150 réponses à ce sujet

[Gimpy74]

DLCs? I want full blown expansions. Like throne of bhaal was to baldur's gate 2.

[Foolsfolly]

Varric as a squadmate.

[Terrorize69]

You do know all this thread does is encourage day one DLC right?

Modifié par Terrorize69, 18 octobre 2012 - 04:40 .

[Giltspur]

Gearbox seems to have a good model for Borderlands 2.  Four story DLC's that'll all be about six to ten hours long each, cost $10 each unless you buy all four for $30.

I can't predict the content I'd want without knowing more about DA3.  In general though, while I'm fine with DLC that adds to a story and fits in before the ending, when it's makes sense, I prefer DLC that can be understood to take place after the ending.  I'm okay with either though.

[Browneye_Vamp84]

DLC that won't cause save corruptions.  

Modifié par Browneye_Vamp84, 18 octobre 2012 - 04:45 .

[Quicksilver26]

Iron_JG wrote...

So, my takeaway from this thread is that the game needs to stand on its own for a while before major DLC comes out, so it feels like people are buying more than what they should already have. I know, breathtaking insight... but something I hope Bioware doesn't forget.
Item packs and other minor DLC are fine for day one fodder, and should be tolerable for even those with great DLC disdain. (Though I'd ask the items aren't overpowered, or are obtained through hard side quests, so we can step back from pay-for-power gameplay.) But I think Bioware should stop with Shale/Sebastian/Javik DLC near release, which gives a palpable ripoff vibe.
So, I lean towards extra quests over extra companions -- I'd prefer a few well-rounded characters over lots of guest appearances. I'd also like each DLC to feel like it adds to the entire campaign. Other DLC felt disjointed, insulated from what they should've affected. Recovering Cailan's armor and documents and finding out about Hawke's father should've had more consequences. The DLC affecting the entire campaign in sustained, even if small, ways would keep entire re-playthroughs interesting.

QFT
this 100%

[Maria Caliban]

Terrorize69 wrote...

You do know all this thread does is encourage day one DLC right?

As I want day 1 DLC, I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

[Foolsfolly]

Terrorize69 wrote...

You so know all this thread does is encourage Day one DLC right?

You know... I kinda like day one DLC.

Sure I dislike it greatly when an art book comes out before the game that shows Prothean concept art and the game's files have plenty of Prothean dialogue and gobs of reactionary dialogue from other characters to the Prothean character. And when said character was always considered to be a part of the game (although not always as a squad mate). Then putting a 7-10 dollar price tag on that content seems really really.... low.

But when it's some new weapons, a few side missions, or a character that wasn't planned from the beginning and contributes little if anything at all to the plot (like Zaeed) than I approve.

But DLC's a **** to figure out. Like character DLCs that add squad mates need to come out early. Like real early. I remember when Kasumi dropped and I was thinking "I've beaten this game like 10-15 times already. What do I care about a new squad mate?"

And I liked Kasumi. She was fun. Her special ability was a joy. The locust SMG changed how I played caster Shepards (no longer picked up Assault Rifle training). And I dug her James Bond-esque loyality mission.

But she DID come out way too late to be so worth while. Meanwhile DLC like Overlord, Lair of the Shadow Broker, Arrival, Legacy, and Mark of the Assassin plug into the game anywhere you want including after you've beaten it. New characters are harder to do that with since naturally they're more worthwhile the earlier you get them.

You also have to take into account the fact that a lot of people don't endlessly replay video games like I happen to do. And so DLC characters are next to useless for those people.

So as soon as you can get a DLC character like Zaeed, Shale, Sebastian, and Javik out the door the better. And Day One or Week One DLC is preferable because you always get to have those characters in your game.

Especially if they come free with a brand new game or a Collectors Edition.

But it all comes down to preception with the fanbase. Fans hate and I mean hate feeling like they're being cheated out of their money. For good goddamn reason too. No likes to feel that the game they just bought is incomplete until they throw down another ten dollars to complete it. It's a tough balancing act.

And I'm not saying I have any answers. I have a very contradictory stance here. I hate it when I think (or there's sufficent evidence to support) that a Day One DLC is cut from the game. But I also like Day One DLC because I get more bang for my DLC buck that way (more of my characters have that DLC which means I get more hours out of that).

[Maria Caliban]

Nizaris1 wrote...

But the Titans expansion could have been included in the main game. All the developers would've had to do was delay the release of Age of Mythology until the new content was complete.

NO, expansion is totally separated game, but use the original game resource, NOT like DLC that add new contents in it.

Can you give me the name of an expansion you liked? Because most of the expansions I know of add new content.

[Foolsfolly]

Giltspur wrote...

Gearbox seems to have a good model for Borderlands 2.  Four story DLC's that'll all be about six to ten hours long each, cost $10 each unless you buy all four for $30.

I can't predict the content I'd want without knowing more about DA3.  In general though, while I'm fine with DLC that adds to a story and fits in before the ending, when it's makes sense, I prefer DLC that can be understood to take place after the ending.  I'm okay with either though.

Saints Row the Third did the same thing. They called it Season Pass and you bought it to get all four of their story packed DLCs.

...the fourth one got cancelled.

It's kinda like... gambling buying one of those packs. You hope the developer is able to fulfil their stated amount of DLC otherwise it wasn't as much of a bargain as you orginally hoped.

[Atakuma]

Terrorize69 wrote...

You do know all this thread does is encourage day one DLC right?

Day one DLC is going to happen regardless of how much encouragement they get.

[Foolsfolly]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Varric as a squadmate.

I've changed my mind.

I want a Chevalier companion. A quest similar to Soldier's Peak where you take back, invade, or somehow gain a tower or fort and the Chevalier leading the charge to retake/steal/slaughter the lord within.

The Chevalier would have no real impact to the over all story and the fort/tower wouldn't be your main base/camp but a secondary camp with some NPCs and a merchant or two.

Completely secondary stuff here. No way that could ****** anyone off. And I get a Chevalier and a fortress again!

[Battlebloodmage]

Conniving_Eagle wrote...

Has anyone suggested the Romance DLC yet...? Lulz.

Flemmeth, anyone? lol 

[vswiss23]

I would like DLC that adds to the story of the game. Such as DLC focused on some event(s) with one or more companions, or a postlude to the main story.

[Fiddzz]

Nizaris1 wrote...

Foir example, Age of Mythology, that is the actuial game, Age of Mythology : The Titans is the expansion that are not add things in the original game but add new campaign, factions and monsters, the whole new game that continue the original game

While DLC is as example, Dragon Age 2 is the actual game, The Exiled Prince ADD Sebastian as one of the optional companion in the original game

Edit :

DLC is a bad and evil marketing strategy....they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC...

First; this "they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC" is completly false.  

Second, dlc and expansions are the same idea with different ways of getting the content to the consumer.  You could either wait 1-2 years from the original release of the game for a full expansion. OR have small amounts of content released as it gets made over the course of those 2 years. 

This thread also proves my next point, different people want different things (some nothing at all)

DLC packs give you the option to buy (or download, for free ones) only the things you want.  In skyrim for example, I bought the vampire DLC, but not the Hearthfire one because building a house doesn't interest me and killing vampires does.  If it was an expansion I would probably have to pay more for something I would only use half of.

[Foolsfolly]

Blair Brown wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

Foir example, Age of Mythology, that is the actuial game, Age of Mythology : The Titans is the expansion that are not add things in the original game but add new campaign, factions and monsters, the whole new game that continue the original game

While DLC is as example, Dragon Age 2 is the actual game, The Exiled Prince ADD Sebastian as one of the optional companion in the original game

Edit :

DLC is a bad and evil marketing strategy....they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC...

First; this "they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC" is completly false.  

Second, dlc and expansions are the same idea with different ways of getting the content to the consumer.  You could either wait 1-2 years from the original release of the game for a full expansion. OR have small amounts of content released as it gets made over the course of those 2 years. 

This thread also proves my next point, different people want different things (some nothing at all)

DLC packs give you the option to buy (or download, for free ones) only the things you want.  In skyrim for example, I bought the vampire DLC, but not the Hearthfire one because building a house doesn't interest me and killing vampires does.  If it was an expansion I would probably have to pay more for something I would only use half of.

You bring up a valid point  which makes me wonder something...

How about an exansion pack that is made up of these smaller piece DLCs? I know Fallout: New Vegas attempted this (somewhat successfully albeit with a disappointing finish.. I expected more from Ulysses after all that time hearing about him).

But let's say 3-4 DLCs which are all tied to a certain plot that when combined can count as an exansion pack of sorts. A complete story all of its own that takes place during the main plot but is completely indepedent of that plot.

[FINE HERE]

Seriously, guys, slow down. DLC shouldn't even be considered now. Let them finish the game first.

[Foolsfolly]

FINE HERE wrote...

Seriously, guys, slow down. DLC shouldn't even be considered now. Let them finish the game first.

By the time they announce DLC discussing what kind of DLC you'd like would be irrelevent, wouldn't it?

Besides if we talked about things they've announced we wouldn't be talking about anything on these boards right now.

[FINE HERE]

Foolsfolly wrote...

FINE HERE wrote...

Seriously, guys, slow down. DLC shouldn't even be considered now. Let them finish the game first.

By the time they announce DLC discussing what kind of DLC you'd like would be irrelevent, wouldn't it?

Besides if we talked about things they've announced we wouldn't be talking about anything on these boards right now.

Okay, but I don't want DLC. I want the game. I couldn't give a damn about DLC until after I've played the game. I don't even know what the story will be or whatever new characters there will be in DA3. What's the point in speculating about something that's added to something I know next to nothing about?

And I didn't say 'wait until the DLC is announced,' I said 'wait until the game is made.' Those should be two entirely different, and hopefully separate, events.

Edit: Also, I just realized: we're discussing the game they announced on this forum. What was the point of your last sentence?

Modifié par FINE HERE, 19 octobre 2012 - 06:05 .

[Wifflebottom]

Why are we talking about dlc for a game that's not even out and doesn't even have a release date?

[deuce985]

I'll let know after I play DA3...

[POETICDRINK]

deuce985 wrote...

I'll let know after I play DA3...

you really think after the game is made they going to take request for DLC?

[Atakuma]

POETICDRINK wrote...

deuce985 wrote...

I'll let know after I play DA3...

you really think after the game is made they going to take request for DLC?

They aren't going to take requests for DLC at all.

[MilaBanilla]

The black emporium. Or something like it. I want to change my characters appearance anytime of the game.
"hmm I sort of feel menace-like today, let me change my hair color to black w/ a Fu Manchu mustache. Now that will make the ladies jealous :0"

But seriously, I like the mirror again from DA2

[astreqwerty]

Blair Brown wrote...

Nizaris1 wrote...

Foir example, Age of Mythology, that is the actuial game, Age of Mythology : The Titans is the expansion that are not add things in the original game but add new campaign, factions and monsters, the whole new game that continue the original game

While DLC is as example, Dragon Age 2 is the actual game, The Exiled Prince ADD Sebastian as one of the optional companion in the original game

Edit :

DLC is a bad and evil marketing strategy....they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC...

First; this "they made the whole thing first, then they separate the contents making it DLC" is completly false.  

Second, dlc and expansions are the same idea with different ways of getting the content to the consumer.  You could either wait 1-2 years from the original release of the game for a full expansion. OR have small amounts of content released as it gets made over the course of those 2 years. 

This thread also proves my next point, different people want different things (some nothing at all)

DLC packs give you the option to buy (or download, for free ones) only the things you want.  In skyrim for example, I bought the vampire DLC, but not the Hearthfire one because building a house doesn't interest me and killing vampires does.  If it was an expansion I would probably have to pay more for something I would only use half of.

wow really bad way of justifying the existence of dlc and even worse comparing it to an expansion because there are huge differences that i am not gonna analyze here..on topic: nothing at all,every game developer should have the decency to ship complete games.

edit: wow do you people really thing that day 1 dlc is a widespread policy these days??well bethesda and cd projekt disagree

Modifié par astreqwerty, 19 octobre 2012 - 07:28 .