but that was different because it was 1) Not ready and finished well before Day 1; 2) The character was not integral to the story at all, but was a great, memorable additional character; 3) It was a quite post-release extra DLC for the dedicated fans and players for those who were willing to pay for it.

In the end, that's what it comes down to: a central plot element/character was finished well before release and is priced at ten freaking dollars; the only other possibility is that the prothean is not a central plot element/character, which is indicative of a gigantic waste of story-telling, dramatic, and character potential. I don't know which is worse, but at least the latter is merely bad planning and/or incompetence, and not malice.

EDIT: To clarify, I did end up pre-ordering the CE from Origin, mainly because the entire package/bonuses made that extra charge worth it, overall--I would absolutely buy the soundtrack and listen to it frequently; the extra weapons aren't necessary, but when added in with the rest of the extras and the DLC as a whole, it's worth it to me. If the CE didn't include the OST, I probably wouldn't have decided to buy it.

Modifié par Paula Deen, 25 février 2012 - 09:41 .

[AlanC9]

Paula Deen wrote...

Yeah, the aIn the end, that's what it comes down to: a central plot element/character was finished well before release and is priced at ten freaking dollars; the only other possibility is that the prothean is not a central plot element/character, which is indicative of a gigantic waste of story-telling, dramatic, and character potential. I don't know which is worse, but at least the latter is merely bad planning and/or incompetence, and not malice.

Third possibility: The prothean is always present in ME3, even central, but without the DLC he isn't a squadmate. So your $10 gets you whatever his mission is, his unique abilities, and some bonus dialogue.

This is the one that actually bothers me. I never wanted a prothean in the first place, so I'm just fine with him being DLC.

[Biotic Sage]

Great article. Spot on. Really don't have anything to add. He articulated everything I would want to say about the dilemma we're in. I buy on average one video game every two months, and it's always one that I am passionate about and have been looking forward to and researching far in advance. Because I know that if I buy a game, I'm the type of person that has to take it all the way. I'm going to be a completionist; I'm going to want all the DLC. This just means that purchasing video games requires a much more thorough screening process than going to the movies or going out to dinner: because I know that it's going to be a big investment. The good thing about the internet is that now I can pretty much know 95% of the time whether I will like a game beforehand because there's a large enough sample size of evidence pre-release for me to make that judgment.

[M_e_t_A]

this is a little offtopic but (im frankly not sure where it would go, sorry)
I'm finding myself in a bad predicament. Gamestop gives you N7 Defender Armor and the incisor rifle for buying the game from them, meanwhile origin gives whatever different bonuses, and retail stores like bestbuy (the one I ORDERED FROM) give nothing extra except the argus rifle, meanwhile spending the same roughly 80 bucks or so on the game to preorder it. different places give different bonuses, why are they discriminating against who buys what an/;d where from? do you guys see my point im trying to get at? I think we should all get the choice since we're all buying the game anyways, and preorder'er's should get to pick which bonus they will get in the game. since we planned on getting the game wayyyyy ahead of time.

[JaegerBane]

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Honestly... I just dont care and buy what I like, Corporate ethics or "image" be damned.

As long as the company isn't kicking puppies and punching babies. If its something I enjoy I buy it and honestly its REAL hard for me to hate EA or activision or Microsoft or sony or anything company honestly. After all its not like I can sustain myself off of video games (they help... but I need more than just video entertainment in my life).

Although I do commend people for taking a stand... I have to wonder why we/they haven't taken a stand when Horse armor was released? or any other of a plethora of corporate missteps have been done in the past in regards to gaming?

Honestly DLC doesn't bother me, because I either A) Dont buy a VAST majority of it or only Buy ones that interest me as finances and mood fits.

ME3 DLC however interests me very much so I'll buy it. I see no reason to deprive myself of it because I can afford it and I like it. So I'll fill the coffers of EA in this respect. But a vast majority of DLC simply holds no interest for me so I neither get upset nor really care when its released or how much it costs.

People will pay for things they enjoy bottom line. If people can buy cigarrettes, luxury cars, GPSs (which dont NEED to be in cars but do help), Expensive meals, designer clothes, etc etc, I say let him and the market as a whole will figure it out and adjust itself accordingly.

This is precisely my view on the matter. I can't stand all these self-important 'Here I stand...' speeches that keep coming out - ultimately, it remains an individual decision as to whether a given gamer will ignore, boycott or buy, and the reason that stuff like this DLC situation happens is that most people simply don't care about spending a extra few dollars on extra content. The majority do not see it as some epic stand, they simply see it as an extra and either buy or leave it on that merit alone.

As you say, I don't really understand why people would make a stand on this but were happy to keep quiet over the reams of other DLC that have been released previously (such as virtually the same scenario happening in DA2, or worse, the situation with the 'Unlock' DLC for Resident Evil 5).

Moreover, I'm sick of hearing from these loonies about how all DLC should be witheld to give everyone the same experience. Its like there's a subculture of gamers who despise DLC and believe that everyone should join them in their despisal, whether they like it or not.