463 réponses à ce sujet

[LinksOcarina]

OdanUrr wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Besides all of that, Javik was designed to be additional, not-in-base-game content in the first place! From Ashes was intended to be bonus content and sold as DLC.

Here's where I disagree somewhat. I mean, we do know that at some point during development it was part of the core game, don't we?

We know that it was an idea floating during pre-production and the script-writing phase. That is about it.

Considering that most of what was seen in that script was changed, removed or altered, its not sufficent in terms of actual evidence that Javik was going to be in the main game fully. They took story elements to include him yes, but considering most of the core bits of the character, namely dialogue interactions and triggers are all on From Ashes as a DLC, its recycled yet planned material that is being played and bought. 

I'm not arguing here whether BioWare should or shouldn't have sold Javik as DLC. What I'm saying is that there are indications, particularly in the game itself, that Javik was intended to play a more critical role in the story.

This is where I ask you to name those indications, but I know what people tend to point too in this situation alreadly, and that is usually Thessia.

And I can give you that one, because the interaction with Javik present there is a bit richer than the other characters. That said, you come to the same conclusion without him. So it is frankly, not that relevent that he is there.

My issue with this is the indications mean little because the final product is what we are basing information on. It doesn't matter what was planned or intended in terms of Javik's involvement, what matters is the final product delivered, and how that was planned. And as I said before, considering the typical model is often seperate DLC pre-planned from the get-go, I would guess Javik was re-tooled to be that DLC after his involvement was scrapped so that the character wasn't lost forever. 

But this is getting off-topic fast....

[Khayness]

Ninja Stan wrote...

I have offered several different ways a gamer could get the content they feel they've missed out on. If they still insist that the company changes rather than changing their own behaviour, then we might be having two different arguments here, and if it's the "other" argument,  I'm not really prepared to weather yet another discussion on "entitlement" and what it means to whom.

Entitlement seems like a most convenient word nowdays, doesn't it?

With everything said and done, I still think when it comes to limiting content the consumer is more in the mercy
of the publisher than the other way around, so it doesn't matter how many times one brings up 'choice', this fact remains. Sejborg's stance on this is perfectly understandable, wether you agree with him/her or not.

[Ninja Stan]

OdanUrr wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Besides all of that, Javik was designed to be additional, not-in-base-game content in the first place! From Ashes was intended to be bonus content and sold as DLC.

Here's where I disagree somewhat. I mean, we do know that at some point during development it was part of the core game, don't we?

Might have been. But you do know that at some point during development, BioWare decided to develop it as a DLC product, don't you? And perhaps, at some point in development, the character of Javik didn't even exist, right? And that, early on in development, one of the potential names for Mass Effect was (I think) Star Citadel, don't you? No one's talking about a Javik-less Star Citadel right now, though.

In game development, just as in the development of any other creative or entertainment product, things change. No one complains that Luke Skywalker isn't female, as the characer was in an earlier script, or that Han Solo didn't die after being frozen in carbonite, as he did in an earlier script, or that the scripted Jabba the Hutt scene, restored in the Special Edition, was left out of the finished original movie. But that's a great example of what happens during development.

Whatever was in the script, whatever concept art you see, whatever a developer says they're working on, it's a snapshot of what the project is like at that time. What you actually get is the final product, which has gone through many additions, deletions, and revisions. Anything that came before may not ever see the light, and it's unreasonable to insist that a project/story/product never changes during development. Creators and developers never promise that their product's never going to change during production, and anything they do talk about is subject to change. Which is just one reason developers are hesitant to talk about what DA3 is going to be like. They have an idea of what it's like now. You won't see it until the finished product. Until things stop changing, anything they talk about might be gone by the time you see it, and then you'll accuse them of lying to you.

See how complex it can be?

[LinksOcarina]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

I am not wrong. And neither is Ninja Stan. I am just able to understand both points of view. It is just how the same thing is perceived from two different places. Don't you know the story about the blindfolded men and the elephant?

Wait... what's this about a blind man and an elephant?

Seven blind men who live together each touch a body part of an elephant, and each come to a different conclusion as to what an elephant looks and feels like. They realize later that their perceptions are wrong, and only together can they create a clear picture of what an elephant looks like.

At least, thats the story as how I remember it. The problem again is that perception blinds the truth, and even with collaboration, there is still bias because you only "see" one aspect of the elephant, as it were. 

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Not the right place for detailed discussion about ME3's content, but I suggest you replay the mission with and without the character and tell me again that it's "nonsense".

I've replayed the mission with and without Javik. Your assertion is nonsense.

Then you're blind, my friend.

The content he presents in and around that segment should not be something you're forced to pay extra for.

[OdanUrr]

Ninja Stan wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

Ninja Stan wrote...

Besides all of that, Javik was designed to be additional, not-in-base-game content in the first place! From Ashes was intended to be bonus content and sold as DLC.

Here's where I disagree somewhat. I mean, we do know that at some point during development it was part of the core game, don't we?

Might have been. But you do know that at some point during development, BioWare decided to develop it as a DLC product, don't you? And perhaps, at some point in development, the character of Javik didn't even exist, right? And that, early on in development, one of the potential names for Mass Effect was (I think) Star Citadel, don't you? No one's talking about a Javik-less Star Citadel right now, though.

In game development, just as in the development of any other creative or entertainment product, things change. No one complains that Luke Skywalker isn't female, as the characer was in an earlier script, or that Han Solo didn't die after being frozen in carbonite, as he did in an earlier script, or that the scripted Jabba the Hutt scene, restored in the Special Edition, was left out of the finished original movie. But that's a great example of what happens during development.

Whatever was in the script, whatever concept art you see, whatever a developer says they're working on, it's a snapshot of what the project is like at that time. What you actually get is the final product, which has gone through many additions, deletions, and revisions. Anything that came before may not ever see the light, and it's unreasonable to insist that a project/story/product never changes during development. Creators and developers never promise that their product's never going to change during production, and anything they do talk about is subject to change. Which is just one reason developers are hesitant to talk about what DA3 is going to be like. They have an idea of what it's like now. You won't see it until the finished product. Until things stop changing, anything they talk about might be gone by the time you see it, and then you'll accuse them of lying to you.

See how complex it can be?

I see your point.

[LinksOcarina]

dreamgazer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Not the right place for detailed discussion about ME3's content, but I suggest you replay the mission with and without the character and tell me again that it's "nonsense".

I've replayed the mission with and without Javik. Your assertion is nonsense.

Then you're blind, my friend.

The content he presents in and around that segment should not be something you're forced to pay extra for.

Is it necessary content though. That is the question. Does the plot change without Javik's presence there? 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 09 mai 2013 - 01:58 .

[Dave of Canada]

Javik and Sebastian were far too "essential" for them to be cut out and sold, Javik provided an in-depth look into the Protheans which many players had interest in and Sebastian added a lot to the final segment of Dragon Age 2.

It wasn't like Shale or Zaeed, those two didn't add too much and you could very well play the game without noticing the hole they leave. Meanwhile, Sebastian and Javik's hole is a vacuum. It's disappointing looking at the destruction of the Chantry and not see Sebastian's "NOOOO~" or his reactions towards Anders or not knowing anything about the Protheans without Javik.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 09 mai 2013 - 01:59 .

[David7204]

dreamgazer wrote...

Then you're blind, my friend.

The content he presents in and around that segment should not be something you're forced to pay extra for.

I've noticed you've failed to actually articulate what this supposed necessary content that I can't get with another squadmate actually is. Why don't you enlighten me? It should be a piece of cake for you, considering you find it so obvious.

[Khayness]

Dave of Canada wrote...

It's disappointing looking at the destruction of the Chantry and not see Sebastian's "NOOOO~" or his reactions towards Anders or not knowing anything about the Protheans without Javik.

Now imagine that if the supposedly scrapped Exalted March expansion would've been about Starkhaven vs. Kirkwall

Modifié par Khayness, 09 mai 2013 - 02:01 .

[dreamgazer]

LinksOcarina wrote...


Is it necessary content though. That is the question. Does the plot change without Javik's presence there? 

Does he send the plot in a different direction? No.

Does his presence inform the plot with crucial context and a few additional scenes before, during, and after? Yes. 

[David7204]

The kiss in Lair of the Shadow Broker is my favorite moment in all fiction. Not all of Mass Effect, not all of video games. All fiction. I consider LotSB 100% essential to the story, and I pay 10 bucks for it gladly. I'd pay 100 bucks for it gladly.

I consider it absolute essential to Mass Effect.

And all this ridiculous whining about 'necessary' DLC is going to accomplish is making sure that great, high-quality DLC like LotSB doesn't exist. Making sure that DLC is constrained to mediocrity, because that's the only way players will consider it 'unncessary.'

If DLC is outstanding content, it's going to become 'necessary.' As it should. 

Modifié par David7204, 09 mai 2013 - 02:09 .

[Withidread]

Haters gonna hate.... but I see reasons to be optimistic. About DA3, Bioware, and EA in general.

[Ninja Stan]

Khayness wrote...

Entitlement seems like a most convenient word nowdays, doesn't it?

"Convenient" is not the word I would use, but that is precisely the discussion I didn't want to get into, because, as far as I'm concerned, we're not having that argument in this thread.

With everything said and done, I still think when it comes to limiting content the consumer is more in the mercy
of the publisher than the other way around, so it doesn't matter how many times one brings up 'choice', this fact remains. Sejborg's stance on this is perfectly understandable, wether you agree with him/her or not.

Don't misunderstand me. The consumer is completely at the mercy of the publisher when it comes to content. But the publisher is also completely at the mercy of the consumer when it comes to purchasing the game. That's the choice of the consumer, and it's extremely powerful. If Sejborg's stance is shared by enough people, enough to cause significantly fewer people to buy the game, then the company will pay attention. But that's based on buying behaviour and not on forum posts many months before release. Even if tons of people say they're not buying the game, but boatloads of people actually buy the game upon release, those "I won't buy" comments aren't worth much. The actual sales numbers will prove those sentiments wrong.

This is why people like me and Allan keep suggesting that, if you feel that strongly about this or any other issue regarding marketing, publishing, or development, don't buy the game. That is one of the strongest statements you can make and the one that can be felt most strongly and definitively. If game sales remain high, if DLC sales remain as high as the company predicts, then it's all smoke but no fire.

Sejborg's stance is perfectly understandable. I understand it perfectly, since I have been a videogame player and purchaser for most of my life. I'm just trying to shed some light on the other side, having been there for some time, too.

[OdanUrr]

Ninja Stan wrote...

But the publisher is also completely at the mercy of the consumer when it comes to purchasing the game. That's the choice of the consumer, and it's extremely powerful. If Sejborg's stance is shared by enough people, enough to cause significantly fewer people to buy the game, then the company will pay attention. But that's based on buying behaviour and not on forum posts many months before release. Even if tons of people say they're not buying the game, but boatloads of people actually buy the game upon release, those "I won't buy" comments aren't worth much. The actual sales numbers will prove those sentiments wrong.

This is why people like me and Allan keep suggesting that, if you feel that strongly about this or any other issue regarding marketing, publishing, or development, don't buy the game. That is one of the strongest statements you can make and the one that can be felt most strongly and definitively. If game sales remain high, if DLC sales remain as high as the company predicts, then it's all smoke but no fire.

And this is the reality of the situation. If you don't agree with a company's business practices, simply don't buy their products. Vote with your wallet, as they say.

[Ninja Stan]

David7204, dreamgazer, please take it to private. We can disagree with each other without resorting to swapping snappy one-liners back and forth.

[LinksOcarina]

dreamgazer wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...


Is it necessary content though. That is the question. Does the plot change without Javik's presence there? 

Does he send the plot in a different direction? No.

Does his presence inform the plot with crucial context and a few additional scenes before, during, and after? Yes. 

His presence informs the narrative though, not the plot. It provides context to the narrative point of the scene, as do the additional scenes regarding Javik.

Because of this, Javik has little to do with the plot, and is more flavor text than anything else. Which is fine by me personally, because it was a damn good flavor. 

[Sejborg]

LinksOcarina wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Not the right place for detailed discussion about ME3's content, but I suggest you replay the mission with and without the character and tell me again that it's "nonsense".

I've replayed the mission with and without Javik. Your assertion is nonsense.

Then you're blind, my friend.

The content he presents in and around that segment should not be something you're forced to pay extra for.

Is it necessary content though. That is the question. Does the plot change without Javik's presence there? 

Is the prologue in Antichrist really necessary? Is Inara really needed in Firefly? Why not charge extra for those scenes?


To add to that. The importance of the character is not the breaking point for me. The point is, I want to expereince the product the artist have intended. Not something that is missing characters. But Bioware is selling out on their artistic integrity even before the game is released. "My vision is this, but let's charge extra for some of it." No wonder you see comparisons with different sizes of burger meals and what not.

Modifié par Sejborg, 09 mai 2013 - 02:26 .

[Khayness]

Ninja Stan wrote...

Sejborg's stance is perfectly understandable. I understand it perfectly, since I have been a videogame player and purchaser for most of my life. I'm just trying to shed some light on the other side, having been there for some time, too.

Then maybe you can answer this question to me:

Did the consumers thought limiting developed game content into different editions on release day was a legitimely good idea and wanted it, or the publishers tried new things to see how much can they get away with?

The degree which it had been done in previous BioWare games does not bother me, I survived not playing with the Facebook nonsense items in DA2, but it can be a subject of change. Ubisoft does it shamelessly.

[David7204]

Sejborg wrote...

Is the prologue in Antichrist really necessary? Is Inara really needed in Firefly? Why not charge extra for those scenes?

That's exactly what they do.

If they made a second season for Firefly, you would have to pay to see it. Indirectly through your cable provider, but still. Whatever content that the second season would have isn't 'necessary' right now. Firefly exists and is lauded without it. But it would immediately become necessary. Which is a good thing - that's a sign of high-quality content.

High-quality content becomes necessary.

Modifié par David7204, 09 mai 2013 - 02:18 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Sejborg wrote...

But will you ask for my trust prior to the release? Will I be missing out on huge chunks of the game if I want to wait for reviews? Like the stunt you pulled with DA2 with the preorder special edition DLC? Or have you come to the conclusion that that might not have been a very nice move? Will I feel punished for just getting the standard edition and not trusting you blindly again, and missing out on huge chunks of the game? Am I still a customer that needs to be eleminated and punished for not preordering? Now I understand you haven't decided upon that yet, but try and keep in mind how different kinds of bonuses might be perceived from different customers.

One man's reward can always be interpreted as another man's punishment.  If you feel you're punished because we incentivize a preorder, what guarantee do I have that you won't still feel punished regardless of the preorder incentive?  How can I trust that we can make a decision that significantly affects how much exposure retailers are willing to give a game, which is fueled in large part by preorders, and you won't still take it the wrong way?  Is there anything that can be done to incentivize a preorder?  Or must a preordered copy award the exact same thing as someone that just decides to buy it the day it is released?

Are video games not allowed to incentivize purchases with bonus features the same way that virtually every other business in the world is able to do?  Buy a large soda?  Your price per mL goes down.  Buy a 64 pack of toilet paper, your price per roll goes down.  Early bird special for that house lottery.  And so on and so on.

It's up to you to decide "I think this treats me unfairly."  At the point, move on, or buy the game and the extra content at a price that you feel is fair.  For example, for all the people that feel they should get From Ashes for their $50 purchase: wait until ME3 + From Ashes costs $50.  You have now spent the amount of money you feel is fair for the content.

Just as a suggestion? When responding directly to someone's post, basing
your response on their direct words, but you actually mean a general
group like a company, its much more civil to not use the "you" pronoun.
It makes the entire argument sound like you are focusing all your
comments and viewpoints at the person you are directly engaging.

Just to be clear, I never had any issue with where Sejborg's comments were directed.  His use of "you" is pretty clearly not directed at me personally, since I like to think that most people will realize that I don't have the ability to make most of these decisions.

[Allan Schumacher]

Did Allan take a break? He'd been hinting at it for some time, and my lack of recent extended duration bans suggests he isn't as active.

I wasn't very active for the last 10 days or so.

[Ninja Stan]

Sejborg wrote...

Is the prologue in Antichrist really necessary? Is Inara really needed in Firefly? Why not charge extra for those scenes?

Ah, but whose decision is that to make: yours as a consumer, after everything has already been created and released? Or the creator's/developer's while they're developing it?

Imagine Inara didn't appear in the Firefly series, and only in Serenity the movie. Now, assume that the Browncoats community is the same as it is today. Joss Whedon says he shot the series with an extra character (Inara, who you saw in the movie) that he is now restoring into the series in a new DVD/Blu-Ray box set. The restored content fleshes out the love story between her and Mal, adds new scenes to most every episode, and even adds an entire episode centred around Inara!

Don't you imagine that a whole boatload of Firefly fans would pay for that? I certainly would. But that's the creator's choice, after the fact. I can't dictate to Joss Whedon which characters are or are not necessary to Firefly, now or ever. What I can do is have an opinion on which characters I think are or are not necessary, and I can choose which of the Firefly comic books I buy based on that opinion. I can choose which action figures to buy, which fanfic to read, which character to cosplay as. Because that's all my choice and under my control.

(I don't know what the referene to the Antichrist prologue is, or I might hav addressed that too.)  8)

[Khayness]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Is there anything that can be done to incentivize a preorder?  Or must a preordered copy award the exact same thing as someone that just decides to buy it the day it is released?

Correct me if I am wrong, but the whole pre-order thing started as a measure so you can get a copy of a highly anticipated game day 1 without risking that it will be out of stock by the time you managed to grab one. That was enough to incentivize.

But since those anticipated games need to sell ridiculous numbers to be profitable, that isn't the case, definetly not since digital download took the fray.

It's funny to see how this little feature got changed over the time now that you mention it. It would've been kinder to let an obsolete feature die rather than to bastardize it.

Modifié par Khayness, 09 mai 2013 - 02:33 .

[Dave of Canada]

Khayness wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

It's disappointing looking at the destruction of the Chantry and not see Sebastian's "NOOOO~" or his reactions towards Anders or not knowing anything about the Protheans without Javik.

Now imagine that if the supposedly scrapped Exalted March expansion would've been about Starkhaven vs. Kirkwall

Exactly. The fact that they're probably going to add Starkhaven/Sebastian content in the future annoys me because of the DLC status of Sebastian.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 09 mai 2013 - 02:29 .