434 réponses à ce sujet

[Brockololly]

Morroian wrote...
Disagree, he's entirely superfluous and the game would be fine without him. Regardless he was available for free if you really have to be a completionist. Like I've said before Jarvik is far more problematic for me.

The problem with Sebastian or Javik as Day one DLC is that the companion/squadmates are a very big reason why people might buy a BioWare game in the first place. So sure, from EA/BioWare's POV, blocking off a whole character as paid DLC is a great way to make some extra money. But knowing that people play their games for the characters, to me it seems incredibly exploitative and sleezy.

Addai67 wrote...
Leliana's quests... the conversations with
what'shername the dippy cleric... the juxtaposition of his role vs.
Anders in the pink poop bomb scene... the intention to have an expansion
based on a Crusade which he mentions.

In a game that was already such a ripoff, putting that content behind a paywall is sleazy business practice.

Exactly.

And as you mentioned, New Vegas is probably the one game in recent memory that really did DLC right. Especially for a narrative heavy game- it created some hooks in the base game but they were just that- hooks to possible new adventures and stories to be told. And the way all the DLCs tied together was similarly great. And outside of Oblivion's horse armor fiasco, I don't think Bethesda has ever done Day 1 DLC, have they? I'd be curious to know how successful their DLC is versus BioWare's Day 1 DLC.

[Gatt9]

Elhanan wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

The difference is,  the movie theater doesn't sell you a ticket for the movie,  then have the ticket taker stop you and ask you for $10 more to be allowed into a theater that has that material reinserted.

ME3 OTOH asked you at the register to pay $10 to get a component of the game that can be easily regarded as necessary given how instrumental Protheans are to the storyline....

But theaters may actually do this, too; one area and price for regular fare, and another for 3D effects. And neither the FX or DLC is essential to the story, I believe.

That's a good counter-arguement. 

I'd argue that the content of both is identical,  so neither side actually misses out on anything no matter which "Version" they opt for.  No one loses out on content regardless of which theater they walk into,  unlike gaming where one side misses out the content.

DLC OTOH is lost content.

Which,  honestly,  how far away are we from that being mandatory to complete the game?  EA's already walking that path now,  look at ME3.  Despite the numerous statements of "Single player can get the best ending without Multiplayer",  the final product had the best ending locked behind Multiplayer which required an Online Pass to force used gamers to pay extra.  To this day,  Bioware-EA refuses to acknowledge the deception,  and went to great lengths to pretend they hadn't lied.  So if Bioware-EA is capable of that,  how far are we from DLC being required to complete the game?

[DukeOfNukes]

Gatt9 wrote...

Which,  honestly,  how far away are we from that being mandatory to complete the game?

*Looks at Asura's Wrath.*

True Ending DLC, eh?

It's like going to Expendables 2, paying full price for the movie, and then having to pay an additional dollar to see Chuck Norris in it.

[Ninja Stan]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Did you like the Avengers? I did. I thought it was a fantastic movie, blending different IPs and characters in an almost seamless way. In the comics, Wolverine was part of the Avengers.

I also really enjoyed The Avengers. In the comics, many characters have been members of the Avengers, either as full members or as reserve members. Spider-Man was, at one time, a reserve Avenger.

Now, assuming Marvel/Disney licensing issues were resolved today, let's say that Wolverine COULD have been in the Avengers movie (Hugh Jackman or no, just throwing the character concept out there). There were able to have him in a few group scenes/conversations, but weren't able to get some of his battle/CG scenes, or his stand alone scenes completely filmed before the film was sent to the editing team for final cut.

I am with you so far. Your premise seems plausible.

What if, while the editing team was doing their magic, they brought back most of the production team and then filmed Wolverine's scenes, so he could be in the movie? Completed all of his CG work, completed all of his lines and story. And if it was finished in time, they could send his section of the film to the editing team to get ready by opening night.

Then, on opening night, you can buy a normal ticket to see the Avengers... or you could buy a ticket that is essentially 20% more expensive and see the Avengers with Wolverine in it?

Personally? I might be annoyed, but I think I would pay the extra money. I like Wolverine and Hugh Jackman's potrayal of the character (did you see him in X-Men: First class? He was a hilarious cameo!).

Do you not envision the sheer volume of nerd rage if something like this happened? Fans would be foaming at the mouth, bad mouthing the studio, calling corporate greed and trying to milk the consumer for every dime they could.

We area already doing this. I would pay extra for seeing a 3D version of the same movie or for the deluxe Ultra AVX version or for seating in the VIP Theatre (think Alamo Drafthouse type layout and services). I saw Pixar's "Up" in both regular 2D and 3D. I also watched Avengers in 2D and 3D. While people might grumble about the extra cost, it seems to be doing good business and keeps people going to the cinema. 

So yes, I see your point, but I think your premise would be a pretty awesome way to encourage multiple viewings of the same movie. One of the cinemas in town has also had screenings of the extended Lord of the Rings movies. It's already happening, and moviegoers seem to enjoy having that kind of choice.

[Elhanan]

Gatt9 wrote...

That's a good counter-arguement. 

I'd argue that the content of both is identical,  so neither side actually misses out on anything no matter which "Version" they opt for.  No one loses out on content regardless of which theater they walk into,  unlike gaming where one side misses out the content.

DLC OTOH is lost content.

Which,  honestly,  how far away are we from that being mandatory to complete the game?  EA's already walking that path now,  look at ME3.  Despite the numerous statements of "Single player can get the best ending without Multiplayer",  the final product had the best ending locked behind Multiplayer which required an Online Pass to force used gamers to pay extra.  To this day,  Bioware-EA refuses to acknowledge the deception,  and went to great lengths to pretend they hadn't lied.  So if Bioware-EA is capable of that,  how far are we from DLC being required to complete the game?

I do not have ME3, though I am familiar with the contention. One of the DLC purchased for ME was done to make a complete playthrough easier for my two Shepard's; same kinda arguement was seen there, though I played a long time after release and only read of it.

But I chose to pay for it, and it was worth it to me; not only for aiding efficient play, but it was quite enjoyable, too. Personally, I see this as business choice for the game creators, and a personal choice for the Players.

[Bostur]

My biggest annoyance with this type of DLCs is my perception that I may not get a complete game, or that a complete game may not even exist.

When I read a book, or go to a movie theatre I very much expect a complete work of art. I want the whole thing and nothing more. I used to have the same expectation of a game, and I still have that expectation when playing games made by old-time designers.

When I see a game that is sold alongside a lot of DLC my perception is that the designers don't even have the notion of a complete work of art. It feels more like a menu at a burger joint, or a DIY kit. Well I'm no game designer and I don't know what combination of features would make for the best game. Part of what I feel I should pay for is the designers' professional design, and their take on what a complete game is. If I have to design the game myself, I should get paid for it, or at least get a lower price

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

This is a major reason why I have recently started to avoid BW games and games from other publishers with similar marketing schemes.

[Elhanan]

Bostur wrote...

My biggest annoyance with this type of DLCs is my perception that I may not get a complete game, or that a complete game may not even exist.

When I read a book, or go to a movie theatre I very much expect a complete work of art. I want the whole thing and nothing more. I used to have the same expectation of a game, and I still have that expectation when playing games made by old-time designers.

When I see a game that is sold alongside a lot of DLC my perception is that the designers don't even have the notion of a complete work of art. It feels more like a menu at a burger joint, or a DIY kit. Well I'm no game designer and I don't know what combination of features would make for the best game. Part of what I feel I should pay for is the designers' professional design, and their take on what a complete game is. If I have to design the game myself, I should get paid for it, or at least get a lower price

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

This is a major reason why I have recently started to avoid BW games and games from other publishers with similar marketing schemes.

I recommend at least trying Dune, Lord of the Rings, Sherlock Holmes, Conan, and other books and films that appear in continuations, have addendums, glossaries, and extras; missing some really good stuff there....

[Bostur]

Elhanan wrote...

Bostur wrote...

My biggest annoyance with this type of DLCs is my perception that I may not get a complete game, or that a complete game may not even exist.

When I read a book, or go to a movie theatre I very much expect a complete work of art. I want the whole thing and nothing more. I used to have the same expectation of a game, and I still have that expectation when playing games made by old-time designers.

When I see a game that is sold alongside a lot of DLC my perception is that the designers don't even have the notion of a complete work of art. It feels more like a menu at a burger joint, or a DIY kit. Well I'm no game designer and I don't know what combination of features would make for the best game. Part of what I feel I should pay for is the designers' professional design, and their take on what a complete game is. If I have to design the game myself, I should get paid for it, or at least get a lower price

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

This is a major reason why I have recently started to avoid BW games and games from other publishers with similar marketing schemes.

I recommend at least trying Dune, Lord of the Rings, Sherlock Holmes, Conan, and other books and films that appear in continuations, have addendums, glossaries, and extras; missing some really good stuff there....

Lord of the Rings is a very finalized and complete trilogy. It does have interesting addendums, but they are separate and there's no doubt where the story starts and ends.

Sherlock Holmes is a popular character featuring in a lot of short stories, each story seems very much like a complete work of art.

Extras and addendums are exactly that, free, optional content unimportant to the main plot, but nevertheless often interesting for fans. I don't see how that compares to Bioware DLC at all.

[Elhanan]

LotR is a complete trilogy, but toss in the other assoc works of Tolkein dealing with Middle Earth, and you may have some original hardcopy DLC. And did you get the vanilla films, the Extended versions, or later works for your library?

Sherlock was dead and gone - as was James Bond - until public cries of grief encouraged the authors to keep the series going; much like some other DLC.

Keep spinning it as you wish, but there is nothing new under the Sun.

Modifié par Elhanan, 18 août 2012 - 12:47 .

[RaggieRags]

Bostur wrote...

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

That's really the gist of it. It doesn't matter how much you rationalize it. If there's a game without DLC, it's "complete". Add DLC to the same game and inevetably people will look at it as "incomplete".

My husband is a movie collector. He always wants to have the version that has the most stuff in it. It doesn't matter if it has extras he's never going to watch, that's the one he wants. If he can't get it, he doesn't really feel like buying the regular edition either. If there's a better set out there, the standard edition somehow becomes "less". People base a lot of buying decisions on irrational feelings. They don't like to think they are buying something that they feel is "missing" something.

[Bostur]

Elhanan wrote...

LotR is a complete trilogy, but toss in the other assoc works of Tolkein dealing with Middle Earth, and you may have some original hardcopy DLC. And did you get the vanilla films, the Extended versions, or later works for your library?

Sherlock was dead and gone - as was James Bond - until public cries of grief encouraged the authors to keep the series going; much like some other DLC.

Keep spinning it as you wish, but there is nothing new under the Sun.

I'm not trying to spin anything. Merely saying how I perceive it, and what I think cause that perception.

Resurrecting Sherlock Holmes was probably the dumbest thing Conan Doyle did, and modern artists may be wise to learn from that. ;-)

[Fast Jimmy]

RaggieRags wrote...

Bostur wrote...

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

That's really the gist of it. It doesn't matter how much you rationalize it. If there's a game without DLC, it's "complete". Add DLC to the same game and inevetably people will look at it as "incomplete".

My husband is a movie collector. He always wants to have the version that has the most stuff in it. It doesn't matter if it has extras he's never going to watch, that's the one he wants. If he can't get it, he doesn't really feel like buying the regular edition either. If there's a better set out there, the standard edition somehow becomes "less". People base a lot of buying decisions on irrational feelings. They don't like to think they are buying something that they feel is "missing" something.

This. If people were truly rational beings, then buying habits would be A) much more predictable and much less, period. Logical people don't buy a whole lot of things. Why go to a restaurant? Logically, you can make the same meal at home with a trip to the grocery store, some research and planning. Why buy a new book? There are many books already in your collection that you have likley forgotten keys themes and scenes for that you could enjoy again. Why buy a new movie? Its possible your current collection could be multiple weeks worth of watching, not to mention TV or the Internet offer showings of movies you may have not seen and truly enjoy at no extra cost.

Being able to logically explain how you are charging people extra for additional content the same day as releasing the core content is not hard. But emotionally it is jarring to the consumer. And again, this is not a DVD release of a movie that was out in theaters for people to see months ago. This is an original showing, the first debut of the medium. And, from the moment that product is rolled out, there is competing "better/enhanced/more content" versions right alongside it for more money.

From a consumer's emotional point of view, that's unfavorable.


If developers were smart, they would have, as I said earlier Week 3 DLC. Just long enough after to get the discussion (and hopefully sales) going again, but far enough out from the original release to distance itself as a gimmick in the eyes of consumers. If, during this time, people have finished your game, this gives them a reason to start from the beginning (assumign it is content that Bioware has been releasing, namely companions), which gives a stronger argument for the developers to include content that can only be experienced on mulitple playthroughs.

Similarly, if they had Day One DLC, but gave it away for free, this would increase the number of users who would sign up through Origins and would lower piracy rates, as pirated versions would be unable to register and get this content. 

I see way too many consumer downsides to Paid, Story Day One DLC and way too many other options on the table to bring value to both the developer and the consumer to not look at the picture and just scratch my head. 

[naughty99]

RaggieRags wrote...

Bostur wrote...

The perception can by itself make the game experience worse. If I feel I may be missing out on something important this can affect my experience even if it is merely a perception.

That's really the gist of it. It doesn't matter how much you rationalize it. If there's a game without DLC, it's "complete". Add DLC to the same game and inevetably people will look at it as "incomplete".

My husband is a movie collector. He always wants to have the version that has the most stuff in it. It doesn't matter if it has extras he's never going to watch, that's the one he wants. If he can't get it, he doesn't really feel like buying the regular edition either. If there's a better set out there, the standard edition somehow becomes "less". People base a lot of buying decisions on irrational feelings. They don't like to think they are buying something that they feel is "missing" something.

Interesting perspective, I hadn't considered this aspect of the additional content. That's a great point; I suppose someone who is a super fan of a particular franchise and has been eagerly awaiting the next installment might feel obligated in a way to buy the extras.

In my case, so far I haven't seen any Day One DLC offerings for any game that even looked remotely interesting. Usually it's small stuff like item packs, small missions with an extra companion, etc. But I can understand where you're coming from, why a collector or someone who wants to own all the content related to a game might feel upset that they have to spend more in order to buy everything related to the game at launch.

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Similarly, if they had Day One DLC, but gave it away for free, this would increase the number of users who would sign up through Origins and would lower piracy rates, as pirated versions would be unable to register and get this content. 

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't most of this stuff given away as premiums to persuade people to pre-order? For example, I pre-ordered DA2 on Steam the first day it was available, and I later learned that those who pre-ordered earlier (via Origin) got the Sebastian DLC. Didn't bother me personally as I wasn't interested in this particular DLC.

Modifié par naughty99, 18 août 2012 - 07:18 .

[Joy Divison]

Only after reading this thread and being amazed at the number of people who rationalize shady business practices do I realize why Marx was wrong about capitalism's inevitable collapse.

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

[Elhanan]

Joy Divison wrote...

Only after reading this thread and being amazed at the number of people who rationalize shady business practices do I realize why Marx was wrong about capitalism's inevitable collapse.

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

Nothing shady except the possible perception and understanding of the nature of Day 1 DLC. The making and selling of it is comepletely legit, and fills the need seen in some Players.

If one does not wish to purchase it, skip it or wait until later; same for the games.

[Il Divo]

Joy Divison wrote...

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

Suckered? Not at all. Bioware laid out an offer. I made an evaluation based on the circumstances. I looked at Mass Effect 3, decided it was worth the price, and bought it. I beat the game, and didn't notice anything "fundamental" missing. I then looked at Javik, decided it was worth the price, and bought it. A pretty straightforward business arrangement.

Modifié par Il Divo, 18 août 2012 - 05:58 .

[Addai]

Elhanan wrote...

LotR is a complete trilogy, but toss in the other assoc works of Tolkein dealing with Middle Earth, and you may have some original hardcopy DLC. And did you get the vanilla films, the Extended versions, or later works for your library?

Sherlock was dead and gone - as was James Bond - until public cries of grief encouraged the authors to keep the series going; much like some other DLC.

Keep spinning it as you wish, but there is nothing new under the Sun.

Boy, the rationalization in this thread gets ever deeper.  Bring your shovel.

My version of LOTR came with appendices included in the base price, but aside from that, LOTR is a long, involved masterpiece that took Tolkien most of his lifetime to create.  I'm not even going to seriously entertain your comparison to Bioware's latest fare of McRPGs and their pathetic defense of trying to sell less and less game for more and more money.

Modifié par Addai67, 18 août 2012 - 06:09 .

[Elhanan]

Addai67 wrote...

Boy, the rationalization in this thread gets ever deeper.  Bring your shovel.

My version of LOTR came with appendices included in the base price, but aside from that, LOTR is a long, involved masterpiece that took Tolkien most of his lifetime to create.  I'm not even going to seriously entertain your comparison to Bioware's latest fare of McRPGs and their pathetic defense of trying to sell less and less game for more and more money.

Not attempting to rationalize anything; simply indicating the apparent difference between the views some have of video games and other forms of entertainment that have had sim practices.

[AngryFrozenWater]

Elhanan wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Only after reading this thread and being amazed at the number of people who rationalize shady business practices do I realize why Marx was wrong about capitalism's inevitable collapse.

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

Nothing shady except the possible perception and understanding of the nature of Day 1 DLC. The making and selling of it is comepletely legit, and fills the need seen in some Players.

If one does not wish to purchase it, skip it or wait until later; same for the games.

Or voice your opinion about it. And that's what Joy Division is doing. That's a good thing. You cannot expect people to defend something they do not believe in.

[Addai]

Elhanan wrote...

Addai67 wrote...

Boy, the rationalization in this thread gets ever deeper.  Bring your shovel.

My version of LOTR came with appendices included in the base price, but aside from that, LOTR is a long, involved masterpiece that took Tolkien most of his lifetime to create.  I'm not even going to seriously entertain your comparison to Bioware's latest fare of McRPGs and their pathetic defense of trying to sell less and less game for more and more money.

Not attempting to rationalize anything; simply indicating the apparent difference between the views some have of video games and other forms of entertainment that have had sim practices.

There is no comparison.  I can tell you that if his publisher suggested to Tolkien that he chop off, say, Aragorn's recitation of the Lay of Luthien, or the Cleansing of the Shire, into companion booklets that people would have to pay extra for because they weren't really necessary to the story, and try to call that "giving readers choices," heads would roll.

Modifié par Addai67, 18 août 2012 - 07:02 .

[Elhanan]

AngryFrozenWater wrote...

Elhanan wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

Only after reading this thread and being amazed at the number of people who rationalize shady business practices do I realize why Marx was wrong about capitalism's inevitable collapse.

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

Nothing shady except the possible perception and understanding of the nature of Day 1 DLC. The making and selling of it is comepletely legit, and fills the need seen in some Players.

If one does not wish to purchase it, skip it or wait until later; same for the games.

Or voice your opinion about it. And that's what Joy Division is doing. That's a good thing. You cannot expect people to defend something they do not believe in.

Nope; the quoted part ref 'shady practices', 'and content that is fundemental to the base game' is apparently made as factual, and it is the perception and understanding of such which is shady.

We are all entitled to opinions, but should strive for informed ones.

[Elhanan]

Addai67 wrote...

There is no comparison.  I can tell you that if his publisher suggested to Tolkien that he chop off, say, Aragorn's recitation of the Lay of Luthien, or the Cleansing of the Shire, into companion booklets that people would have to pay extra for because they weren't really necessary to the story, and try to call that "giving readers choices," heads would roll.

Instead we have an author encouraged to publish additional works which were likely purchased under a seperate fee; not free, though probably not available on Day 1.

http://en.wikipedia....._R._R._Tolkien

Personally, w/o The Hobbit, I would have never completed LotR, and have never bothered with the other publications. I also skipped most of the DLC for ME2 as superfluous materials.

If folks do not want the added items. simply avoid them.

[Joy Divison]

Il Divo wrote...

Joy Divison wrote...

If so many people are going to be sucked in paying extra for content that is fundamental to the base game, then Bioware would be suckers *not* to charge for Day 1 DLC.

Suckered? Not at all. Bioware laid out an offer. I made an evaluation based on the circumstances. I looked at Mass Effect 3, decided it was worth the price, and bought it. I beat the game, and didn't notice anything "fundamental" missing. I then looked at Javik, decided it was worth the price, and bought it. A pretty straightforward business arrangement.

I make the same "straightforward business arrangement" when I spend $9 for a warm beer at a ball game, that does not change the fact that I am being suckered into paying for something with almost a 1000% percent markup.  Just because you agree to the terms of a business arrangement, that does not mean you are not being taken advantage of, squeezed, ripped off, or suckered.

[Chromie]

Elhanan wrote...
We are all entitled to opinions, but should strive for informed ones.

Ha, I almost took you seriously for a second.

EDIT: You're a Harrowmont supporter aren't you? If so well...

Modifié par Skelter192, 18 août 2012 - 07:58 .