105 réponses à ce sujet

[Snypy]

MACharlie1 wrote...

Snypy wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

I'm failing to see the interest in "I want to bring MY squaddies along." I mean - whats the point of this argument? Just for the sake of hearing maybe 1 or 2 unique lines from them....which aren't that unique and just a rewording/revoice work of the others? This seems like a pretty pitiful reason. I mean, I don't mean to defend Bioware since the reason why we can't bring them is the obvious budget...

Apparantly, not all of us have the same priorities and wishes -- some of us actually like the interaction with the squad more than shooting Cerberus guys. That's particularly true when the outcome of the next DLC -- liberating Omega from the Illusive man, I assume -- will have absolutely no impact on the war with the Reapers. And if you believe my reason not to buy the DLC is pitiful, then I'd like to know what's your reason to buy it.

When have we EVER had actual squad interaction with DLCs? Lets review:
- Bring Down the Sky - None
- Pinnacle Station - None
- Zaeed - None (it's a loyalty mission for Zaeed)
- Kasumi - None - can't even bring another with you
- Overlord - None
- LOTSB - None - Liara doesn't count since she wasn't a member of the squad
- Arrival - None whatsoever in the slightest
- Firewalker - None
- Extended Cut - Free DLC after a fan backlash - doesn't count as it isn't new missions
- Leviathan - Save for EDI and James, there is squad interaction but it's all copy and paste. Similar to any run of the mill missions where they spout commentary - which for the most part is the squadmates saying the exact same thing. 

You act like this is a new thing. Leviathan only had it with EDI and James. I like squad interaction myself - but when the squad interaction is all the same copy and paste it really isn't that big of a deal.  

I don't recall me saying I will be buying it. Strangely enough - I don't have much interest in this DLC. I thought I would but the content seems...lackluster. 

I suppose it comes down to what you consider to be a squad interaction. I think both From Ashes and Leviathan have that -- even though the interaction is mostly limited to a few lines, and those lines are usually unique. It's actually a major difference from ME1 and ME2 where squadmates often paraphrased the very same thing. (Though I'd most definitely welcome new, real conversations in future ME3 DLCs, not just Zaeed lines and squad banter.)

Despite the fact that squadmates were mute most of the time in ME2 DLCs, I did get them all because I knew those stories were going to have some consequences in ME3. Also, there were more squadmates in ME2 so voicing all of them wasn't probably feasible. But we know there won't be a direct sequel to ME3 and the ending won't be touched again. Therefore, VA for all squadmates is the least BioWare can do, regardless of budget.

Modifié par Snypy, 08 novembre 2012 - 05:47 .

[Mims]

Beyond voice acting, removing squadmate choice for DLC can be a little annoying for Shepards who are a specialized class, playing on higher difficulties. I know when I play on insanity, there's always a character I bring for a particular power, like overload. In shadow broker it wasn't a problem, since there was only one temp squadmate. With TWO temp squadmates in this DLC, movesets are limited.

For me, its also hard to handwave why Shepard would just leave and not bring anyone. Aria says she doesn't like the company he keeps...really? All of them? I guess she'd not like Garrus, or the alliance guys, but she'd turn down Liara and Javik? It would be different if the story was like, "While walking down the street one day, Shepard is kidnapped by baboons and now has to find his way back home." Even Arrival had a slightly better reason for going it alone. 

Modifié par Mims, 08 novembre 2012 - 06:00 .

[phimseto]

So "lots of combat"...If I wanted "lots of combat", I would play multiplayer. For actual single player, I was hoping for something deeper. It also sounds like Omega won't be the second hub that we hoped for.

No squadmates = another red light.

1200 MS point price point = a bit rich for DLC.

In general, I think Bioware needs to change up their DLC policy - either invest in whole expansion packs like "Awakening" or have the DLC scripts written and ready when you bring the talent in to record dialogue for the main game (like The Stone Prisoner, Exiled Prince, and From Ashes seem to be).

All the rest feels too separate from the rest of the game, and it made me not really enjoy "Mark of the Assassin". Omega sounds like more of the same in that regard. I'd rather Bioware do follow-up expansions like the did with Awakening or DLC that can be fully integrated into the story like Return to Ostagar or the aforementioned launch DLCs.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

known_hero wrote...

So, why exactly is this dlc $15 dollars?

Because overpriced DLC is a business model that actually works. We live in an age where developers charge for even the simplest things like black dye because they know they can and the kids today who didn't grow up in the 90's believe this **** is normal and that this is how it's always been. So, the result is more and more overpriced DLC with less and less content every year.

The lack of content is another issue. The price goes up, but the amount of content keeps going down. This is just the case of developers and publishers realizing they can do less and still make just as much money. There's a reason Rockstar is #1 with DLC. They put a lot of time and care into their work and don't charge outrageous prices. Frankly, I think they're the only ones who have done DLC right this generation.

phimseto wrote...

So "lots of combat"...If I wanted "lots of combat", I would play multiplayer. For actual single player, I was hoping for something deeper. It also sounds like Omega won't be the second hub that we hoped for.

Why are people still surprised by this approach after playing ME2 and ME3?

Bioware's target audience shifted towards the average gamer who likes to shoot things for hours on end. The people who like Gears of War, Halo, and COD... the "dudebro" gamer who wants every other game to be like one of those three games and scoffs at games like Deus Ex and KOTOR, calling them "gay" while eating a bag of Doritos and sipping on a Big Gulp from 7/11.

Modifié par EpicBoot2daFace, 08 novembre 2012 - 09:29 .

[Brockxz]

The more important question about this DLC is not how long will it last but does it change anything to ending? If not, I don't see really any reason to buy it even if it gives me 10 hours of gameplay.

[Snypy]

Brockxz wrote...

The more important question about this DLC is not how long will it last but does it change anything to ending? If not, I don't see really any reason to buy it even if it gives me 10 hours of gameplay.

It won't affect the ending one bit.

[EpicBoot2daFace]

Brockxz wrote...

The more important question about this DLC is not how long will it last but does it change anything to ending? If not, I don't see really any reason to buy it even if it gives me 10 hours of gameplay.

Who cares? What could it possibly add to a game that has alreasy been concluded? Nevermind the fact that you're only getting 3-5 hours of content for $15. No, what really matters is whether or not it adds anything to the ending.

Mass Effect 3 is the only game that has this problem. It's ending was so bad that fans are still asking Bioware to fix it with DLC, and if it doesn't or Bioware doesn't respond, they choose not to buy the DLC. I love Bioware fans.

[CptData]

Still have the small hope, a complete set of story DLCs might improve the fourth decision so you can take down the Reapers without the three major paths but refusal.

Obviously it won't happen, but I still have that hope.

Santa Claus exists!

[Asch Lavigne]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Brockxz wrote...

The more important question about this DLC is not how long will it last but does it change anything to ending? If not, I don't see really any reason to buy it even if it gives me 10 hours of gameplay.

Who cares? What could it possibly add to a game that has alreasy been concluded? Nevermind the fact that you're only getting 3-5 hours of content for $15. No, what really matters is whether or not it adds anything to the ending.

Mass Effect 3 is the only game that has this problem. It's ending was so bad that fans are still asking Bioware to fix it with DLC, and if it doesn't or Bioware doesn't respond, they choose not to buy the DLC. I love Bioware fans.

I dont see how taking Omega from Cerberus can have anything to do with the ending anyway.

[ElitePinecone]

MattFini wrote...
Welcome to my world on March 6, when I was planning on rotating Jack, Miranda and Grunt as my main squad. 

Not to be too harsh, but surely you understood the sheer impossibility of bringing all 10+ ME2 squadmates back as optional, rotational squadmates for ME3? They'd need their own dialogue, power balances, custom interjections in cutscenes, they couldn't have other parts in the plot without being absent from the player temporarily... it's a logistical nightmare. 

It was never going to happen, and I'm struggling to understand why people are disappointed about it. It's not something that Bioware was ever going to consider, with the resources they had and the priorities of the game.

[Raikas]

ElitePinecone wrote...
It was never going to happen, and I'm struggling to understand why people are disappointed about it.

Yes, and the idea that the new DLC would have new permanant squadmates/new LIs/a new hub was never likely either, but we're seeing post after post about that too - people just tend to expect too much and then set themselves up for disappointment.

MACharlie1 wrote...

You act like this is a new thing. Leviathan only had it with EDI and James. I like squad interaction myself - but when the squad interaction is all the same copy and paste it really isn't that big of a deal.  

There's a difference between squad interaction and unique squadmate content, and Leviathan had quite a bit of the latter.  I found it entertaining enough to want to replay the whole thing with different sets of squadmates just to see the differences.  When people talk about having wanted to bring the regular squad along, I think that's what they were hoping for.  With a set two-person squad it loses that element.

I don't think it's a huge loss, myself - but I think it's a completely valid thing to point out as being something that Leviathan did well that will be missing from this new DLC.

Modifié par Hervoyl, 09 novembre 2012 - 01:53 .

[Clayless]

Well Halo 4 cost me much more than this DLC and I completed it on Heroic in 5 and a half hours.

[Trix-Rabbit]

Bioware did say it was the largest dlc to date. So either they are talking time or file size. This thread leads me to believe the latter due to the fact that journalists are rarely decent gamers.

[CptData]

Trix-Rabbit wrote...

Bioware did say it was the largest dlc to date. So either they are talking time or file size. This thread leads me to believe the latter due to the fact that journalists are rarely decent gamers.

File size is limited to 2 Gigs - unless Microsoft changes its policy here one day. So it should be gaming time.

[known_hero]

One good thing about removing optional squad mates is it frees up space on the file. More file space can be used for gameplay content instead of storing random banter lines.

Squadmate banter is good but kinda overrated. In Leviathan, squad mates pretty much said the exact same thing. LIs are the only ones that really provide a different experience.

Modifié par known_hero, 09 novembre 2012 - 02:43 .

[ElitePinecone]

known_hero wrote...

One good thing about removing optional squad mates is it frees up space on the file. More file space can be used for gameplay content instead of storing random banter lines.

That's an interesting perspective, I guess it's a matter of different priorities, which a fixed 2gb file-size limit would always seem to make necessary. Although I think I remember Mike saying before Leviathan that the team was generally getting good at finding ways of compressing things or fitting more content in with the same limit. 

(The console publishers' ban on DLC that requires other DLC seems to restrict what could be a really interesting model, an episodic story arc that could feature things like choice reactivity and a divergent narrative between DLC parts. It'd be one way to deal with the hard limit on file sizes.)

[dead_goon]

CptData wrote...

Trix-Rabbit wrote...

Bioware did say it was the largest dlc to date. So either they are talking time or file size. This thread leads me to believe the latter due to the fact that journalists are rarely decent gamers.

File size is limited to 2 Gigs - unless Microsoft changes its policy here one day. So it should be gaming time.

Well it came in at 1.97Gb, so they could legitamatley claim it as being the biggest DLC they've ever done.

[CptData]

known_hero wrote...

One good thing about removing optional squad mates is it frees up space on the file. More file space can be used for gameplay content instead of storing random banter lines.

Squadmate banter is good but kinda overrated. In Leviathan, squad mates pretty much said the exact same thing. LIs are the only ones that really provide a different experience.

Aaaaand guess what? That's what I was hoping for in "Omega". Well, chances are still there your LI may have extra lines post-mission, but that's it ...

[FirstBlood XL]

Over the last month or two I bought (Xbox 360):

* Red Dead Redemption (GotY Edition) for $30 brand new

* Assassin's Creed: Revelations for $15

* Gears of War 3 for $13

* Rage for $10

* Witcher 2 for $15

So $15 for a few hours of DLC sounds pretty silly. But whatever, kids will buy it.... Hell, I'll even buy the ME3 DLC soon, just because I feel like I'm near the finish line with the series. But good luck in the future, BW... maybe I'm getting 'old', but I can't imagine people paying these prices for DLC for much longer. I can't be the only one who's nearing the line of "DLC fatigue".

[Raikas]

FirstBlood XL wrote...

Over the last month or two I bought (Xbox 360):

* Red Dead Redemption (GotY Edition) for $30 brand new
* Assassin's Creed: Revelations for $15
* Gears of War 3 for $13
* Rage for $10
* Witcher 2 for $15

So $15 for a few hours of DLC sounds pretty silly. But whatever, kids will buy it.... Hell, I'll even buy the ME3 DLC soon, just because I feel like I'm near the finish line with the series. But good luck in the future, BW... maybe I'm getting 'old', but I can't imagine people paying these prices for DLC for much longer. I can't be the only one who's nearing the line of "DLC fatigue".

I think that's less to do with age and more to do with gaming style (although I might argue that older gamers are generally able to spend more).   I suspect that people who buy relatively fewer games overall but want to add to the replayability of the ones they already own will probably be more willing to buy higher priced DLC.  And that's in part because they're less likely to have already spent $80+ on other games in the same month.

I also think the cost/hour value of DLC vs. a new game isn't as equal a comparison as people present it to be - DLC is an add-on to a known product, whereas a new game is (in general) more of a risk for the consumer. A 30 hour game for $15 isn't a great value if you only play 15 minutes of it before deciding you hate it.

[unknown16]

PKchu wrote...

I hate that 2GB limit by the way.

Stupid Xbox.

It differs, a lot. I mean look at "The Ballad of Gay Tony", that was 1.8 GB and it was amazing, also look at LOTSB, that too was also phenomenal at a 1.5 GB.

[ZeCollectorDestroya]

5 hours alone is not worth it for $15 green (GREEEEEEEEN.)

Max I'd pay is $8 bucks. And now, people will sadly pirate this. Damn.

[neoskeptic2]

I want to see a cutscene where Aria just wades in and completely demolishes a Cerberus strike team. (Kinda like what Jack did in 2, only much more badass - hopefully with a homage flying kick since the voice is being done by Carrie Anne Moss)

[Brockxz]

Asch Lavigne wrote...

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

Brockxz wrote...

The more important question about this DLC is not how long will it last but does it change anything to ending? If not, I don't see really any reason to buy it even if it gives me 10 hours of gameplay.

Who cares? What could it possibly add to a game that has alreasy been concluded? Nevermind the fact that you're only getting 3-5 hours of content for $15. No, what really matters is whether or not it adds anything to the ending.

Mass Effect 3 is the only game that has this problem. It's ending was so bad that fans are still asking Bioware to fix it with DLC, and if it doesn't or Bioware doesn't respond, they choose not to buy the DLC. I love Bioware fans.

I dont see how taking Omega from Cerberus can have anything to do with the ending anyway.

Then answer me this: Why would I care to help Aria to retake Omega? I don't have friends there. For all I know, only lowest scum and criminals lived there (the info from games and comics/novels). To get some minor number increase for finished fight? Who cares, as you say, it won't affect it. What's the motivation?

Just to give us more shooting fun? I can get it by replaying game (or not because I don't have a reason to replay because I get the same 3 Ending anyway I got with my first replay and reloading last save file). OK, I can play multiplayer. I did that for a while until it started to feel dull.

So what's the motivation? As I saw it' s just plain simple go and shoot things DLC is. It's not like LOTSB DLC where there was strong motivation to do that. To help the person who saved you and gave up everything to see you alive. That's at least one thing I want to see from Omega DLC (if they don't change the ending) but it's not there. So what's the motivation?

Modifié par Brockxz, 10 novembre 2012 - 02:39 .

[Snypy]

@Brockxz Yes, that's also why Omega will be the first story DLC in the ME trilogy that I won't be getting.