234 réponses à ce sujet

[Blueprotoss]

wantedman dan wrote...

zsom wrote...

and @wantedman dan

Irrelevant. A DLC should be a small addition to the game, a short mission expanding the universe, not  something game changing like a new ending.
I am and always have been a "believer" of the DLC model because it's a safe and easy way to keep games alive longer and add more depth to an interesting game. However the moment we go from this to a different model where you buy the actual game in small chunks, is the point where it gets iffy. Soon we will have games that end in a cliffhanger telling you to buy the rest or miss out on the experience.

The game is already complete. How are you "changing the model?"

It seems like you missed on changing the ending or some people expecting a large amount of content.

[Mathias]

Please stop bringing up ME2 DLC. Let's not forget you can continue to play ME2, once you beat the game. Most people who downloaded the DLC, played it post ending.

So yeah. Not a good comparison to bring ME2 DLC up.

[arial]

Sion1138 wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

Sion1138 wrote...

Who would that be exactly?

Africans?

Customers.

Think about it... do you REALLY want video game publishers to get the idea in their heads that they can charge customers extra to "fix" a game?

Would you want to see the game pause right after the final boss fight with a pop-up panel saying, "Wanna know how it ends?  Buy the Resolution DLC for $10!!!"

Because that is where that road would lead... companies producing a substandard product INTENTIONALLY with the express purpose of charging customers later to "fix" it.

No thank you.  I'd rather just have a bad ending.

The resolution is there, new possibilities in the end resulting from new content would be a bonus. It wouldn't be like selling you an ending.

Plus, I've heard they're already charging for weapons and even ammunition in certain games. How much worse could it get?

And... we've already seen an ending sold to people by Capcom.

many of those games that charge for ammo are Free To Play (Project Blackout for example), they have to get their money back somehow

[chemiclord]

I can accept the idea of DLC perhaps opening up new options and paths. I'm still wary of such a practice, but whatever.

But that is not what the "majority" (whether they really are or not is irrelevant) claim they want. They want it scrapped and rewritten. They want an outright change, and many have said they are more than willing to pay for it.

THAT is the dangerous precedent, not changing the ending itself.

[Blueprotoss]

wantedman dan wrote...

And that, my friends, is the beginning of a delusion of grandeur.

Thats hypocritcal.

wantedman dan wrote... 

Point: missed.

Its not my fault that you don't want to listen to the facts.

[MassEffect762]

EA fishing, for money.(weighing their options)

[arial]

Blueprotoss wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

And that, my friends, is the beginning of a delusion of grandeur.

Thats hypocritcal.

wantedman dan wrote... 

Point: missed.

Its not my fault that you don't want to listen to the facts.

he never listens to facts, if they go against his preconcieved notion he completely ignores them

[Blueprotoss]

arial wrote...

many of those games that charge for ammo are Free To Play (Project Blackout for example), they have to get their money back somehow

Those games normally get special cosmetic items for a specific dollar amount.

[Blueprotoss]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Please stop bringing up ME2 DLC. Let's not forget you can continue to play ME2, once you beat the game. Most people who downloaded the DLC, played it post ending.

So yeah. Not a good comparison to bring ME2 DLC up.

Yet you can't play ME2 if you already did every mission and you forgot about ME1.

[AresKeith]

Blueprotoss wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

And that, my friends, is the beginning of a delusion of grandeur.

Thats hypocritcal.

wantedman dan wrote... 

Point: missed.

Its not my fault that you don't want to listen to the facts.

you missed the point, those games haven't ended the story, ME3 ended Shepards story arc. Any ME3 DLC won't be post ending DLC, they'll end up being pointless war assets

I on the other-hand will play them cuz I wanna see what there about, but the fact that they'll just be point Was Assets does annoy me

[arial]

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

And that, my friends, is the beginning of a delusion of grandeur.

Thats hypocritcal.

wantedman dan wrote... 

Point: missed.

Its not my fault that you don't want to listen to the facts.

you missed the point, those games haven't ended the story, ME3 ended Shepards story arc. Any ME3 DLC won't be post ending DLC, they'll end up being pointless war assets

I on the other-hand will play them cuz I wanna see what there about, but the fact that they'll just be point Was Assets does annoy me

Bringdown the sky was only playabale pre-ending of ME1, and it was still a great DLC

[Ieldra]

I don't get the OP's attitude. There are still so many unanswered questions, so many things in this universe to explore, and to do. More background information about the Reapers is a good thing, more content with certain characters, too. Not everything must have influence on the ending. Recall the ME2 DLC? Overlord? LotSB? Arrival? They make no difference at all to ME3's ending except a few points of EMS. They were still fun to play.

I don't buy story DLC to get a different ending. I buy it to spend more time in this universe.

(Though admittedly I am thinking about the possibility for a story DLC to give us an added epilogue slide. I don't require it, but it would be very nice)

[Mathias]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Please stop bringing up ME2 DLC. Let's not forget you can continue to play ME2, once you beat the game. Most people who downloaded the DLC, played it post ending.

So yeah. Not a good comparison to bring ME2 DLC up.

Yet you can't play ME2 if you already did every mission and you forgot about ME1.

What?

[AresKeith]

arial wrote...

Bringdown the sky was only playabale pre-ending of ME1, and it was still a great DLC

its was great, I meant that ME3 is the only one that doesn't have post ending DLC to they story arc

[Blueprotoss]

Sion1138 wrote...

Well, to me, DLC seems to be exactly that. Buying little chunks of content. Who's to say that certain elements added through DLC shouldn't perhaps have been included in the main game?

Did you ever play the digital version of Fable 2 because you wouldn't be saying that.

Sion1138 wrote... 

The most glaring example being "From Ashes". The Prothean race was a major factor in the story of Mass Effect and yet they made you buy last living Prothean as DLC. 

 Javik wasn't a main character, but you would have a point with Kasumi in ME2.

Sion1138 wrote... 
 
What's the difference between adding to the story mid-game and adding to it post-game?

I see no difference while the mid-game DLC won't change the endings.

Sion1138 wrote... 

I for one was much more fond of the old "Expansion" model. 

If you want the old expansion model then look at DA: Awkening.

[Iakus]

chemiclord wrote...

I can accept the idea of DLC perhaps opening up new options and paths. I'm still wary of such a practice, but whatever.

But that is not what the "majority" (whether they really are or not is irrelevant) claim they want. They want it scrapped and rewritten. They want an outright change, and many have said they are more than willing to pay for it.

THAT is the dangerous precedent, not changing the ending itself.

I've always been realistic enough to know that the endings themselves won't change.  The Catalyst, the choices, and so on.  That will never happen, no amount of DLC could change that.

But what I would have considered spending money on would be DLC that makes the endings more definitely upbeat, or change what gets sacrificed at the end to make Shepard's fate more customizable.

I'm reasonably confident there are people who'd spend money on DLC that expanded Shepard Lives video to include a rescue, even without a reunion.

I think I could live with a DLC that allowed EDI and the geth  to live in High EMS Destroy, but Shepard is maimed in the process.  And ended with EDI at the Memorial Wall while a one-armed Shepard hung Anderson's plaque?

[Mcfly616]

why do I want dlc? Ummm for more Mass Effect....

I don't care that the ending is set in stone.....because I like it....


I bought Dawnguard for Skyrim....it didn't change my battle with Alduin....at all.....I guess it was a waste of time right? Lol

[Blueprotoss]

AresKeith wrote...

arial wrote...

Bringdown the sky was only playabale pre-ending of ME1, and it was still a great DLC

its was great, I meant that ME3 is the only one that doesn't have post ending DLC to they story arc

You technically can say that Arrival was really the only post ending DLC for ME2 because you need to defeat the Collectors to do the Arrival mission.

[arial]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

Please stop bringing up ME2 DLC. Let's not forget you can continue to play ME2, once you beat the game. Most people who downloaded the DLC, played it post ending.

So yeah. Not a good comparison to bring ME2 DLC up.

Yet you can't play ME2 if you already did every mission and you forgot about ME1.

What?

Protip: Ignore everything Blueprotoss ever says. It never makes sense.

what he is trying to say is that being able to play ME2 after the story is pointless if you have already finished every mission

[Sphynxian]

 I'm kind of hoping for the DLC adventures of Shepard: Queen of the Reapers.

http://25.media.tumb...wdtzo1_1280.jpg 


(iknowitwillneverhappenbuticandream)

Modifié par Sphynxian, 15 juillet 2012 - 05:37 .

[Blueprotoss]

Mcfly616 wrote...

why do I want dlc? Ummm for more Mass Effect....

I don't care that the ending is set in stone.....because I like it....


I bought Dawnguard for Skyrim....it didn't change my battle with Alduin....at all.....I guess it was a waste of time right? Lol

I guess a lot DLC is useless then, which I wouldn't complain.

arial wrote...

what he is trying to say is that being able to play ME2 after the story is pointless if you have already finished every mission

Thank you for noticing that since they missed it. 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 15 juillet 2012 - 05:41 .

[zsom]

wantedman dan wrote...

zsom wrote...

and @wantedman dan

Irrelevant. A DLC should be a small addition to the game, a short mission expanding the universe, not  something game changing like a new ending.
I am and always have been a "believer" of the DLC model because it's a safe and easy way to keep games alive longer and add more depth to an interesting game. However the moment we go from this to a different model where you buy the actual game in small chunks, is the point where it gets iffy. Soon we will have games that end in a cliffhanger telling you to buy the rest or miss out on the experience.

The game is already complete. How are you "changing the model?"

Hmm.. maybe I didn't explain it too well, let me try again. By changing the model I meant changing the financial/economic model built up for DLCs.
They create a good game, then as long as there is a market for it they add little extras. Small missions, new characters, better weapons etc. This works because it's financially safe. Creating a DLC is a lot quicker than creating an expansion, and based on their statistics they can easily see the trend and decide if a new content is still going to turn in profit. Because of this safety even smaller, less successfull games will get extra content (yay for us), and if it does turn into a flop, it won't be a big one financially. (yay for them)
However this is only fair until the game isn't chopped up into small parts and sold in chunks. Imagine a game where they first release the first chapter, and if it isn't profitable enough they just stop developint the rest. This would be great for them, but very bad for people with a less than mainstream taste, they would never see their games be finished.

[SmokePants]

Only a Mass Effect fan would ask this. A lot of people thought that if the entire squad from ME2 wasn't carried over to ME3, then ME2 was pointless. Or if a choice doesn't impact the next game in the series, then the choice is pointless.

This type of thinking is toxic and spoiled. This is entertainment. If you are having fun and enjoying something in the moment, then it has value. Only a complete idiot thinks, "Gee, I can't wait to see whether I enjoyed that or not when the next game/ending rolls around.

In 99% of all video games, we either don't have decisions to make or our decisions don't really matter. That does not make them pointless and we buy DLC to draw out and extend our enjoyment. It's as simple and common-sense as that. If there was one critique I'd have for the BioWare community, it would be, "You're looking at things all wrong."

Modifié par SmokePants, 15 juillet 2012 - 05:41 .