571 réponses à ce sujet

[ThePrestige10]

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

[garf]

WaterWar wrote...

I would gladly pay for a DLC that changes/updates the current ending.
It would be unreasonable for us to expect them to release a DLC that properly would require quite a lot of manpower and resources to make. If they can cover some expenses with the income from a DLC-sale, they might be more willing to make it in the first place.

Can you agree that we all want that DLC and can wait to discuss price vs. value once they put some thing concrete on the table to be valued?

Or will you let them divide us before we begin?

[wulf3n]

Lugaidster wrote...
That has nothing to do with paid DLC. We are fighting to get an ending DLC, we should focus on getting that. Discussing price will come afterwards. You guys seem to be missing the quality part in the discussion, any attempt to correct the situation will still be held accountable, be it free or paid. If it's paid, we have more leverage.

To me it's the opposite.

Releasing an inferior quality free ending dlc would "hopefully" be the final straw for a lot of fans, whereas with paid they'll make a profit either way, and precedent will have shown the "fans" will buy whatever they release no matter how bad, and so they'll just keep doing it.

Modifié par wulf3n, 19 mars 2012 - 11:13 .

[Tregon]

Lugaidster wrote...


You're missing one key part, without quality theres no money. If they half ass a paid DLC they won't auto get their costs back. Whereas they can half ass a free DLC and call it a day. "Waving a wallet around", as you put it, is a way to take the money issue out of the discussion. I want a quality ending for ME3. If they put up a quality ending, I will after verified be willing to pay money.

By that logic, my 60 dollar game should have been FINE AS IT WAS! Because it was paid in full. It was NOT!
Thus, paid does not equal quality. Right now, they have lost all credibility to be permitted more money until they have regained that credibility. So free DLC is the way to do it.

Sometimes you just have to suffer for making mistakes. We suffer right now for having trusted Bioware too much, it is time for them to suffer to make it up.

[Lugaidster]

joe1852 wrote...

u people make me sick u complained about the day 1 DLC saying it should have been included in the game and u boycotted it buy not buying it and now u r willing to pay for an ending that should have already been in the game lol

That piece right there is a great way to prove you are no better than the ones that call us entitled. You get nothing. There's no one-to-one relation between those who complained about day-1 DLC and those that are complaining about the ending right now. Puting us all in a box is stupid at best and retarded, ignorant and full of prejudice at worst.

[InsaneAzrael]

RedNanaki wrote...

InsaneAzrael wrote...

 Changing the ending would cost one animation team (using engine based rendering) and a damned good foley/sound editor. ETA - 2 months for 5 minutes. Use several teams - if production came to 50,000 cost, charge DLC at $2/£1 for MILLIONS of customers. 

IMO that alone would *not* be enough to do the ending justice.

Totally agree.. Thing is, this is the profit marginalisation that would be expected of an EA subsidiary at this moment in time. The reputation held by EA firms is not exactly considered by most to be consumer orientated. Rather like most corporations the goal is maximising profit margins minimising losses.

[garf]

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

[AwesomeDudex64]

Yeah, no. Producing a new ending would be costly and people need to be paid as well. I don't mind paying but it has to be at cost.

Modifié par AwesomeDudex64, 19 mars 2012 - 11:18 .

[ThePrestige10]

garf wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

You would call it success, if you have to pay for a functioning and logical ending?

[granyte]

InsaneAzrael wrote...

RedNanaki wrote...

InsaneAzrael wrote...

 Changing the ending would cost one animation team (using engine based rendering) and a damned good foley/sound editor. ETA - 2 months for 5 minutes. Use several teams - if production came to 50,000 cost, charge DLC at $2/£1 for MILLIONS of customers. 

IMO that alone would *not* be enough to do the ending justice.

Totally agree.. Thing is, this is the profit marginalisation that would be expected of an EA subsidiary at this moment in time. The reputation held by EA firms is not exactly considered by most to be consumer orientated. Rather like most corporations the goal is maximising profit margins minimising losses.

yes and what we need them to feel is that they are about to get thier houses burned to the ground because they pushed thier crapy idea to far any thing les then that and we will end up payin per bullet we shoot

[garf]

Lugaidster wrote...

joe1852 wrote...

u people make me sick u complained about the day 1 DLC saying it should have been included in the game and u boycotted it buy not buying it and now u r willing to pay for an ending that should have already been in the game lol

That piece right there is a great way to prove you are no better than the ones that call us entitled. You get nothing. There's no one-to-one relation between those who complained about day-1 DLC and those that are complaining about the ending right now. Puting us all in a box is stupid at best and retarded, ignorant and full of prejudice at worst.

Perhaps true but if we MUST argue, instead of finding a simple message we can all agree on. Can we do it without burning the bridges of rapprochement? Is winning a little fight on the internet with one person THAT much more important than winning at least some of what we want from EA/BIOWARE?

Personally I think we should

Stay United, Stay Civil and Stay On Message. (of course it would help if we could agree on that message)

[GothamLord]

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

I am willing to pay for ending DLC.  By no means am I endorsing the business practice of producing bad endings. I will pay for closure and then cut ties with BioWare/EA.   If they give it for free I'll be more likely to consider to give them money beyond the DLC.  My money is going towards awesome VA work like Brandon Keener and Courtenay Taylor.  I cant write them a personal check to do voice work for the charaters as I dont own the rights to them so I have to get it the only way I can. 

[TheRealMithril]

granyte wrote...

Thornquist wrote...

Asking Bioware to make it for free is absurd.

enjoy paying to reload your gun www.youtube.com/watch

It is interesting to note that he also mentions that he himself spent 5000$ on it. That means he is an avid  battlefield gamer himself .. besides that. I have mixed feelings about this kind of model. Personally I would not use it, i believe more in a subscription model (at a nominal support cost)

[Lugaidster]

Tregon wrote...

Thus, paid does not equal quality.

I concur, there's no point in debating that. There's usually a correlation between the two, but there's no causative link.

Tregon wrote... 
By that logic, my 60 dollar game should have been FINE AS IT WAS! Because it was paid in full. It was NOT! 

 

While you and I agree that the game wasn't fine as it was, there's no way to prove it wasn't, unless you have evidence that I don't have. Because of that, what we are actually doing here is bargaining to get a more fitting ending, this is not a case of incomplete product.

[granyte]

garf wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

the first step is for them to aknowledge that they are deep deep into trouble and that they need to redeeem themself

[Lugaidster]

ThePrestige10 wrote...

garf wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

You would call it success, if you have to pay for a functioning and logical ending?

Yes I would, it would be bittersweet, but I prefer that to no/crappy DLC. With money I have leverage, without it I have to take what they give and be thankful.d

[InsaneAzrael]

granyte wrote...

InsaneAzrael wrote...

RedNanaki wrote...

InsaneAzrael wrote...

 Changing the ending would cost one animation team (using engine based rendering) and a damned good foley/sound editor. ETA - 2 months for 5 minutes. Use several teams - if production came to 50,000 cost, charge DLC at $2/£1 for MILLIONS of customers. 

IMO that alone would *not* be enough to do the ending justice.

Totally agree.. Thing is, this is the profit marginalisation that would be expected of an EA subsidiary at this moment in time. The reputation held by EA firms is not exactly considered by most to be consumer orientated. Rather like most corporations the goal is maximising profit margins minimising losses.

yes and what we need them to feel is that they are about to get thier houses burned to the ground because they pushed thier crapy idea to far any thing les then that and we will end up payin per bullet we shoot

Are you implying that your desire is to digitally instigate a virtual consumer lynch mob? Sorry, no deal. I would much prefer the line be held to at the very least assure the company that they are responsible more to the community that cares about their genuinely wonderful franchise. Acting more as an intervention of sorts rather than a threat.

[GothamLord]

granyte wrote...

yes and what we need them to feel is that they are about to get thier houses burned to the ground because they pushed thier crapy idea to far any thing les then that and we will end up payin per bullet we shoot

First piracy and now arson.  

Somehow I dont feel my idea of offering to pay for DLC is that bad compared to threats of felony worthy charges. 

[Costin_Razvan]

There are already companies making free DLC for their games that add a lot to a game, hell even the game ending: Look at CD Projekt and what they did already and what they are adding to the Witcher 2.

[granyte]

Lugaidster wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

garf wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

You would call it success, if you have to pay for a functioning and logical ending?

Yes I would, it would be bittersweet, but I prefer that to no/crappy DLC. With money I have leverage, without it I have to take what they give and be thankful.d

no you don't you can levrage about not buying anything from then anymore we nee to remind them about C&C they killed a franchise because they acted like idiots and we never broke the line we made sure C&C 4 was the worst failure ever and it worked they lost the war and moved to other things

sad point it killed C&C good point we showed EA they could not do any crap they wan and unless we pull that again and remind them that the old westwood era gamers are not yet into acceptance they will try to pull that kind of crap over and over again just to milk us

[JPR1964]

I prefer an ending paid dlc than nothing...

And therefore, they can add more contents to justify the price.

JPR out!

[garf]

ThePrestige10 wrote...

garf wrote...

ThePrestige10 wrote...

The dumbest thing to say: "Yeah - we won't get a good ending unless we pay". What's this?

They probably made the worst ending in video game history and totally ripped the customers off with it. If they want to be redeemed as a company, they have to fix this for free. For their own sake.

How could you encourage such bad new practices, where you have to pay for a better ending, when the company totally f*cked it up? No way! Be aware of your consumer rights and don't excuse EA/Bioware that easily.

Can you agree that the first step would get them to acknowledge there is even a problem. and another first step would be to have them offer US a fix that we evaluate before we talk price? or is this particular principle. (whose sucessful application some may find debatable) more important than sucess?

You would call it success, if you have to pay for a functioning and logical ending?

I mispoke. Let me clarify: "Succesful application " did not refer in anyway to sucessfully getting stuff free of additional charge.  I meant the legitimacy of the principal itself. in the eyes of others and the law.

We may agree for example that we were sold this game under false pretences (insert Pre-launch Casey Hudson quote here) But convincing the LAW that is was false advertising might impossible and convincing those with no stake in the debate but with power to influence it one way or the other that we are not 'entitle brats who need to get a life' might be nearly as hard.

so how important is that principal ... Right now.... When you don't know what they are going to offer to give us as a 'fix' and what they may ask in return? Can it wait until you see if they offer something not worth your time. Is it possible that if they bundle enough goodies in, ones that go over and above 'functioning and logical' that it might be worth a non-zero sum?

If so. Can you not then agree that the FIRST priority is to get them bargaining in good faith. Making spefic offers for which the public can hold them to account?

and If so could you not agree it makes sense to ally with those who want the same FIRST step and table the disagreements over exact Value vs. Price until said offer(s) is(are) on the table?

[Tregon]

Lugaidster wrote...

While you and I agree that the game wasn't fine as it was, there's no way to prove it wasn't, unless you have evidence that I don't have. Because of that, what we are actually doing here is bargaining to get a more fitting ending, this is not a case of incomplete product.

They betrayed their promises actually, produces explicitly stating that "there will be no A,B or C-options" and saying flat out that our choises have importance.

Furthermore, this is not court in traditional sense. I and you have absolute power of judge and executioner in form of our wallets as has been noted. Total boycott of Bioware for example may not salvage ME3 in the end, but should it end up totally bust and end up folded by EA due to lost sales will send strong message to whole gaming industry that they cannot treat us like crap.

[Lugaidster]

wulf3n wrote...

Lugaidster wrote...
That has nothing to do with paid DLC. We are fighting to get an ending DLC, we should focus on getting that. Discussing price will come afterwards. You guys seem to be missing the quality part in the discussion, any attempt to correct the situation will still be held accountable, be it free or paid. If it's paid, we have more leverage.

To me it's the opposite.

Releasing an inferior quality free ending dlc would "hopefully" be the final straw for a lot of fans, whereas with paid they'll make a profit either way, and precedent will have shown the "fans" will buy whatever they release no matter how bad, and so they'll just keep doing it.

You can't be in constant fight with fans. You usually get only one chance to make a mistake. For us Mass Effect fans this is it. Let's see how much pre orders they'll get with Dragon Age 3 and you'll see what I mean. I'm here right now bargaining, but that means that even if they comply with quality paid DLC, the next time I won't be preordering again, much less a collectors edition. If the next time they do the same and I didn't preorder, they lost a sale. Long term application of this practice isn't in their best interest. I genuinely believe they made a mistake, but we can agree to disagree.

What I'd like to state is that, we should be united behind only one message. Let's get them to commit to actually making a DLC, we can discuss price later. As of right now, this discussion is like drowning in a glass of water. We won't get anything if we continue to get ahead of ourselves.

[granyte]

GothamLord wrote...

granyte wrote...

yes and what we need them to feel is that they are about to get thier houses burned to the ground because they pushed thier crapy idea to far any thing les then that and we will end up payin per bullet we shoot

First piracy and now arson.  

Somehow I dont feel my idea of offering to pay for DLC is that bad compared to threats of felony worthy charges. 

that was imaged gees you have to be kidding me right i'm talking about making sure EA never makes money anymore when i'm talking about burning houses ... i can't belive i actualy had to explain that