945 réponses à ce sujet

[hero 2]

Sloth Of Doom wrote...

Buying waffles is a waste of time because the price isn't the same as my self-imposed notions of value.

Waffles should be free.

Your arbitrary figures are not reflective of the value which each of us puts upon the Waffles individually. Surely Waffles are only worth what each of us is willing to pay for it - individually.

[_Aine_]

Bottom line: Do you think the story is good enough to pay to extend your experience? It isn't so much a matter of what is complete or not. If you expect neverending content for free, eventually you will get what is free in abundance: nothing. It's a business and conducting themselves as a business is not stupid or selfish. Expecting them to bankrupt themselves for short-term approval perhaps would be.



As long as the content quality is as is has been, I am happy to pay to extend my experience. This is the first game in a long time that has captivated me. I am willing to support that with my wallet as long as it makes sense to do so ( for me).

[grieferbastard]

It reaches a certain point in a debate on any topic where it becomes less a matter of facts and data and more about opinion and faith. It has more in common with a debate about religion than anything else. I had a discussion with someone once about a 9/11 conspiracy theory. I provided a lot of hard facts, did a ton of research, presented data in a variety of formats. I've done professional editing in my free time over the years and I swear to you I've seen Masters theses with less detail. The result? Like bouncing a rubber ball off a wall.

So I asked him, 'What if I presented you with incontrovertable proof, would you change your opinion?'

The answer?

'No, I'd assume it was faked. No matter what you say I would not change my opinion. I know I'm right!'

That, right there? That is a religion. It has nothing to do with proof, facts, evidence or truth. It has to do with belief. When you stop running into opinions and start running into beliefs than you are wasting your time in a debate or discussion.

I can back up my opinions with facts about profit margins on computer games and the game market and even with the fundamentals of economics - supply and demand. If someone could present me with evidence that showed paying for DLC was bad for the gaming industry and bad for my getting what I want out of the product I'd change my opinion. I'm strong in my stance because I can comfortably say it's an educated decision and one I can back up pretty easily with details above and beyond personal opinion. Still though, show me I'm wrong and I'll change my position. Say for example RtO gets delayed 3 months and jumps to$30 while BioWare/EA cancels all new games coming down the pipe to focus on DLC and the quality of it drops down the crapper. My dollars will go elsewhere. So far though I'm happy with how my money is being spent and how it is
affecting the industry that produces the entertainment of my choice.

That's not what's being debated here now. The 'value' of DLC isn't something anyone on this forum can accurately debate. It's established by the market of free trade. You can buy it or not. That's not an opinion. Buy it. Don't buy it. It's a personal choice. The problem is that some people have not opinions but beliefs around how you make that choice. Facts, details, truth has nothing to do with it. Hence it's time to move the conversation on to waffles, forced memes and sports.

[addiction21]

grieferbastard wrote...

to waffles,

Thats all I remember reading. How about anyone else?

[addiction21]

sprybry wrote...


did someone write something?

If he did he did it wrong. Never mention waffles because then the audiance will forget everything else.


It was a good read tho.

[krisd2]

MerinTB wrote...

krisd2 wrote...

addiction21 wrote...



To be trolled one must be oblivious of being trolled and a palpable emotional response must be enacted in the one being trolled. Non of which is true in Merins case.
Also a troll is measured in how much he need to write to garner such a response. In this case traversc would be the worst troll ever or just be that thick headed.

traversc writes like 10 lines and gets a freakin book back from merin. its quite a response in my opinion.

You could also look at it like I respond to most everything traversc brings up and leave the context intact of what said, and he ignored the majority of what I said to pick apart two unrelated lines of what I wrote which he combines together to create some straw man to argue against, and when I try and respond to what he's done, he ignores any questions I ask and most of what I write to simply do it again.

I chose to address most of what traversc said.  He chose to ignore almost all of what I said.  If you think the latter is better because of its brevity then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Right. which goes back to my orignial post.
Traversc trolled you bro.

Spybro to clarify yes you have to buy the game and you have to buy expansions but skill updates and some very minor new content is updated free. And yes they do sell random crap like name changes or character costumes for extra. I don't think its unreasonable to suggest that DA might throw some free goodies.

[mrmike_1949]

At $5, RtO is a poor value when compared to DAO:

Let's model "value" of a game = [T (gameplay time) * S ( Subjective Enjoyment) * R (number of replays)]/Cost $

S (Subjective
Enjoyment) can be measured in micrograms of Endorphins/Second,
Smiles/minute, Orgasms/hour, or any other measure - doesn't matter IF you assume that both RtO and DAO have, on average, the same S

R (number
of replays) I would assume that R for RtO is less than or equal to R
for DAO. If you're playing RtO many more times than DAO, see your
doctor about your A.D.D. !../../../images/forum/emoticons/sick.png

Assume T (DAO) = 60 hours and T (RtO) = 1hour           (generous estimate for RtO)

Then : DAO [60 hours * S * R]/$50  >  RtO [1 hour *  S * R]/$5     now cancel out the S and R

    1.2 > 0.2    or RtO has 1/6th the value of DAO per dollar spent   ../../../images/forum/emoticons/crying.png


For those of you who argue that market sets the value :

Bull!    
Market can set the price (sometimes, doesn't often happen). Only under
very special conditions does value equal price. Those special
conditions occur only with a free market (most of you will need to look up the definition of a free market). It does NOT hold true with RtO

And please, no more comparison with food - put your hotdogs away!

MikeK

ps I actually tried to start a seperate thread for this, but the mods called it spam

[krisd2]

Why did this thread turn into is DLC worth it instead of DLC should be free. completely different discussions imo.

[mrmike_1949]

krisd2 wrote...

Why did this thread turn into is DLC worth it instead of DLC should be free. completely different discussions imo.

Cause the moderators locked the thread I tried to start with the above post:(

MikeK

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...
Right. which goes back to my orignial post.

Waffles, yes?

You wanted waffles DLC correct?

Who else wants waffles DLC?

[krisd2]

Step 1: troll

Step 2: wall of text

Step 3: he trollin you bro

Step 4: no he ain't

Step 5: yes he is

Step 6: ???

Step 7: Reasonable post length

Step 8: SUCCESS!



I dont get the waffle thing.

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...
Step 1: troll

Step 2: get a waffle

[krisd2]

can we make that step 6?

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...

can we make that step 6?

Waffle DLC?

What value is that to you?

Not in price, in dimensionless value of completely objective reality?

You couldn't answer that, though, because you are an irrational person.  Every person is irrational, you know.

Especially for waffles.

Even more so for waffle DLC.

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...
wall of text
(...)
I dont get the waffle thing.

You actually don't get the "wall of text" thing, since you keep insinuating that I'm am doing "wall of text"s.

Do you know what a "wall of text" is?  You realize it doesn't mean a long post, right?

Cause it sure seems like you think it means a long post.

Here, in case people other than you don't know what it means - I certainly wouldn't want to imply that you don't understand a term you keep using.

wall of text -
Definition 1: A piece of writing that does not use proper grammar and generally looks like a giant essay with 20 to 400 sentences without using paragraphs or any bit of spacing at all.
Definition 2: A paragraph written, usually on an internet forum, that is usually very
long, has little or no punctuation and is very stressful on the eyes.
Definition 3: A massive, and terribly formatted post or write up. Your eyes might bleed from trying to read it.

You may have missed my use of format, punctation, paragraphs, breaking up my responses into multiple posts, and so-on to allow for easier reading and comprehension.

completely unrelated Quote of the Day: "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya

[krisd2]

I didn't read your longer posts due to its the internet so if I offended you on your punctuation or grammar I apologize. I labeled them wall of text because they were way to long for me to bother with.

While I'm sure extremely well formatted you long posts were to a guy who was trollin you. So I said: he's trollin you bro, so you wouldn't have to keep beating your head against a wall trying to point out holes in a guys argument who clearly does not give a **** but is probably amused by your well thought out well formatted respones that are a waste of your time to write and my time to scroll over.

MerinTB wrote...


You could also look at it like I respond to most everything traversc brings up and leave the context intact of what said, and he ignored the majority of what I said to pick apart two unrelated lines of what I wrote which he combines together to create some straw man to argue against, and when I try and respond to what he's done, he ignores any questions I ask and most of what I write to simply do it again.

^^ Here you describe how he trolled you.

[grogthetroll]

Hmmm...$5 for a DLC to a game I enjoy....when I think about all the time I've spent playing the game, $5 doesn't sound so bad. If I don't want the DLC I won't buy it. Or is that a trifle to logical?

[asaiasai]

I am not going to read 34 pages of replies telling this cheap skate to try a different hobby if they think DLCs should be free. If you want quality games well that costs money. Developers need to eat, make house payments, etc, so this it should be free mentality needs to get over it. DLCs are optional part of the game play, if you wanna play you gotta pay that is life and until some one more brilliant than i comes up with some utopian type of economic system to replace the current one you are stuck with it.



Asai

[Metallicka]

grieferbastard wrote...

It reaches a certain point in a debate on any topic where it becomes less a matter of facts and data and more about opinion and faith. It has more in common with a debate about religion than anything else. I had a discussion with someone once about a 9/11 conspiracy theory. I provided a lot of hard facts, did a ton of research, presented data in a variety of formats. I've done professional editing in my free time over the years and I swear to you I've seen Masters theses with less detail. The result? Like bouncing a rubber ball off a wall.

So I asked him, 'What if I presented you with incontrovertable proof, would you change your opinion?'

The answer?

'No, I'd assume it was faked. No matter what you say I would not change my opinion. I know I'm right!'

That, right there? That is a religion. It has nothing to do with proof, facts, evidence or truth. It has to do with belief. When you stop running into opinions and start running into beliefs than you are wasting your time in a debate or discussion.

I can back up my opinions with facts about profit margins on computer games and the game market and even with the fundamentals of economics - supply and demand. If someone could present me with evidence that showed paying for DLC was bad for the gaming industry and bad for my getting what I want out of the product I'd change my opinion. I'm strong in my stance because I can comfortably say it's an educated decision and one I can back up pretty easily with details above and beyond personal opinion. Still though, show me I'm wrong and I'll change my position. Say for example RtO gets delayed 3 months and jumps to$30 while BioWare/EA cancels all new games coming down the pipe to focus on DLC and the quality of it drops down the crapper. My dollars will go elsewhere. So far though I'm happy with how my money is being spent and how it is
affecting the industry that produces the entertainment of my choice.

That's not what's being debated here now. The 'value' of DLC isn't something anyone on this forum can accurately debate. It's established by the market of free trade. You can buy it or not. That's not an opinion. Buy it. Don't buy it. It's a personal choice. The problem is that some people have not opinions but beliefs around how you make that choice. Facts, details, truth has nothing to do with it. Hence it's time to move the conversation on to waffles, forced memes and sports.

I agree mostly with whast you have said, however it should be pointed out that those of us (myself included) trying to convince those who think DLC should be free, that in fact it should NOT be free is a complete and utter waste of time. These people believe because something exists for the game that they purchased that they are entitled to it and should not have to offer any form of compensation whatsoever to those that have provided it. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see posts from these same people demanding that the expansion packs be free, after all, they paid their $60, that entitles them to everything that is ever made available for the game, right? I have no problem with buying my DLC or Expansions. Something tells me I'll get alot more of both that way.

[Magic Zarim]

The "waffles" joke is so rampant on this forum that it gets as stale as a dried out waffle capable of fracturing someone's skull.

[Taura-Tierno]

I don't think DLC should be free. I do, however, believe that it's a bit overcharged. I suppose it really depends on how much they make from the DLC (if the make a lot of money, they could lower the costs), but I don't suppose we'll ever know for sure?



Paying around 7$ for Warden's is ... well, I don't regret buying it, really, but I don't feel it's really worth the money either. It they had charged more than 7$, I would have told my friends not to buy it.



I would definitely not pay 15$ for a new character, however. That's like 20% of what I paid for the full game. A new character does not add 20% additional playtime in terms of completely new plots and quests. It's still the same game all over again, with a small twist. A new character does not make up 20% of the total gaming experience. In addition to that, there's also the risk that I won't enjoy the character (I don't like all of the already existing characters), so buying the character and finding out that I hate it would be kind of a bust. And I don't think Bioware does any refunds on DLC?



I might be willing to pay 15$ for a new character if

1) I hear a lot of great stuff about it in reviews from people who share my taste in character

and

2) If the personal quest(s) for the character is/are much more extensive that Shale's. So that we get a new character, new conversations AND a quests worth at least a few hours gameplay.



But I would be most hesitant to buy a new character for myself, if I hadn't heard any good reviews about it, since whether or not it will be worth it depends solely upon whether or not I'd like the character in question.



I understand that a new-character-DLC has got to be more expensive than just a small quest, since it'd probably include lots of costs for voice actors and such. The only way I would buy a new character for 15$ is if we were promised several (4, maybe?) hours worth of new quests and areas to explore.



I'd probably pay 10$ for a new character, however. Seems a more reasonable price for Shale, at least. In my opinion.

[hero 2]

shantisands wrote...

It's a business and conducting themselves as a business is not stupid or selfish.

False. Business is inherently selfish. 

[MerinTB]

krisd2 wrote...
he's trollin you bro,

Here's the other thing you seem to not understand: what "being trolled" means.

some various online defintions -

being trolled -
Definition 1: usually refers to someone who is stalked by a troll. Some trolls will
latch on to certain users and follow them around reporting all of their
answers and questions
Definition 2: when one or more users downrates a bunch of your questions and / or
answers over a very short period of time. The downrates are usually
retaliatory in nature
Definition 3: Trolls are people that post inflammatory questions and/or answers to
trigger responses from people -- that they then report. They also will
follow and harass others on the site, reporting all their postings,
emailing threats, etc.

Now while I will say that I think traversc is using many logical fallacies in his arguments, I still believe that he honestly has a point of view he is trying to get others to agree to.
He has not latched onto me anymore than I latched onto him.  By your contextual definition of "being trolled", I am trolling traversc as much as he is trolling me.

As far as I know he hasn't reported me to anyone, nor have I reported him.  He hasn't followed me to other sites, emailed me a thing, PM'd me - nor I to him.

We are not harassing each other.

traversc started posting in this thread not responding to me, and he has held "debates" with people he agrees or disagrees with, as have I.

There is no "trolling" going on - not even the OP, really.

Be more careful with your language.