512 réponses à ce sujet

[Snypy]

DukeOfNukes wrote...

...

That's what this boils down to. Somebody saw Javik in the planning stages, said "Oh, this content is good. I bet if we put it off until later, we could get people to buy it as DLC." It was a concious decision to take this character and make him as DLC. They sold us an incomplete game, not because they added stuff into it later, but because they made the decision to HOLD BACK for the purpose of selling us later.

...

Apparently, while ME3 was still in development stages, somebody did realize that, given limited resources to finalize the game, it would've been impossible to create the content related to Javik on time. Therefore, instead of cutting the character out completely, BioWare decided to add 'From Ashes' as a Day One DLC. I don't believe that the content was intentionally held back form the game just for the purpose of increasing revenue.

And we're back to the argument: "Is ME3 complete without Javik?" Try to imagine playing the game without ever hearing anything about the prothean. Now, in hindsight, did you miss him? Was the story incomplete? Was your experience affected in any major way?

Basically, the only thing that the DLC provides is more insight into the Protheans -- their culture and their actions which somewhat affected the other species in the game. Ultimately, it contains some pieces of information that I'd rather not know. (I guess Liara would agree with me on that. )

[MajorStupidity]

Ninja Stan wrote...

DukeOfNukes wrote...

Complete is pretty simple. Uncomprimised, undivided. Making your vision as a whole, and then adding onto it is perfectly acceptable. Dividing that vision to sell off in pieces is incomplete. The issue isn't that they had DLC, or even Day 1 DLC...it's that they had something planned as part of their vision, and they comprimised that by stripping it out and selling it as profit.

Okay, I get what you're saying, but when did you work on the ME3 team? I don't recall your name or alias anywhere on the team roster or anywhere on the staff gallery. To be able to determine what is "complete" and what is not, you must have been either an executive producer or maybe a team lead? I can only believe that you were let go over your disagreement with the leads about what constitutes a "complete" ME3. So please provide some of your bona fides.

Yes, Javik may have been part of the plan from the beginning. At some point, he was no longer part of the plan for the base game. Him being in some leaked script does not obligate BioWare to adhere to that script. You seeing Javik's name in the game code does not, in any way, constitute a binding contract that Javik needs to be in the base game. You wanting Javik's story does not suddenly confer upon you the ability to dictate what goes on the disc.

I understand that you believe Javik's story is an important part of ME3. But calling a game incomplete because a developer has chosen to sell as DLC content that you feel belongs in the base game in no way removes the company's prerogative to make that decision. As always, you the consumer make the choice to purchase or not purchase. Because companies are entities geared towards making profit.

You can accept that and dislike or disagree with their decision in a respectful, civil manner, or you can continue to whinge about how they were wrong in selling content you want because you feel you shouldn't have to pay for it, and it should have been given to players for free.

*Clap* you are awesome

what people fail to realize is that the most opportune time to release DLC is very early on in the cycle when demand for the game is at its highest. For most players once the "new car smell" phase has ended and the game is set on the shelf the demand for DLC goes down. For BW to make the most profit (they are a business after all) it is in their best interest to get out DLC fairly quickly. And if you dont like it dont buy it, BW would not produce day one DLC if it did not sell.

[KBomb]

JaegerBane wrote...

*snipped for space and for being asinine*

We’ll just have to agree to disagree. I haven’t got the patience to argue with a sycophant who throws out insults like ‘moral crusaders’, ‘whiners’ and ‘cranks’, then gets up in arms when someone mocks their own words against them.
Also, I don’t care if the “corporate suits”  take me seriously . I couldn’t possibly care any less about them than I already do.  I guess I don’t share your love for corporate entities.


It’s obvious we have reached a stalemate and any other discussion will be inflammatory and useless. If you’d like to discuss this in a civil manner, do so in PM, otherwise I am done with you.  

[Fisto The Sexbot]

Ninja Stan wrote...

DukeOfNukes wrote...

Complete is pretty simple. Uncomprimised, undivided. Making your vision as a whole, and then adding onto it is perfectly acceptable. Dividing that vision to sell off in pieces is incomplete. The issue isn't that they had DLC, or even Day 1 DLC...it's that they had something planned as part of their vision, and they comprimised that by stripping it out and selling it as profit.

Okay, I get what you're saying, but when did you work on the ME3 team? I don't recall your name or alias anywhere on the team roster or anywhere on the staff gallery. To be able to determine what is "complete" and what is not, you must have been either an executive producer or maybe a team lead? I can only believe that you were let go over your disagreement with the leads about what constitutes a "complete" ME3. So please provide some of your bona fides.

Yes, Javik may have been part of the plan from the beginning. At some point, he was no longer part of the plan for the base game. Him being in some leaked script does not obligate BioWare to adhere to that script. You seeing Javik's name in the game code does not, in any way, constitute a binding contract that Javik needs to be in the base game. You wanting Javik's story does not suddenly confer upon you the ability to dictate what goes on the disc.

I understand that you believe Javik's story is an important part of ME3. But calling a game incomplete because a developer has chosen to sell as DLC content that you feel belongs in the base game in no way removes the company's prerogative to make that decision. As always, you the consumer make the choice to purchase or not purchase. Because companies are entities geared towards making profit.

You can accept that and dislike or disagree with their decision in a respectful, civil manner, or you can continue to whinge about how they were wrong in selling content you want because you feel you shouldn't have to pay for it, and it should have been given to players for free.

He didn't say that BioWare does not 'have the prerogative to make that decision'. Being able to release an unfinished product or not being forced into paying twice for a complete product does not make the game any more 'complete'. Companies may be geared toward making a profit, but they can go about in different ways. Valve made DoTA and Team Fortress 2 completely free and they can still make a profit. Brian Fargo says he wouldn't dream of selling us Wasteland 2 day 1 DLC after he used fans' money to fund the project. CDProjekt has made all DLC free. If wanting to make a profit absolves a company of any criticism directed at their business practices, then obviously anything they'd do that can stand to make a profit (and still be legal yet consumer unfriendly) should be considered a correct practice because 'companies want to make money'.

If people don't 'continue to whinge', as you called it, about unfair business practices then nothing will be stopping companies from following EA's example as opposed to the other companies I've mentioned, and I don't see why the consumer would want that. Better yet, how much more profit will they really make if BioWare's reputation continues to suffer because of certain practices, among which Day 1 DLC can be counted, and when other companies have wisened up and decided it would be a good idea to invest in a service instead of five separate products you have to buy to get the full experience?

And I haven't seen anything uncivil or disrespectful in the post you quoted. It's strange that you'd think of being civil and criticizing BioWare for day 1 DLC as mutually exclusive.

[Fisto The Sexbot]

 

JaegerBane wrote...

Upsettingshorts is absolutely correct - the 'full game' is what the developers define it as. It may not match your view of what it is but, as a consumer, your place is to decide whether to buy the product on offer, not decide what the product is.

 

JaegerBane wrote...

 your own arbitrary definition of a full product

 Thanks for making our place clear.

[Wulfram]

In a complete game, this guy wouldn't show up

[AsheraII]

I can fully justify Day 1 DLC.
1) It encourages players to purchase, or better even, pre-order the game themselves instead of buying a second hand copy. Yet, it does NOT force players to do so. The game is playable without the DLC, even though the side missions and rewards provided are very good, they're not integral to the game.

2) It gives players an impression of the potential of future DLC's. What's to be expected from future DLC's? What can be done through future DLC? It's basically a demo or a form of advertisement for future DLC.

3) It allows the developers to test through the implementation of DLC's. It sounds easy enough to a NOOB to just patch in some new content, but it isn't. The Mass Effect 3 game is specifically designed with DLC in mind, a good modular system that allows one to plug in new bits of content easily. That has to be tested thoroughly, and the best way to test it is making a fully functional DLC for day 1 already, rather than starting the development of DLC after release and finding out too late that certain modules simply won't connect without a complete overhaul of the games' main engine, simply because you didn't get to test those properly because you didn't have a proper DLC to test it with.

Maybe you'd need experience as a developer or publisher to grasp all that reality, but that's how it is. That's 2 very strong Marketing reasons and one very strong Development reason for Day 1 DLC.

[Harorrd]

Then why arent they just placing the game another 6 months in development? so they can relese the final product with all the "DLC" as original content, giving the player a better and more fun experience and giving the game a real 10/10 and not a fake IGN 10/10, so that more people recomend it to their friends, and more people buy the full game for full price.

[AsheraII]

Harorrd wrote...

Then why arent they just placing the game another 6 months in development? so they can relese the final product with all the "DLC" as original content, giving the player a better and more fun experience and giving the game a real 10/10 and not a fake IGN 10/10, so that more people recomend it to their friends, and more people buy the full game for full price.

Because that fails to meet justifications #1 and #2, while increasing the development time (making development much more expensive). It's MUCH easier to fix a glitch during the development while it's being added before release than fixing it after release when the glitch becomes part of many gamesystems and some may actually rely on some of the glitches' effects. So that is simply not an option. Such systems are to be tested DURING development, not after.
So that adds reason #4 for day 1 DLC: It's more cost efficient to develop and test DLC systems early on.

If you want to see what happens when you add content without properly tested modular systems: The implementation of The Burning Crusades expansion to WoW resulted in unstable and bugged game systems for months after release. The servers crashed every 30 minutes on the first day, some were completely offline for as long as a week, and months after, players still suffered unexpected crashes (both server and client side), loot-lag, logging in after a crash to find their character in an endless fall down the grey, permanently bugged mobs both inworld and sometimes also within instances (which is just great if you have to wait a week for the raid to reset properly).

So overall, I can't say I mind Day 1 DLC. I understand the reasoning behind it, and feel it functions properly.

[hoorayforicecream]

DukeOfNukes wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Let's say that Nintendo made a Super Mario Bros. game that had N levels, and then made an additional M levels available via DLC on day 1.

You lost me right there. Nintendo is on the record as being anti-DLC in general...let alone Day 1 type shenanigans.

Not anymore.

[Bhaal]

Snypy wrote...
And we're back to the argument: "Is ME3  complete without Javik?" Try to imagine playing the game without ever  hearing anything about the prothean. Now, in hindsight, did you miss  him? Was the story incomplete? Was your experience affected in any major way?

Basically, the only thing that the DLC provides is more  insight into the Protheans -- their culture and their actions which  somewhat affected the other species in the game. Ultimately, it contains some pieces of information that I'd rather not know. (I guess Liara  would agree with me on that. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/joyful.png[/smilie])

To be honest i had to play without Javik for a while and i can easly say  without him somethings feels missing since he's so integrated to the  story.

Wulfram wrote...

In a complete game, this guy wouldn't show up

and this...

Modifié par Adakutay, 19 août 2012 - 03:33 .

[Siran]

Wulfram wrote...

In a complete game, this guy wouldn't show up

Try playing with a save where Tali isn't alive or Garrus. You get these fillers, too. No argument for an "incomplete" game.

[rolson00]

Chris Priestly wrote...

Perhaps you should read this.

whilst thats a good read chris i think people mean like from the ashes dlc if its releast on the same day as the game then its should be part of the game

[Grubas]

Wulfram wrote...

In a complete game, this guy wouldn't show up

Can someone explain? 

[AlanC9]

Harorrd wrote...

Then why arent they just placing the game another 6 months in development? so they can relese the final product with all the "DLC" as original content, giving the player a better and more fun experience and giving the game a real 10/10 and not a fake IGN 10/10, so that more people recomend it to their friends, and more people buy the full game for full price.

At some point don't you reach diminishing returns? You're throwing away the revenue from From Ashes, and maybe Leviathan and Retake Omega too (speculating), and delaying the next game's revenue.... In hopes of a few more word-of-mouth sales. Note that from the tracking data most players don't finish the games, and since players were less likely to finish DA:O than the ME games, it's not obvious that more length would help.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 août 2012 - 05:21 .

[svenus97]

Let me educate you a bit. There is this thing called "gone gold". As in, "the game has gone gold". It's a period of around a month or so before the release date in which the finished product is being evaluated by Sony and Microsoft for the console release. During that month (or so) the devs have nothing to do, so they make DLC. Now, no publisher in their right mind would allow this for free, so, of course, the DLC costs money. Not to mention that DLC sales go down significantly the longer the game is out.

[Siran]

Grubas wrote...


Can someone explain? 

If someone of your crew is missing during your final "speech", be it Tali, Garrus or Javik in this case, he / she gets replaced by some fill-in. That's it. I don't know why someone would derive from that, that a game is incomplete to be honest. But I guess whatever keeps your imagination running...

Parts of Zaeed and Kasumi where in ME2 as well and it wasn't an "incomplete" game either.

[Selene Moonsong]

Fisto The Sexbot wrote...

He didn't say that BioWare does not 'have the prerogative to make that decision'. Being able to release an unfinished product or not being forced into paying twice for a complete product does not make the game any more 'complete'. Companies may be geared toward making a profit, but they can go about in different ways. Valve made DoTA and Team Fortress 2 completely free and they can still make a profit. Brian Fargo says he wouldn't dream of selling us Wasteland 2 day 1 DLC after he used fans' money to fund the project. CDProjekt has made all DLC free. If wanting to make a profit absolves a company of any criticism directed at their business practices, then obviously anything they'd do that can stand to make a profit (and still be legal yet consumer unfriendly) should be considered a correct practice because 'companies want to make money'.

If people don't 'continue to whinge', as you called it, about unfair business practices then nothing will be stopping companies from following EA's example as opposed to the other companies I've mentioned, and I don't see why the consumer would want that. Better yet, how much more profit will they really make if BioWare's reputation continues to suffer because of certain practices, among which Day 1 DLC can be counted, and when other companies have wisened up and decided it would be a good idea to invest in a service instead of five separate products you have to buy to get the full experience?

And I haven't seen anything uncivil or disrespectful in the post you quoted. It's strange that you'd think of being civil and criticizing BioWare for day 1 DLC as mutually exclusive.

You missed Stan's point completely. The Producers and various Leads determine what is a finished product, and only them.

Day 1 DLC is not new, and BioWare and other developers are doing the same thing. One thing BioWare does is plan for it early on enough to include flags for it in the design. Some people may interpret this as cut content or an incomplete product, but from what I have seen from BioWare, it is done early enough in design so that placeholder information is available for the developer teams that will work on that subset of content.

To offer it up as Day 1 DLC is not a bad thing, it is provided for those who would want it, and DLC has never been required to complete a game, but provide more story content that makes the game, IMHO, re-playable.

Making claims that day 1 DLC was actually cut material and that the game is incomplete is barely civil and is rather insulting when the individual making the claim was not a member of the BioWare staff that Stan mentioned.

Everyone is welcome to provide feedback in the forums as long as it is done in an appropriate manner and is referred to as Constructive Criticism. This means without accusations and assertions that something is factual without actually having enough information to verify such claims.

If you disagree with a desogn, development, or other business decision, everyone is free to say so and why they disagree, as long as it is in the form of constructive criticism and follows the Site Rules.

[Tipsyfresh]

Complete game is complete.

[Akugagi]

I didn't get the day 1 DLC (I would have if Origin supported paysafecard [they dont apparently sell retail collectors editions anywhere]) and I don't feel like that I missed anything, really.

[KBomb]

svenus97 wrote...

Let me educate you a bit. There is this thing called "gone gold". As in, "the game has gone gold". It's a period of around a month or so before the release date in which the finished product is being evaluated by Sony and Microsoft for the console release. During that month (or so) the devs have nothing to do, so they make DLC. Now, no publisher in their right mind would allow this for free, so, of course, the DLC costs money. Not to mention that DLC sales go down significantly the longer the game is out.

‘From Ashes’ was not created after the game went gold. That would only allow a month or so to make the entire DLC. Javik has extensive party banter and dialogue, whether you find it significant or not. He has a pretty extensive cut scene with Liara after Thessia, too.

DLC still has to undergo certification for Sony and Microsoft that can sometimes take up to two weeks, which would leave even less time after the game went gold.

You can say that Bioware planned for Javik to be day one DLC all along, that they worked on it in conjunction with the main game for the sole purpose of being released as day one DLC, but you cannot say that ‘From Ashes’ wasn’t made until after the game went gold. If it were planned as day one, it would need to be ready to go at the same time the game was released, most likely it’s submitted for certification around the same time as the main game.

Even with “hooks” present in the game disc, I don’t see DLC being made with a window of a month or less. Not as substantial as ‘From Ashes’ or the Sebastian DLC for DA2.

Modifié par KBomb, 19 août 2012 - 05:19 .

[Snypy]

Adakutay wrote...

To be honest i had to play without Javik for a while and i can easly say  without him somethings feels missing since he's so integrated to the  story.

and this...

// img of a guy; deleted to save space;

Well, that's your opinion. Although I recruited Javik in my first playthrough, I didn't take him with me on missions. (Not until my second playthrough.) In my book, he isn't an integral part of the story. He just provides more lore and understanding. None of which is vital to defeat the Reapers. It only makes the game more enjoyable for those of us who care about the Mass Effect universe.

As for the screenshot, there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. If you refuse Kaiden/Ashley to join you on the Normandy, he/she will then be replaced by a random soldier in this particular scene. I didn't really mind at all that some guy was listening to my speech. Frankly, I didn't even pay attention to him until you guys started discussing it here. So, I guess it's no argument for "this game is incomplete without Javik".

KBomb wrote...

You can say that Bioware planned for Javik to be day one DLC all along, that they worked on it in conjunction with the main game for the sole purpose of being released as day one DLC, but you cannot say that ‘From Ashes’ wasn’t made until after the game went gold. If it were planned as day one, it would need to be ready to go at the same time the game was released, most likely it’s submitted for certification around the same time as the main game.

So, let's assume that BioWare recorded dialogues with Javik while they were working on the other characters. But the rest of the content was made after the game went gold. Does it change anything?

Modifié par Snypy, 19 août 2012 - 06:01 .

[AlanC9]

KBomb wrote...
You can say that Bioware planned for Javik to be day one DLC all along, that they worked on it in conjunction with the main game for the sole purpose of being released as day one DLC, but you cannot say that ‘From Ashes’ wasn’t made until after the game went gold. If it were planned as day one, it would need to be ready to go at the same time the game was released, most likely it’s submitted for certification around the same time as the main game. 

You could submit the DLC later and still make Day 1, since you don't have the manufacturing and shipment delays for a DLC. Whether they did do that.... beats me.

[Atakuma]

John Riccitiello said day one DLC is so great because they can charge you ten more dollars for the game. That's really all you need to know about the mentality behind this practice. It's basically just subterfuge for price gouging.

[JaegerBane]

KBomb wrote...

I haven’t got the patience to argue  

You haven't got an argument to argue Kbomb - You can't even agree with yourself what you consider to be full game or not, and a few posts ago you were claiming that Bioware had 'violated your rights' - simply put, you're just shouting. If you're going to post your argument up on a forum then expect it to be challenged - throwing the toys out of the pram does nothing other than diminish your own credibility.