92 réponses à ce sujet

[T-Kay]

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

You say worth "it". I'd like to make that more specific in a question and say: worth "what"?. you see. I like DLC if it gives me a reasonable amount of gameplay for the money I spend on it. It's for the same reason I don't want to spend 300 dollars on a game when it first comes out.

And what we're all pointing out to you is painfully obvious: if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Nobody is twisting your arm.  The game is perfectly playable without any DLC. All this whining you're doing? Nobody cares. You've come to the decision it's not worth it to you, and you won't buy it. Congratulations, you made your own decision. Do you want a cookie? Why should we care?

What you say is true, but it doesn't make it "right". The fact that you accept being ripped off says more about you than about this whole DLC business. I for one think it's good that there are people that try to improve gamer experience for an acceptable price. We're not winning any wars with quitters like you.

[Krigwin]

Everyone, or at least all intelligent video game consumers, should be against DLC, because in the long run DLC will only hurt video games.

I always see the same tired arguments so let me go ahead and nip this in the bud right now:

1. Hurr durr it adds extra content so it must be good derp!
- It adds content that could've already been in the game. We already have something that adds content to an existing game, it's called an expansion pack. Notice you never see fairly priced and massive expansion packs like Frozen Throne or Throne of Bhaal anymore, it's because everyone got wise to the fact that you can parcel out content that could fill a single expansion into 8-10 DLCs and sell them for quadruple the price and people will still buy it because "hurr extra content good durr". Keep buying DLC and sending the message that this is an acceptable business practice and games will keep getting smaller and smaller while DLCs become more frequent. Eventually we're going to have a full-priced RPG launch that's the size of Diablo 1 with quests that you can only get by buying from an online store for $2 each.

2. It's only $5 lolderp upoor kid get a job durr!
- It's not about the cost, but the value. Any additional content must proportionally meet the value of the original game, anything else is overpricing at its finest. If a quest costs $5, it should last 8-10 hours. If it lasts 1 hour, it should definitely not be $5. You may think DLC is cheap, but this is an age-old scam that other industries have been using for decades - the low cost of each individual DLC pack tricks you into thinking they're cheap because you're not considering the total value of all the additional content. Consider EA, which realized years ago they could make a lot more cash by releasing stuff for the Sims in low-priced "stuff packs", and somehow people still paid good money for items they could get for free from modders. Of course, since EA now owns Bioware, this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Thinking DLC is fine because it doesn't cost a lot of money will only decrease the quality of video games, while increasing the cost.

Let me put it this way: imagine you're a video game publisher. You have a video game that has potentially 50 hours of content. You have two possible ways of selling it. The first way is by selling it as a whole game for $50. The second way is to cut all of the non-essential content out of it, reducing its total playtime to a mere 20 hours, and sell that for $50, then sell the remaining 30 hours of content as 30 individual DLC packs over the next 2 years, that all cost $5 and last 1 hour each, which would potentially make you an extra $150 per consumer. Which option would you choose? And which is better for the consumer?

By supporting DLC you are sending the message that you, as a consumer, are fine with this unscrupulous business practice, and this sends a greenlight to companies like EA to continue slicing games down and selling off portions at hilariously unfair prices. If you care about the quality of video games at all, realize DLC is a practice that only hurts the industry. Expansion packs are fine. Free DLC like The Last Stand is good! Overpriced DLC, or worse, DLC that should've been in the original game, is bad.

[LynxAQ]

At Krigwin - There is no need to try make a point and try make it sound like the people who by DLC are simpletons. All it does is make your points (which where pretty good) get ignored. Making your opposition look like simpletons by the way you phrase your arguments just make you look childish and a fool.



At T-Kay - Jus because you feel like you are being ripped off, doesnt make it a fact. You say your OPINIONS as tho they are fact and then try to force them onto others. I dont feel like I am being ripped off therefore you are not being ripped off. (Thats the opposite equivilent to what you are doing.) You then continue to insult the people who don't agree with you (like Krigwin). How you gonna get more people to support your cause if you insist on insulting them?



Both T-Kay and Krigwin, support my opinion that the people against the "DLC should be free camp" are mainly made up of kids and jobless/part timers. Both of you resort to nothing more than fallacious attacks on the people wo dont agree with your argument. And only a kids mentality, or an adult who is yet to grow up and still has a kids mentality, would insult and make fun of peoples arguments using straw man tactics and then expect those same people to change there minds and join their cause.

[T-Kay]

I'm not trying to make people join my cause. I'm here to troll.

I'd like to answer your post on the last page, which I missed. 5 dollars, euros, pounds is nothing to me either. In fact Making the whole thing twice as expensive wouldn't hurt my wallet anymore than it does now. But that's not the point. The point is the equivalent of gaming experience in the price you pay for it. Yeah I think Cinema's are heavily overpriced as well. Movies in general are overpriced, but that's because somehow we allow people to make 30 million dollars for a year of work. The comparison is flawed. The earlier comparison of how much the original game costs when considering a price and a DLC is much better. In fact it's the only comparison that makes sense. 5 dollars is not a lot for DLC. We can all agree on that. 5 dollars for an hour (or 20 minutes for some) is a lot. Whether or not I have enough money to pay for it is besides the point.

Modifié par T-Kay, 16 décembre 2009 - 12:54 .

[Original182]

I already gave my reasonings for why a $5 DLC that lasts only 1 hour is a rip off. There's no need to compare it to anything else. Let's use the best measuring stick; the main game itself.

Dragon Age, $50, takes 80 hours to complete without replays.
A $5 DLC therefore should take 8 hours to complete without replays.

But Return to Ostagar only takes 1 hour to complete. 1 hour is no where near the 8 hours it should be. That is why it's a rip off, because it is only 1/8th of what it should be.

I've also tried the reverse argument. If it is acceptable to pay $5 that only gives you 1 hour, how would you feel if a $50 Dragon Age only took 10 hours to finish? Wouldn't you feel ripped off?

Even if we pretend that Return to Ostagar is of superior quality (voice acting, quests, gear) to the main game, which is almost hard to believe as the main game has top notch story, at most it would shave off only 1-2 hours. We're talking about a drop from 8 hours to 1 hour. That's like a 87.5% drop in duration. I don't know of any quality that can justify such a reduction in content.

It's not an opinion, it's fact. A $5 DLC that only gives 1 hour when it should give roughly 8 hours, is a rip off.

Modifié par Original182, 16 décembre 2009 - 01:19 .

[marshalleck]

T-Kay wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

You say worth "it". I'd like to make that more specific in a question and say: worth "what"?. you see. I like DLC if it gives me a reasonable amount of gameplay for the money I spend on it. It's for the same reason I don't want to spend 300 dollars on a game when it first comes out.

And what we're all pointing out to you is painfully obvious: if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Nobody is twisting your arm.  The game is perfectly playable without any DLC. All this whining you're doing? Nobody cares. You've come to the decision it's not worth it to you, and you won't buy it. Congratulations, you made your own decision. Do you want a cookie? Why should we care?

What you say is true, but it doesn't make it "right". The fact that you accept being ripped off says more about you than about this whole DLC business. I for one think it's good that there are people that try to improve gamer experience for an acceptable price. We're not winning any wars with quitters like you.

Who says I bought anything? Stop assuming, it just makes you look even more stupid. If you're interested, I probably won't be buying the Ostagar DLC. It just doesn't seem appealing to me, though I could easily afford it. If they focused on some other aspect of the story that I was interested in, I'd buy it.

[T-Kay]

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

You say worth "it". I'd like to make that more specific in a question and say: worth "what"?. you see. I like DLC if it gives me a reasonable amount of gameplay for the money I spend on it. It's for the same reason I don't want to spend 300 dollars on a game when it first comes out.

And what we're all pointing out to you is painfully obvious: if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Nobody is twisting your arm.  The game is perfectly playable without any DLC. All this whining you're doing? Nobody cares. You've come to the decision it's not worth it to you, and you won't buy it. Congratulations, you made your own decision. Do you want a cookie? Why should we care?

What you say is true, but it doesn't make it "right". The fact that you accept being ripped off says more about you than about this whole DLC business. I for one think it's good that there are people that try to improve gamer experience for an acceptable price. We're not winning any wars with quitters like you.

Who says I bought anything? Stop assuming, it just makes you look even more stupid. If you're interested, I probably won't be buying the Ostagar DLC. It just doesn't seem appealing to me, though I could easily afford it. If they focused on some other aspect of the story that I was interested in, I'd buy it.

I never said you did.

[marshalleck]

T-Kay wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

You say worth "it". I'd like to make that more specific in a question and say: worth "what"?. you see. I like DLC if it gives me a reasonable amount of gameplay for the money I spend on it. It's for the same reason I don't want to spend 300 dollars on a game when it first comes out.

And what we're all pointing out to you is painfully obvious: if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it. Nobody is twisting your arm.  The game is perfectly playable without any DLC. All this whining you're doing? Nobody cares. You've come to the decision it's not worth it to you, and you won't buy it. Congratulations, you made your own decision. Do you want a cookie? Why should we care?

What you say is true, but it doesn't make it "right". The fact that you accept being ripped off says more about you than about this whole DLC business. I for one think it's good that there are people that try to improve gamer experience for an acceptable price. We're not winning any wars with quitters like you.

Who says I bought anything? Stop assuming, it just makes you look even more stupid. If you're interested, I probably won't be buying the Ostagar DLC. It just doesn't seem appealing to me, though I could easily afford it. If they focused on some other aspect of the story that I was interested in, I'd buy it.

I never said you did.

"The fact that you accept being ripped off..."

No. I don't accept being ripped off. I evaluate the product being offered and the price, decide if I value it that much, and if I do, I purchase it. If I don't value it at that price point, I don't buy it. Simple as that. I also don't whine up a storm about my decisions.

[borelocin]

Yes DLC costs more per hour played than the main campaign. Vote with your wallets people - nobody is making you pay for DLC ! If you feel it is worth the price, pay it. If you don't, don't.



These "all DLC should have been included free how DARE Bioware/EA" threads no matter how camoflagued all miss that point.

[Adria Teksuni]

imported_beer wrote...

I think there are many people who will believe the extra content is not worth it, and that is fine. Especially if you have completed the game and have resolved your tale, you may not wish to go back and play a few hours when you know how it all went down in the end for your PC. Others may have moral issues with DLC, and that is their prerogative.

But DLC serves a useful purpose for people like me who love the world and lore. It gives us a chance to play a little more in that setting, instead of having it all end. Many people do not have a moral or ethical issue with DLC. We think it is awesome to have a chance to have a new plot, or new content between expansions/sequels.

And since I personally refuse to complete the game, it is very essential that I have something new to do once in a while.

This.

I found the additional lore included in the hour or so of gaming to be completely worth "it".

For those not understanding basic pronoun usage: "it" means the price of the DLC in this particular case.

[T-Kay]

The problem is that you don't know if it's worth it until you bought, downloaded and played it.

[Adria Teksuni]

When I think back to other games and the opportunities we have now for DLC, sometimes I want to cry. I would have loved more DLC for KoTOR and ME, plus some for JE.



Then again now that I think of it, people were kvetching about the KoTOR DLC not being included in the XBOX version and not worth the download...and it was free.

[BroBear Berbil]

This is an issue that I'm pretty torn about. On the one hand I love this game so much and am likely to buy anything that expands upon it. On the other hand I realize that buying DLC hurts the prospect of expansions maybe not so much for this game but for other games down the road. I think that expansion packs are, unfortunately, going the way of the dinosaur anyway. Just take a look at all the frivolous things people pay too much for on a daily basis because they come in bite-sized quantities and advertise as enhancing something or being more unique because of it. Of course companies are going to capitalize on this same scheme for video games.

For this game it's too late to change it one way or the other. Any decision they would have made about producing an expansion pack and how much DLC they will do would have been made long ago. Normally I don't buy dlc but this game is the exception. Is that stupid of me? Yes, it is.

Modifié par OnionXI, 16 décembre 2009 - 02:48 .

[Adria Teksuni]

Would you rather wait a year and get it all at once, or buy each comprehensive piece as it comes out? As one of the WANT MOAR NOW crowd, I want it as soon as it becomes available.

[marshalleck]

T-Kay wrote...

The problem is that you don't know if it's worth it until you bought, downloaded and played it.

Discipline and impulse control help a lot in this area. You wait for others to play it and review it. It can sometimes be frustrating in the case of highly anticipated releases, but it's usually less than the frustration that results from one feeling they'd been ripped off.

Modifié par marshalleck, 16 décembre 2009 - 02:49 .

[TastyLaksa]

LynxAQ wrote...

This seems like a cleverly written "DLC's should be free" thread. I like the DLC idea and I am willing to pay £5 for an extra hour of entertainment.

My only thing against the DLC thing, is they not releasing them fast enough.

My only problem with the DLC is they didn't need to announce that they intend to release it sometime in the holiday season. Why not just announce it when the release date is set in stone so there is no disappointment from delays? What is the point in announcing that they will be releasing DLC when they already said 2 years of DLC.

I prefer the under promise over deliver strategy.

Log in one day and bam. Hey new DLC caught me by surprise. Cool.

Log in one day to see announcement that DLC will be released (soon!!) spend 30 minutes trying to download said non existing DLC. Not cool.

</rant>

[T-Kay]

marshalleck wrote...

T-Kay wrote...

The problem is that you don't know if it's worth it until you bought, downloaded and played it.

Discipline and impulse control help a lot in this area. You wait for others to play it and review it. It can sometimes be frustrating in the case of highly anticipated releases, but it's usually less than the frustration that results from one feeling they'd been ripped off.

True, the initial description of Wardens Keep had me fooled. I was very much disappointed by the size of the dungeon and the fact that after you complete it there's no more quests and you can't even access the keep anymore. I was half hoping it would be a staging ground for future wardens, or something like that. At least something with more impact. Funny thing is, on my first play-through I had this quest telling me I needed to find out more about the keep, which was still active after the keep closed down.

[Original182]

Tassiaw wrote...
But... Return to Ostagar isn't even out yet, so why are you judging it?

I was voicing my opinion on the forums, the same reason people are voicing their displeasure at how long Return at Ostagar takes to be released.

In reverse, people like you may have no problem paying $5 for something that can be completed in 1 night. But people like me have no problem in DLCs being released as long as it takes.

I am taking every opportunity to complain about how the length of the content doesn't justify the cost, in hopes that it reaches the developers' ears and they will release future DLCs that are worth the cost. I know I won't be buying Warden's Keep or Return to Ostagar out of principle. But I hope future DLCs will be worth their money.

Modifié par Original182, 16 décembre 2009 - 03:11 .

[DrakhanValane]

So I assume that none of the hour per unit of currency folks will ever pay for a CD or a song off iTunes. $10-$15 for 45 minutes or $1 for 3-5 minutes is ridiculous!

[T-Kay]

DrakhanValane wrote...

So I assume that none of the hour per unit of currency folks will ever pay for a CD or a song off iTunes. $10-$15 for 45 minutes or $1 for 3-5 minutes is ridiculous!

That comparison is flawed, because the context is different. Doesn't take away from the fact that music is also overpriced.

[Adria Teksuni]

And I'm not quite sure why length of play = absolute value.

[Original182]

DrakhanValane wrote...

So I assume that none of the hour per unit of currency folks will ever pay for a CD or a song off iTunes. $10-$15 for 45 minutes or $1 for 3-5 minutes is ridiculous!

You forgot to compare it to a cup of coffee or a movie that you'll never watch again.

Again, comparing a DLC to the things you mentioned can be like comparing apples to oranges. I used the best measuring stick, the main game itself. If $50 of the main game = 80 hours, then a $5 DLC = 8 hours.

[Original182]

Adria Teksuni wrote...

And I'm not quite sure why length of play = absolute value.

It is a very important value. Would Dragon Age be the epic game that it is, if it took only 10 hours to complete fully instead of 80 hours? 80 hours of quality gaming > 10 hours of quality gaming, no matter how you see it.

Edit: I'm also not quite sure why people want to get their hands on Return to Ostagar as soon as possible. What's the rush? I have no problem waiting for it.

I hope you see what I did there.

Modifié par Original182, 16 décembre 2009 - 03:29 .

[Taleroth]

Because you can still do the DLC with the character. Just pretend it's before he died. THE MISSING ADVENTURES! This one he went on between Brecilian Forest and Orzammar! LEARN THE NEVER BEFORE TOLD STORY FEATURING YOUR ADVENTURER!