319 réponses à ce sujet

[Dragoonlordz]

bigfootedfred wrote...

Well.. Techincally all the IT preachers are implying the game didn't ship with the end...

indeed.

Would i put it past EA to think they could make $20 per sale for a ending dlc,
cutting said ending from the released game?

Nope.

Third time now, if you cannot except that you even got an ending then I am beginning to think you never even played the game at this stage. Your taking your conspiracy too far without any evidence outside of self denial that an ending took place. It did, you just did not like it.

[Dragoonlordz]

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

[Kuari999]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

Actually he's pretty much completely on disc.  You can unlock him with very little difference compared to if you actually buy him.  This goes against what they said.  Quit trying to defend this garbage.

[nycmode75]

Pallando wrote...
 

Ok. Since I was talking about getting the dessert, I thought it was implied that it was some three course meal. 

But I've refined my analogy. No more "stinky pie". 
You ask for a three course meal and get to the dessert. 
You were promised a great selection of desserts. Not just three conventional apple pies, but a very complete selection of desserts. So when the time comes, you're awfully excited. The waiter comes. And you get three conventionnal apple pies. Not made with the same varieties of apples. But apple pies nonetheless. 

How would you react ? I understand that some would be ok because they like apple pies. But is it so surprising if someone calls the waiter ?

I know what you're getting at, but I think it can be disputed that they promised us a great selection of desserts.  I don't think Bioware advertised that the game would promise a selection of satisfying endings for everyone that played ME3.  

You are totally right in that someone would (and should) call the waiter or chef ... and I think people have already done it and Bioware has gotten plenty of flak for it.  I personally think it's unfortunate that Bioware dropped the ball, but I don't think they really promised anyone a really awesome selection of desserts.  It's more like what you said - they promised different desserts, but they ended up all tasting the same (and kind of crappy).  But to me it's more like apples and oranges ... they did serve a full meal, just not a very good one ... (whereas some are arguing they didn't provide a full meal, which is technically untrue ...)

Modifié par nycmode75, 02 avril 2012 - 05:39 .

[bigfootedfred]

Third time now, if you cannot except that you even got an ending then I am beginning to think you never even played the game at this stage. Your taking your conspiracy too far without any evidence outside of self denial that an ending took place. It did, you just did not like it.

you seem to have developed a somewhat unhealthy obsession with me...
Following me around the boards and replying to me everywhere, when i havent even said anything to you...

love you too man <3

Modifié par bigfootedfred, 02 avril 2012 - 05:41 .

[Tocquevillain]

Han Shot First wrote...

Of course the flip side to that is that gamers are consumers, and some consumers also happen to be cheap fvcks that expect something for nothing.

Which is why I like that Bioware has limited forum participation to people who register their games.

[Dude_in_the_Room]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

Theres not one reason.....not one....that can suffice as an explaination for Javik not being DLC and being in the game.

Sure he didn't have a huge part in the plot progression, but something that deep in the story/lore.......no excuse.

[SalsaDMA]

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

EA happened.

[bigfootedfred]

Theres not one reason.....not one....that can suffice as an explaination for Javik not being DLC and being in the game.

Sure he didn't have a huge part in the plot progression, but something that deep in the story/lore.......no excuse.

yeah. not to mention, developed at the same time, with the same budget...

EA again. DLC lock on material that should come with the game at base price.
Just like the ending.

(waits for my internet loverboy)

Modifié par bigfootedfred, 02 avril 2012 - 05:44 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Kuari999 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

Actually he's pretty much completely on disc.  You can unlock him with very little difference compared to if you actually buy him.  This goes against what they said.  Quit trying to defend this garbage.

He is on the disc because they required him to be part of the game when developing it. This has been explained. His mission howvever is downloaded. In fact ironically you would have more ground to stand on if he was not on the disc, actually "cut" from the content and sold to you. In reality he was not cut and sold back to you because he was not cut in the first place. He remained in place due to the development stage which required him there for design and development of the title including interactions, cinematics and such.

[Pallando]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

1. Thats not completely true, there is very little incentive to buy DLC when fans are creating it themselves. It has an effect.

2. Sorry but I was correct, I already looked into this and had many discussions about the cost of CGI, VO and other elements including cost to hire staff rising many times in the past. Marketing is just one element of many that increased the cost vastly over the years and you cannot ignore the rest just because one element also does such.

3. If people want item packs and are willing to buy them then let them. If people wish to buy DLC and support the company by providing additional finance towards future products and content, let them. Both these things have a market and both have demand and people willing to pay. With all three they cost time and money to create, if a developer wishes to make some money back for that time and effort then I hold nothing against them for it. I do not consider myself selfish enough to want everything like that for free. I have a job and I am willing to pay to support future developments whether thats Bioware or CDPR.

There is nothing unethical about it (imho). A company exists to make profit, that profit keeps roofs over heads, food in families bellies and the more it makes the more people employed with roofs over heads and food in families bellies. I would call anyone who says they do not need to earn more a hypocrite as debated in the past with others it is hypocritical to make such statements because I bet they would never turn down a pay rise offered because they felt they earn enough to survive off already. The more a publisher and/or developer makes the more content they can fund and produce, more titles and more franchise and teams. While I am not saying this is something you have done, it is something I have seen occur many times now from others with similar views regarding the wishing for free DLC debate which is why I mentioned it.

• Only poorly-made DLCs.
• Where does the development cost actually increase over the years ?
• I am willing to pay too. But I'm not a walking purse. There needs to be quality involved. In the precised DLC or overall in the studio. 

The problem with companies making more an dmore profit is that it does not always go to employees. I know John Riticiello is in charge of a big one, but he has quite the salary. And when you know how EA used to treat its employees some years ago, I'm not sure the leaders are interested in humans... 
As for the need to earn more, I was just discussing that at lunch today. I reckon I would accept a pay rise, because I'm well paid a little more would not hurt if I want to start a family. However, I do not need more. At least for now. I'm a little underpaid for a computer engineer, but I have a lot of holidays

If they wanted to give me a raise today, I'd ask them to try to gather more money to hire me a colleague. 
I'm as sellfish as any other, but I really think that one needs to appreciate what he has, because happiness is not a race. When you know you have a good salary and live well, why do you need more... ? A lot of people would need whatever more I could get...

[SalsaDMA]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

Actually he's pretty much completely on disc.  You can unlock him with very little difference compared to if you actually buy him.  This goes against what they said.  Quit trying to defend this garbage.

He is on the disc because they required him to be part of the game when developing it. This has been explained. His mission howvever is downloaded. In fact ironically you would have more ground to stand on if he was not on the disc, actually "cut" from the content and sold to you. In reality he was not cut and sold back to you because he was not cut in the first place. He remained in place due to the development stage which required him there for design and development of the title including interactions, cinematics and such.

Nope. He didn't have to be part of the game. All that was required, actually, would be for the voice-acting scripts handed out to people to include the passages that contained references that were to be used with him. That's it.

Rest of the stuff could be patched in, but the stuff like voices needed to be pre-recorded anyway and thus could be defended to be put on the disc already even if the character wasn't finished.

Fact is, character WAS finished. The rest of the stuff in the DLC could very well be defended as not having been finished, but the character himself most certainly was.

[clarkusdarkus]

well considering mass effect 3 is 27.99 now at blockbuster, i think i should have waited a year then got all the dlc with it like i did with dragon age origins. as i'd like to think we all know the worth of dlc when its horse armour or LOTSB...i'll buy it if its got value and adds to the story not something thats closure/epilogue/colour pallettes etc.

[Han Shot First]

Yet, when you see how much EA spends on marketing (much more thant on actual development), a free DLC would be a better marketing strategy than a lot of things they have done...

And I think that what people fear is that a paying ending is the first step towards Capcom's strategy.

I don't have any issues with people who say that Bioware should release free DLC that alters the ending as a PR move. That might be a good business strategy for Bioware. Or it might not. I don't have a business degree or any work experience in either marketing or public relations, so I'll leave that debate to people who are a bit more informed in that area.

I do have an issue however with people who somehow think they deserve free DLC just because they didn't like the direction of the writing in the end game.

If Bioware releases DLC that alters the ending it has every right to charge for it. If the players are lucky Bioware will release free DLC in a PR move, but the players are not entitled to free DLC. If Bioware decides to charge for that DLC, the players are also not being slighted in any way.

[SalsaDMA]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

2. Sorry but I was correct, I already looked into this and had many discussions about the cost of CGI, VO and other elements including cost to hire staff rising many times in the past. Marketing is just one element of many that increased the cost vastly over the years and you cannot ignore the rest just because one element also does such.

You didn't even look at his picture, did you?

Also, please be reminded that license fees and branding costs associated with choosing expensive brand names over cheaper alternatives is not related to production costs, but just another form of marketing.

[SalsaDMA]

Han Shot First wrote...

Yet, when you see how much EA spends on marketing (much more thant on actual development), a free DLC would be a better marketing strategy than a lot of things they have done...

And I think that what people fear is that a paying ending is the first step towards Capcom's strategy.

I don't have any issues with people who say that Bioware should release free DLC that alters the ending as a PR move. That might be a good business strategy for Bioware. Or it might not. I don't have a business degree or any work experience in either marketing or public relations, so I'll leave that debate to people who are a bit more informed in that area.

I do have an issue however with people who somehow think they deserve free DLC just because they didn't like the direction of the writing in the end game.

If Bioware releases DLC that alters the ending it has every right to charge for it. If the players are lucky Bioware will release free DLC in a PR move, but the players are not entitled to free DLC. If Bioware decides to charge for that DLC, the players are also not being slighted in any way.

Bioware are not entitled to their customers either:blush:

[Mylia Stenetch]

SalsaDMA wrote...
You didn't even look at his picture, did you?

Also, please be reminded that license fees and branding costs associated with choosing expensive brand names over cheaper alternatives is not related to production costs, but just another form of marketing.

My company pays for higher end networking equipment in our core network over cheaper alternatives. We do not market we use this in our core systems so we are better! It is development costs. That is the same for software they want to use, or even who they want to hire for VAs. 

When marketing comes into this is when the advertise all these VA's commercials, ads everywhere and viral plans. That inflates the cost of marketing. To pay for equipment you need to use is the choice of the development team.

[Dragoonlordz]

SalsaDMA wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Kuari999 wrote...

I had only minor issues with the DLC when I believed what they told us was true.... however the "DLC" is already on the disc and locked. So basically they lied about their reasons for the DLC.  That I have a HUGE issue with.  What happened to BioWare's integrity?

Javik was always partly on the disc and they explained why and it's purpose during the development stage.

Actually he's pretty much completely on disc.  You can unlock him with very little difference compared to if you actually buy him.  This goes against what they said.  Quit trying to defend this garbage.

He is on the disc because they required him to be part of the game when developing it. This has been explained. His mission howvever is downloaded. In fact ironically you would have more ground to stand on if he was not on the disc, actually "cut" from the content and sold to you. In reality he was not cut and sold back to you because he was not cut in the first place. He remained in place due to the development stage which required him there for design and development of the title including interactions, cinematics and such.

Nope. He didn't have to be part of the game. All that was required, actually, would be for the voice-acting scripts handed out to people to include the passages that contained references that were to be used with him. That's it.

Rest of the stuff could be patched in, but the stuff like voices needed to be pre-recorded anyway and thus could be defended to be put on the disc already even if the character wasn't finished.

Fact is, character WAS finished. The rest of the stuff in the DLC could very well be defended as not having been finished, but the character himself most certainly was.

Sorry but that is not true. I am pretty sure John would argue with you on this regarding the requirement of the character to be present when creating his cinematics for all interactions involving such characters. This has always been the case with companions. Shale was on the disc, Legion was on the disc and I believe Kasumi also was partially on the disc, Sebastion was on the disc and so was Javik. Unlike cameos which can be easily patched in and out, companions are almost always to my knowledge or always on the disc themselves. There are so many interactions and cinematics needed for them to be present that it is important to have him present on the disc during development. You are mistaken about just requiring audio.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 02 avril 2012 - 06:02 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

SalsaDMA wrote...
Bioware are not entitled to their customers either:blush:

I don't think anyone is denying this, Bioware is entilted (thanks to EA) to release games that they want to make. We have the choice or entitlement to purchase/play/like/dislike the game. EA is entitled to reap in the profts they get from the IPs they have aquired.

[Dragoonlordz]

Pallando wrote...

-snip-

I already explained where the cost comes in from CGI development costs have sky rocketed over the years, voice actors cost more now and bigger names are being used, staff and teams have got bigger and cost more, marketing has also increased in cost even the latest and best software now costs more in order to be more things. This is just to name few off top of my head plus production costs have increased.

[Pallando]

nycmode75 wrote...

I know what you're getting at, but I think it can be disputed that they promised us a great selection of desserts.  I don't think Bioware advertised that the game would promise a selection of satisfying endings for everyone that played ME3.

Yeah, it can be disputed... But do you know what happened to key-characters after the end ? What impact your choices had ?
I can understand that there is a "last choice" in the game and that it multiplies all the previous choices. But do you witness it ? Or only the consequences of your last choice ?

And I'm not discussing out-of-character behaviors or the plot. 

Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer) 3/5/12
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think one
of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people”

Interview with Casey Hudson (Director) 1/10/12
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2

Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2]
“Is that same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect
3?”

Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the
ability to build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry
about eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings, where
you can say how many endings there are or whether you got ending A, B,
or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and variety in
them.”

Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer) 2/2/12
http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry

“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the architect of what happens."

Whether you're happy or angry at the ending, know this: it is an ending.
BioWare will not do a "Lost" and leave fans with more questions than
answers after finishing the game, Gamble promised.

Modifié par Pallando, 02 avril 2012 - 06:09 .

[Cainne Chapel]

I'm not even sure i'm sure of what we're arguing anymore...

my head hurts

But my own personal feelings are this, DLC is fine, I still enjoy BW games and dont feel shafted. Hell I even shelled out EXTRA for another From Ashes code for my PS3 version since for somereason I didn't get my N7 edition...

But thats besides the point, as a company EA/Bioware and every known company under the sun, will do what they can (within reason) to make a profit. I say within reason because if its outright stupid I will not purchase said game (Like Id id with Capcom and SF x T) But as of right now I'm still a loyal bioware fan, as I have yet to play a terrible game from them or even really a BAD one.

and I'm also optomistic in hoping that they provide me actual closure in the form of DLC (Free hopefully) but I will wait until they formally announce something before making assumptions

[nycmode75]

I think those are all valid examples (I've seen before), but what I meant to say was the game was never advertised on the box or in TV commercials that players would be given different satisfactory endings. (And rightfully so, I think if they did, then it would really set them up for future liability lol). Given that the quotes above were from key members of the production team, I think they were just doing the usual smoke blowing that teams do to pump up their games. Too bad they have to eat their own words lol but fortunately for them I don't think it sets them up for any potential liability ...

Bioware has learned a valuable lesson here. In the future, promise nothing but the most mundane experience possible!

[AlanC9]

SalsaDMA wrote...
Nope. He didn't have to be part of the game. All that was required, actually, would be for the voice-acting scripts handed out to people to include the passages that contained references that were to be used with him. That's it.

Rest of the stuff could be patched in, but the stuff like voices needed to be pre-recorded anyway and thus could be defended to be put on the disc already even if the character wasn't finished.

Fact is, character WAS finished. The rest of the stuff in the DLC could very well be defended as not having been finished, but the character himself most certainly was.

Sure, he could have been put in.

Bio could also have given everyone Warden's Keep or whatever the DA2 DLC is for free. Or all of the From Ashes content.

There are an awful lot of things Bio could have done.

[Artemis_Entrari]

Han Shot First wrote...


I don't have any issues with people who say that Bioware should release free DLC that alters the ending as a PR move. That might be a good business strategy for Bioware. Or it might not. I don't have a business degree or any work experience in either marketing or public relations, so I'll leave that debate to people who are a bit more informed in that area.

I do have an issue however with people who somehow think they deserve free DLC just because they didn't like the direction of the writing in the end game.

If Bioware releases DLC that alters the ending it has every right to charge for it. If the players are lucky Bioware will release free DLC in a PR move, but the players are not entitled to free DLC. If Bioware decides to charge for that DLC, the players are also not being slighted in any way.

But it is good business strategy to keep your fanbase happy.  BioWare charging for a new ending DLC would be adding insult to injury considering the outrage over the current ending.  So while it's true customers aren't technically "entitled" to free DLC, if BioWare really wanted goodwill with those customers who are dissattisfied, they'd not charge for it.

Example of why businesses do this kind of thing.  I bought a new TV from Best Buy, the advertisement stressed the quality of the picture, yadda yadda.  I got it home and didn\\t like how the picture actually looked.  I took it back and told them I didn't think the picture quality matched the advertisement of it and wanted to return it.  Because I'd bought a lot from them over the years, they decided that not only would they allow me to exchange it for any other model of a similar price if I wanted, but they'd discount the price of the XBox360 system I bought with the TV to make up for my lack of satisfaction over the product because they didn't want me to just outright return the TV and take my business elsewhere.

Technically, they didn't have to do that.  I wasn't "entitled" to a free XBox360.  Heck, they could have done what a lot of those defending the ending are saying BioWare should do.  Best Buy could have just told me, "tough luck.  You just expected too much" and sent me on my way.  But that's not what businesses who want repeat customers do.  They saw it as an opportunity to retain a customer who has shown a track record of spending money in their store, who might potentially go elsewhere if he wasn't happy with his overall purchase.

BioWare's in that situation right now.