638 réponses à ce sujet

[phordicus]

i won't judge it until i see if they can justify RtO's cost. if RtO is as much of a one-shot yawner as WK, it'll save me wasting time on DA:FallingAsleepAgain.

[Fates end]

damirko wrote...

30$ for PC version of the expansion is totaly reasonable...

Besides that 15 hours quote if true is apromixation for the main story of Awakening... I think that with few sidequest it'll get over 20+ hours without a problem.

Uh...no, it's not.   30 $ for  a PC expansion pack is right on the dot.  Has been that way for years.  As far back as I can remember buying expansions (latest was kane's Wrath), it was 30 dollars. 

[HolyRomanCousinConsort]

phordicus wrote...

i won't judge it until i see if they can justify RtO's cost. if RtO is as much of a one-shot yawner as WK, it'll save me wasting time on DA:FallingAsleepAgain.

If you think WK was short, I can agree. It was great but short. But the main game sounds more like DA:bestRPGever than what you called it. You have to at least admit that the Redcliffe quests were excellent. If not, then why are you even waiting for the expansion lol

[sumdood]

15 extra hours seems short. If they expand the base game as well though, I can see where $40 is justified. New skills for every class, new NPCs that interact throughout the game, maybe a few extra sidequests.

[Default137]

GvazElite wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Expansion pack prices:

Everquest II: Sentinels of Fate: $39.99
WoW: Wrath of the LichKing: $39.99
Ultima Online: Stygian Abyss: $39.99 (UO has been around since like 1997!)
Warhammer 40K - Dawn of War II: $29.99
WoW: Cataclysm: $39.99
Sims3 - World Adventures Pack: $39.99
Star Wars - The Force Unleashed Ultimate Sith Edition: $39.99 (this is basically 3 more levels tagged onto the existing game, and yes you get the original game, but what if you already own it?)

That's what I could find. I know that when games like Rise of Nations, Dawn of War, Total War, Age of Empires and the like put out expansions they are almost always at the lowest $19.99 and quite often $29.99 or even $39.99. The $39.99 is a newer thing, like the last couple years - but you know, prior to the current gen of consoles, console games were $49.99 not $59.99.

All of those games sans maybe WAP have more than 15 hours of gameplay.

So does Awakening, unless of course, you speed through games.

But hey, why don't we just shut up and keep buying overpriced shyte like MW2, which has a 3 hour Campaign for $60, because I mean, thats "cool" and "trendy" and I mean, its Multi totally makes it well worth the price right? Its obviously a full game, not at all like Awakening, an Expansion to one of the longest games of the past few years, which we all know from the two sentances we have heard will be easily beatable in under 10 hours, making $40 totally not worth it.

I mean, its not like we will replay Awakening several times, it will most likely be several times longer then just 15 hours ( Origins was originally pitched as being a 20 hour game, 80 hours later I would like to point out that was bull**** ), and it will be of very high quality, no lets focus on a arbitrary number that will probably only be reachable if you skip everything in a mad dash to the end.

That makes the most sense.

Modifié par Default137, 06 janvier 2010 - 06:17 .

[TheMadCat]

Careful Default, logic and common sense are not permitted on these boards.

[X2-Elijah]

"I mean, its not like we will replay Awakening several times, it will most likely be several times longer then just 15 hours ( Origins was originally pitched as being a 20 hour game, 80 hours later I would like to point out that was bull**** ), and it will be of very high quality, no lets focus on a arbitrary number that will probably only be reachable if you skip everything in a mad dash to the end."



I'm sorry, but What?

1) Going y the current gameplay times / advertised times of DA add-ons, (which have always been about 150% to 200% overly optimistic), we can easily expect that this expansion will not, in fact, even reach 15 hours of gameplay time. 10,12 hours more likely.



2) What is this BS about Origins being pitched as a 20 hour game? All major outlets, and Bioware, and EA said that the game was estimated to be 80 - 120 hours. And, like you, after playing through several times, I would also like to say that this estimate was BS, and the game was not that long.



3) What is up with people saying "Oh, yeah, a single playthrough is shorter, but, you know, you are supposed to play SEVERAL time, ya know..". No, just hold on. an estiamted length of a game should always reflect a single playthrough, start to finish. Otherwise it is just misinformation. Vaguely similar to the 'minimum' and 'recommended' specs on game boxes, which often are not really indicatives of real-life situation.



4)"why don't we just shut up and keep buying overpriced shyte like MW2" No-one is arguing with facts about MW2. This is a discussion about the Awakening, not some FPS piece. The fact that there is such a thing out there does not mean it is OK for other companies to do the same.



5)"and it will be of very high quality" Really? If the Mass Effect DLC and Dragon Age previous DLCs are taken into consideration, there is little hope that the Awakening will be 'high quality'.



6)" no lets focus on a arbitrary number that will probably only be reachable if you skip everything in a mad dash to the end" And what if this arbitrary number will be easily attainable if you don't spend twenty minutes on ever cutscene, refusing to advance it at it's own pace? What if it is reached if you do things in a normal pace, and not gaze at every single pixel/texture/monster for hours? What if you can do it in 5-7 hours, if you know where not to make mistakes? Should you start making mistakes and backtrack just because you need to justify the length? For all intentions, your assumption of the length is just as arbitrary as all other's, except that you have a smaller supporting fact base to justify your claim.

[MerinTB]

GvazElite wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Expansion pack prices:

Everquest II: Sentinels of Fate: $39.99
WoW: Wrath of the LichKing: $39.99
Ultima Online: Stygian Abyss: $39.99 (UO has been around since like 1997!)
Warhammer 40K - Dawn of War II: $29.99
WoW: Cataclysm: $39.99
Sims3 - World Adventures Pack: $39.99
Star Wars - The Force Unleashed Ultimate Sith Edition: $39.99 (this is basically 3 more levels tagged onto the existing game, and yes you get the original game, but what if you already own it?)

That's what I could find. I know that when games like Rise of Nations, Dawn of War, Total War, Age of Empires and the like put out expansions they are almost always at the lowest $19.99 and quite often $29.99 or even $39.99. The $39.99 is a newer thing, like the last couple years - but you know, prior to the current gen of consoles, console games were $49.99 not $59.99.

All of those games sans maybe WAP have more than 15 hours of gameplay.

Huh.

Force Unleashed was like 8-10 hours for most people.  I doubt 3 more levels will jack that above 15, but ok.
Dawn of War 2 was maybe 20 hours for the campaign, and if the Dawn of War expansions are anything to go by, Dawn of War 2's expansion might add 10 hours.
You can't quantify non-story / no-ending games like Sims or MMO's into "hours" but the majority of what you get in those expansions already exists in the game - most MMO expansions give you a couple new areas, a bunch of new quests (most of which whatever character you are playing your won't experience, but if you start counting multiple characters or replayability you have to do the same for DAO), maybe a handful of new classes - not the same as 15 hours of a single-player game, honestly, since I don't count travel time and running back and forth, waiting in queue for your turn camping a spawn, or the time spent gathering your mates for your guild to tackle a new quest as "game playing" time *shrug*

We can go back to some definite not-MMO expansions (I just did a quick search of Gamestop for expansion packs) to CRPGs if you need to be exact:
Shadows of the Undrentide, Hordes of the Underdark: $39.99
Total War - Viking Invasion, Total War 2: Kingdoms: $39.99

I cannot find what Throne of Bhaal cost, but I remember buying the CE of Shadows over Amn for $69.99, and I'm fairly certian I bought Throne of Bhaal for $29.99.  Heart of Winter, I think, was $29.99.

[SkittlesKat96]

 Who knows..maybe it will magically become more longer and funner or something...who am I kidding, maybe if they put it down to 30 I'll buy it, but whatever I have a lot of spare cash on me.

[TheMadCat]

X2-Elijah wrote...

1) Going y the current gameplay times / advertised times of DA add-ons, (which have always been about 150% to 200% overly optimistic), we can easily expect that this expansion will not, in fact, even reach 15 hours of gameplay time. 10,12 hours more likely.

2) What is this BS about Origins being pitched as a 20 hour game? All major outlets, and Bioware, and EA said that the game was estimated to be 80 - 120 hours. And, like you, after playing through several times, I would also like to say that this estimate was BS, and the game was not that long.

Except people have pulled in 80-120 hours, my one play-through I logged 65 and missed a bunch of stuff as I didn't get a couple of achievements like the 75% of side quests or the world explorer thing so perhaps I could have tacked on another 5-10 hours. Just because you didn't reach it doesn't mean it isn't a valid claim. Everyone has different play styles, uses different tactics and difficulties, these things makes time spent VERY subjective. If you feel the need to low-ball Bioware's estimate then so be it, but neither one of your numbers is going to represent s completely accurate figure.

3) What is up with people saying "Oh, yeah, a single playthrough is shorter, but, you know, you are supposed to play SEVERAL time, ya know..". No, just hold on. an estiamted length of a game should always reflect a single playthrough, start to finish. Otherwise it is just misinformation. Vaguely similar to the 'minimum' and 'recommended' specs on game boxes, which often are not really indicatives of real-life situation.

You're partly correct. But there is no reason one shouldn't take re-playability into account. It's like summing up the length of a MP primary game and saying it's true length can only be judged by one session. Re-playability is a huge factor when I look at buying games, if it's 15 hours and I can easily get two playthroughs on it why should I not look at it as 30 hours for $40?

4)"why don't we just shut up and keep buying overpriced shyte like MW2" No-one is arguing with facts about MW2. This is a discussion about the Awakening, not some FPS piece. The fact that there is such a thing out there does not mean it is OK for other companies to do the same.

No, but perhaps it shows it's needed to turn profit these days? $40 is becoming the average price of expansions regardless of genre, size, content, ect. Perhaps we're underestimating budgets?

5)"and it will be of very high quality" Really? If the Mass Effect DLC and Dragon Age previous DLCs are taken into consideration, there is little hope that the Awakening will be 'high quality'.

Never played any of the ME DLC, personally I enjoyed Stone Prisoner and Warden's Keep, my grudge with Warden's Keep. If the quality is somewhere between the DLC and the OC, I'd say money well spent.

6)" no lets focus on a arbitrary number that will probably only be reachable if you skip everything in a mad dash to the end" And what if this arbitrary number will be easily attainable if you don't spend twenty minutes on ever cutscene, refusing to advance it at it's own pace? What if it is reached if you do things in a normal pace, and not gaze at every single pixel/texture/monster for hours? What if you can do it in 5-7 hours, if you know where not to make mistakes? Should you start making mistakes and backtrack just because you need to justify the length? For all intentions, your assumption of the length is just as arbitrary as all other's, except that you have a smaller supporting fact base to justify your claim.

Hence why projected hours need to be taken with a grain of salt. If you choose to speed through the game faster then it was intended to go, meaning go through the cutscene, explore, read codex's, talk to everyone, then you should expect your hour count to be below the estimate. Would you prefer they design the game on beating it as quickly as you can with only minimal interactions between you and NPC's, little to no lore, faster paced combat, and no side quests?

Modifié par TheMadCat, 06 janvier 2010 - 07:02 .

[MerinTB]

X2-Elijah wrote...

1) Going y the current gameplay times / advertised times of DA add-ons, (which have always been about 150% to 200% overly optimistic), we can easily expect that this expansion will not, in fact, even reach 15 hours of gameplay time. 10,12 hours more likely.

2) What is this BS about Origins being pitched as a 20 hour game? All major outlets, and Bioware, and EA said that the game was estimated to be 80 - 120 hours. And, like you, after playing through several times, I would also like to say that this estimate was BS, and the game was not that long.

People's play times vary.

First time through DAO - 128 hours. Looks like, from arriving at WK to finishing clearing it out took me 2 1/2 hours, and that's not counting all the other WK stuff (extra travel encounter, returning for storage and purchasing stuff, etc.).  Just under 2 hours from merchant with the rod to completing the village Shale was in (and that playthrough I didn't use Shale so no extra stuff at all from her other than the merchant and the village, missing later stuff obviously.)

Second time through DAO - 98 hours. WK took a little over an hour, but I didn't read any entries at all this time.  Second time from merchant to finishing the village where Shale was was just about an hour as well (skipping all Codex entry reading again), but this time I had her in party and that added content (all the dialog and camp time and such) is really hard to quantify, but I do know that completing her personal quest in the Deep Roads was just over another hour, making Shale on the second time through without reading codex entries = at least 3 hours.

So each of the DLC's for me were, on one playthrough, at least 3 hours.  The game, each play through, was over 90 hours.

Mileage varies, but you can easily get 80 hours out of the game if you don't skip stuff, and you can easily get a couple hours out of each DLC if you don't skip stuff - and that isn't counting other things you get in the DLC.  Nor is any of that counting replayability.

[Schneidend]

Default137 wrote...

So does Awakening, unless of course, you speed through games.

But hey, why don't we just shut up and keep buying overpriced shyte like MW2, which has a 3 hour Campaign for $60, because I mean, thats "cool" and "trendy" and I mean, its Multi totally makes it well worth the price right? Its obviously a full game, not at all like Awakening, an Expansion to one of the longest games of the past few years, which we all know from the two sentances we have heard will be easily beatable in under 10 hours, making $40 totally not worth it.

I mean, its not like we will replay Awakening several times, it will most likely be several times longer then just 15 hours ( Origins was originally pitched as being a 20 hour game, 80 hours later I would like to point out that was bull**** ), and it will be of very high quality, no lets focus on a arbitrary number that will probably only be reachable if you skip everything in a mad dash to the end.

That makes the most sense.

As a fan of Modern Warfare 2, one who has probably logged a good 30+ hours into the multiplayer of said game, I'll ask that we try and not not be so obtuse. I know bashing action games on Bioware boards is the order of the day because everybody here is so very sophisticated and advanced, while such games are so very low-brow and simplistic,  but it just gets tiresome after a while.

I'd agree with just about everything else, though.

[Lequin]

coming out for $40 bucks......hmm, will probably wait for bargin bin/sales and stuff. im kinda tired of dragon age after 2 play thrus. but then again, it's in march, so maybe i'll be tempted who knows, especially since I prefer a larger chunk of gameplay vs smaller 1hr bits.

as an aside note, feedback is all well and good, but complaining/bashing and all that isn't really necessary. EA (companies in general) can price their games to whatever they want. They're always taking a risk with a project, and hope they can get their most out of it. Whether you want to buy it at their price or not should be up to you really. You guys did realize EA (which owns bioware) had to cut back on the amount of games they produce right due to costs? means they gotta maximize existing revenue streams, higher prices, max DLC revenue stuff like that. so if you think it's priced high, don't get it immediately. if you absolutely have to get everything dragon age, go nuts. and stop comparing fps fad games (mw2) games to story driven rpgs.....not targeted to the same audience and aren't gonna generate the same costs/sales. mw2's "$200mil" costs was pretty much all marketing (ie. hyping it into a fad), not actual production costs.

Modifié par Lequin, 06 janvier 2010 - 08:33 .

[HighlandBerserkr]

SO will this be DLC for the consoles as well or only disc?

[Kail Ashton]

This is all redundant really, at the end of the day you'e all going to buy the expansion, despite your internet tough guy hardballer routines, you wouldn't be here posting if you weren't, i know, you know & most importantly they know it



It's always easy to say one thing on the internet but do another, from the 13yo kids that drop N-bombs online but wouldn't dare to try in real life, to the 45 yo male pervs pretending to be 16yo girls, to you guys the "this is an outrage for many overembelished reasons~! i won't buy it!"



and you know what? you'll keep buying it and every coment you say to the contrary is just further hypocritical denial cause you know no one will ever be able to prove otherwise, welcome to internet forums 101 lol

[LadyDrusilla]

I'm sick of the gametime comparisons. Sure you can breeze through WK quickly if you try, so what? Every one of my warriors has used the armour from that dlc to end game, and learning the history behind the exile from Ferelden of the Grey Wardens was worth paying for (to me at any rate).

Be frugal*, save up and buy the expansion. Or don't. Whatever. But do not go declaring it worthless or overpriced simply because you think so. Others may and do disagree, and your opinion is no more or less valid than theirs. Unless you are an idiot.



*No pain, Loghain.

[LenaMarie]

I always love how the sheepy fanboys will pay anything and justify it to themselves. Anyone stupid enough to fall for the "Less for More"Schemes, Deserve to get nickle and dimed to death.

In the real world, people are usually smart enough not to fall for the "less for more" bs. Its just in the game world you have these idiots, almost as bad as the Modern Warfare 2 fanboys.

Modifié par LenaMarie, 06 janvier 2010 - 09:51 .

[Noviere]

GvazElite wrote...

http://www.gamestop....roduct_id=76825

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

$40 for only 15 hours of gameplay? I got the deluxe edition off of impulse for about $10ish more when I applied a coupon I had.

If you put it to say like, $15 I'll buy it. $40 is just obscene.

It's only $30 for PC. If you have a coupon, it will be cheaper than $30.

Either way, I'm buying it. New console games cost $59.99 in the US, and most of those are only 12-15 hours long.

Modifié par Noviere, 06 janvier 2010 - 09:53 .

[Varek_Raith]

So...I take it a lot of the detractors on this thread are going to stop gaming in general? I mean, most games released are $60, last <10 hours and have little to no replayability. The solution is simple to those who don't think the expansion is worth the $40 pricetag; Don't buy it.

[MerinTB]

LenaMarie wrote...

I always love how the sheepy fanboys will pay anything and justify it to themselves. Anyone stupid enough to fall for the "Less for More"Schemes, Deserve to get nickle and dimed to death.

In the real world, people are usually smart enough not to fall for the "less for more" bs. Its just in the game world you have these idiots, almost as bad as the Modern Warfare 2 fanboys.

The real world of $5 coffee, homeopathic medicine, self-help books, extended warranties, payday loans and donating to the GOP?

That real world?

The ad hominem attacks do not actually affect anyone but yourself, exposing your lack of critical thinking and debating skills.

Logic and fact can allow a reasonable person to compare the price of one product to similar products, adjust the worth of the product based on it's quality, and come to a rational conclusion on whether they will purchase said product or not.

Emotional pleas of name-calling and belittling, however, prove nothing and only show your lack of an argument.

I have repeatedly shown how this expansion is no more expensive than the average expansion being sold, that there is no "standard" for length of gameplay or amount of content in such expansions, and that computer games in actual dollar amounts (let alone adjusted for inflation) are no more expensive now than they were 20 years ago when the games themselves were far less and cost far less to make with much smaller teams of developers.  If that is being a "sheepy fanboy" - using history, research, facts and logic - then give me a wool sweater so I can say "Baaah" because "sheepy fanboy" has just been made synonymous with "skeptic" according to LenaMarie.

Modifié par MerinTB, 06 janvier 2010 - 10:12 .

[kansadoom]

*sigh* we dont even know what it is going to be like yet lets jsut wait till the reviews are out and we have reliable sources of how long it is going to be before we all start raging about the price ok.

[FlintlockJazz]

Point for those saying that it's a good deal because it's longer than a film or whatever other bollucks you say, you're not paying for length. It's production costs you should be considering. When you bought the base game you were paying for the development of the game, including development of the tools needed to make the game, programming and development of the core system, the design and development of the companion system, the rulebase used for character creation etc. With an expansion or dlc all this is already made, it is just the new content you are paying for, which is based off what is already there. A film at the cinema has cost millions to produce no matter how long it is, while a coffee requires the use of materials per user that no other user can use and which costs money (coffee, milk, etc).



Sorry for that, but people using length as a justification are not looking at the true value of the product. I'm sure the response will be "Well for me it is about the length that is the value" but that does not change the fact that the cost of production nor it's true value is not worked out that way, and being willing to pay more for a lesser product means that companies are more likely to gouge the customer if they think they can get away with it. Business 101.

[LadyDrusilla]

LenaMarie, I would like to introduce you to my friend Mr Supply and Demand. You should be his friend, because he is very important. He is the basis of every modern economy. He also has a huge...body of literature discussing him.

LenaMarie wrote...

I always love how the sheepy fanboys will pay anything and justify it to themselves. Anyone stupid enough to fall for the "Less for More"Schemes, Deserve to get nickle and dimed to death.

In the real world, people are usually smart enough not to fall for the "less for more" bs. Its just in the game world you have these idiots, almost as bad as the Modern Warfare 2 fanboys.

[Lord Abrasion]

If all of the new content added with the expansion is exclusive to the expansion itself then I for one don't think it's worth $30 (or $40, depending on platform). Not for a mere 10-15 hours of gameplay. If for example those new skills etc are available to characters in the main game then I might feel it's worth the price.