463 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

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.

In this case, no video game... not even Baldur's Gate 2, and I not so darefully say any BioWare game, satisfies this criteria.

How do you define "Artists vision?"

[Khayness]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

On some level though, as gamers, I have a feeling we will never see eye to eye with this.  Again, it's a situation where I don't feel I can convince you, no matter how much my perspectives may differ, just as I am skeptical that you would ever convince me.

Well yes, every time I spot my Mask of the Betrayer box on my bookshelf, it reminds me how awesome gaming was before DLCs. Unless you steal my copy and erase any memory of it from my mind, this whole DLC argument is going to be antagonistic for a lot of us.

[LittleDiegito]

Khayness wrote...
Well yes, every time I spot my Mask of the Betrayer box on my bookshelf, it reminds me how awesome gaming was before DLCs. Unless you steal my copy and erase any memory of it from my mind, this whole DLC argument is going to be antagonistic for a lot of us.

You can still get exactly that. It's the game in the box, without Sebastian. He's not cut from the game, he's extra. He wouldn't exist at all if there was no DLC.

[Khayness]

LittleDiegito wrote...

You can still get exactly that. It's the game in the box, without Sebastian. He's not cut from the game, he's extra. He wouldn't exist at all if there was no DLC.

That's not how you spell quality expansion pack with tons of new content.

[Sanunes]

Khayness wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

On some level though, as gamers, I have a feeling we will never see eye to eye with this.  Again, it's a situation where I don't feel I can convince you, no matter how much my perspectives may differ, just as I am skeptical that you would ever convince me.

Well yes, every time I spot my Mask of the Betrayer box on my bookshelf, it reminds me how awesome gaming was before DLCs. Unless you steal my copy and erase any memory of it from my mind, this whole DLC argument is going to be antagonistic for a lot of us.

What is the different between an expansion and a set of DLC?  Some DLC is better then others, but the same can be said about expansions.  With Dragon Age: Awakenings I spent less amount of time completing my first playthrough then as I did for all the Mass Effect 2 DLC and my first playthroughs of those and they cost the same.  If you don't like it being released in chunks you could just buy them all at once after they are done making DLC and it would be the same as an expansion.  I know the Mass Effect 3 DLC costs more then Awakenings, but I don't know if Awakenings would still have been $40 if released in 2013.

[Homebound]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

In this case, no video game... not even Baldur's Gate 2, and I not so darefully say any BioWare game, satisfies this criteria.

How do you define "Artists vision?"

20/20 preferably without glasses.

[Khayness]

Sanunes wrote...

What is the different between an expansion and a set of DLC?  Some DLC is better then others, but the same can be said about expansions.  With Dragon Age: Awakenings I spent less amount of time completing my first playthrough then as I did for all the Mass Effect 2 DLC and my first playthroughs of those and they cost the same.  If you don't like it being released in chunks you could just buy them all at once after they are done making DLC and it would be the same as an expansion.  I know the Mass Effect 3 DLC costs more then Awakenings, but I don't know if Awakenings would still have been $40 if released in 2013.

Most RPG expansion packs retroactively change game mechanics in the original campaign aswell, so you can have more fun with the goodies. On this principle alone I don't really count Awakenings as an expansion pack.

And don't worry, I don't like being fed on breadcrumbs, so I don't follow them one by one.

LittleDiegito wrote...

It's still extra add on content. Expansion packs and DLC are essentially the same thing. One just comes out in smaller chunks and more rapidly than the other. If I remember correctly I paid about the same for complete sets of DLC for recent Bioware games as I did for Awakening. And Awakening was shorter than the combined sets of DLC for me.

Expansion packs generally conclude another story after the original campaign, most DLCs add to the original campaign, so story wise they are more restricted for obvious reasons. And they can be seen as missing content from the original, since it adds to it rather than continues it with another self-contained story.

Modifié par Khayness, 09 mai 2013 - 06:46 .

[LittleDiegito]

Khayness wrote...

That's not how you spell quality expansion pack with tons of new content.

It's still extra add on content. Expansion packs and DLC are essentially the same thing. One just comes out in smaller chunks and more rapidly than the other. If I remember correctly I paid about the same for complete sets of DLC for recent Bioware games as I did for Awakening. And Awakening was shorter than the combined sets of DLC for me.

[Allan Schumacher]

Khayness wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

On some level though, as gamers, I have a feeling we will never see eye to eye with this.  Again, it's a situation where I don't feel I can convince you, no matter how much my perspectives may differ, just as I am skeptical that you would ever convince me.

Well yes, every time I spot my Mask of the Betrayer box on my bookshelf, it reminds me how awesome gaming was before DLCs. Unless you steal my copy and erase any memory of it from my mind, this whole DLC argument is going to be antagonistic for a lot of us.

Imagine if aspects of Mask of the Betrayer were originally conceived but could not be delivered for release.  Like an expansion called "Tales of the the Sword Coast" (which is a better analogue since TOTSC introduces content that does not take place after the main narrative of BG1).

[Khayness]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Imagine if aspects of Mask of the Betrayer were originally conceived but could not be delivered for release.  Like an expansion called "Tales of the the Sword Coast" (which is a better analogue since TOTSC introduces content that does not take place after the main narrative of BG1).

So does Night of the Raven for Gothic II for example, I don't really want to beat on this expansions vs. DLCs argument, since I stated it is an antagonistic one.

[ElitePinecone]

Sanunes wrote...

What is the different between an expansion and a set of DLC?  Some DLC is better then others, but the same can be said about expansions.  With Dragon Age: Awakenings I spent less amount of time completing my first playthrough then as I did for all the Mass Effect 2 DLC and my first playthroughs of those and they cost the same.  If you don't like it being released in chunks you could just buy them all at once after they are done making DLC and it would be the same as an expansion.  I know the Mass Effect 3 DLC costs more then Awakenings, but I don't know if Awakenings would still have been $40 if released in 2013.

I think there's a qualitative difference there, Awakening was a longish epic quest story that significantly expanded on the lore of the games, provided new locations and companions, and felt like an actual campaign with its own sidequests.

Unless a set of DLC is going to build on a larger meta-story, it's always going to pale in comparison, at least to me. Overlord, Lair of the Shadow Broker and Mark of the Assassin might all be very well-produced DLC, but they're (at best) side-adventures, not a major piece of content with its own arcs, characters and so on. Omega, for example, was grossly overpriced for $15, compared against Awakenings' breadth of content for $40. 

As in, amount of content is to me less important than the type of that content, and how it fits together. Ten hours of unrelated DLC mini-adventures, while fun, aren't the same thing as a ten-hour expansion campaign. The latter offers a chance to tell a story with bigger scope and consistent characters, changes to gameplay systems, etc.

[Firky]

Here is a weird example. Because Allan will appreciate it. It's certainly the first add-in DLC (on a disk) that I remember.

http://bootstrike.co...e/fovreview.php

[Allan Schumacher]

Forge of Virtue was good fun! I didn't get a chance to play it until probably a decade after release (which I was finally able to get past the lich on Skara Brae.... much to my "oh my god how was I stuck here 10 years ago!!?!?!" dismay... >.>)

I'm curious if people had issues because, upon completion, the Avatar had obtained the most powerful weapon in the game?


Minor aside, I like the differences between The Black Gate and Serpent Isle. Both have their different focuses, with The Black Gate embracing the open world more wholly, while Serpent Isle had a more linear narrative. As such, I tend to enjoy the story of Serpent Isle more, though lost much, much more time in The Black Gate.

I don't think I ever played The Silver Seed, however.

[Sanunes]

ElitePinecone wrote...

Sanunes wrote...

What is the different between an expansion and a set of DLC?  Some DLC is better then others, but the same can be said about expansions.  With Dragon Age: Awakenings I spent less amount of time completing my first playthrough then as I did for all the Mass Effect 2 DLC and my first playthroughs of those and they cost the same.  If you don't like it being released in chunks you could just buy them all at once after they are done making DLC and it would be the same as an expansion.  I know the Mass Effect 3 DLC costs more then Awakenings, but I don't know if Awakenings would still have been $40 if released in 2013.

I think there's a qualitative difference there, Awakening was a longish epic quest story that significantly expanded on the lore of the games, provided new locations and companions, and felt like an actual campaign with its own sidequests.

Unless a set of DLC is going to build on a larger meta-story, it's always going to pale in comparison, at least to me. Overlord, Lair of the Shadow Broker and Mark of the Assassin might all be very well-produced DLC, but they're (at best) side-adventures, not a major piece of content with its own arcs, characters and so on. Omega, for example, was grossly overpriced for $15, compared against Awakenings' breadth of content for $40. 

As in, amount of content is to me less important than the type of that content, and how it fits together. Ten hours of unrelated DLC mini-adventures, while fun, aren't the same thing as a ten-hour expansion campaign. The latter offers a chance to tell a story with bigger scope and consistent characters, changes to gameplay systems, etc.

I think it really boils down to personal preferences, for if a story is ten hours long it doesn't necessarly means its going to be better for me, I really don't remember much about Awakenings, but I can recall most of the story from Origins or Warden's Keep.  Quality is always something I prefer over quantity.

Comparing Omega to Awakenings isn't to me a good way to describe it, for it took me 2.5 to 3 hours to beat Omega so it worked out to be around $5/hr, but with Awakenings I did get between eight and nine hours according to the game so thats about $4.5-$5.0/hr so they worked out to be close, I just think Omega has a lackluster story, but I am pretty sure I felt the same about Awakenings since I really don't remember it.

As far as the additions to the game, that is always dependant on the developer for BioWare has made gameplay changes to the game with their DLC, but I have rarely bought expansions, but my experiences its mostly new powers and areas to explore.  In Mass Effect 3: Levithan you became an investigator to track down what happened and there wasn't anything like that anywhere else in the game, which to me is about what you would get in an expansion maybe a little more but I doubt there would be a 10hr expansion using that mechanic the same.

[Tuleron]

jstme wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

EA is getting hit hard financially? Source?

As I understood it, they actually improved last quarter.


As for the topic, It's been slightly over two years since the release of DA ][. It's too "late" for EA to rush DA:I out. Rushing it out would have been March this year.

Depends on your definition of "rushing," of course.

That depends on the scope of the game and number of people working on it.
Dragon Age: Origins or even Skyrim with slightly over 2 years of development still were going to be seriously rushed. ME2 with same schedule but with half manpower - the same.
I really really hope that Chris Priestly is correct and it is not just a PR. But saying that it is too late to rush a game because it was 2 years in development is simply wrong.

Still don't get what DA:O and Skyrim are doing on this conversation, they weren't rush.
And i don't know why they will rush DA3, EA didn't take a srsly hit, if i readed right they fired like 700 ppl, but they won the don't remember what price for being the company who sold more games of the year with FIFA and don't remember the other game's name.
Sometimes a company needs a restructure to work better or just to avoid the wrong path.

PD: Answered and then saw Chris Priestly posting, so this worth nothing haha lol.

Modifié par Tuleron, 09 mai 2013 - 07:45 .

[Kelgair]

Khayness wrote...

So does Night of the Raven for Gothic II for example, I don't really want to beat on this expansions vs. DLCs argument, since I stated it is an antagonistic one.

... Night of the Raven for Gothic 2 was released in the states 2 years after it was released in Germany.  2003 German release compared to 2005 state side release...


Who wants a 2 year lag time for an expansion? Anyone?

Come on, there's a movement that supports such thought.

Modifié par Kelgair, 09 mai 2013 - 09:11 .

[Myusha]

What I want is...for game developers to take their time reasonably. You had to release ME3 and DA2 very quickly, and it was somewhat sad seeing the effect of being rushed. An ending to an entire trilogy was left to one man, and DA2 inspite of a wonderful storyline had bits of bad gameplay design dragging it down.

I've put my faith in Bioware though. The Warden's legendary tale introduced me to the amazing level you put into making every single character fleshed out, and realistic. You've made them interesting, appealing all of it. Sometimes I feel plot elements are recycled [Like how I feel like Geth=Darkspawn in alot of ways],

From Morrigan, to Garrus, to Nathaniel, to Mordin, to Isabela, and all that came before and after, you've made your mark with engaging storylines, options that games never thought to hold, and the ability to make a character unlike any other.

Do you allow more Golems, assist the Geth, have the God Child, kill the Architect, cure the Genophage etc. You feel the weight of your choices, the gravity of it, and it's remarkable. And if you say you'll give a good experience I'll take it.

All I want is so you don't repeat the mistakes of the past, like DA2's or ME3's if you can help it. If they becoming stepping stones, then I'm eager for everything ahead.

[Kelgair]

Myusha wrote...

What I want is...for game developers to take their time reasonably. You had to release ME3 and DA2 very quickly [do you believe the entire time between ME2 and ME3 development their was only one team working on DLC and then ME3?], and it was somewhat sad seeing the effect of being rushed. An ending to an entire trilogy was left to one man [Wrong], and DA2 in spite of a wonderful storyline had bits of bad gameplay design dragging it down. [Like what? What was bad gameplay in DA2 other than the minor wave enemies and repeated caves?]

I've put my faith in Bioware though. The Warden's legendary tale introduced me to the amazing level you put into making every single character fleshed out, and realistic. You've made them interesting, appealing all of it. Sometimes I feel plot elements are recycled [Like how I feel like Geth=Darkspawn in alot of ways] [Interesting, I don't agree Geth=Darkspawn, maybe because that Darkspawn were a generic enemy like the Geth were a generic enemy, but both have evolved for various reasons over the games. Neither being near the original enemy in the first games inclination],

From Morrigan, to Garrus, to Nathaniel, to Mordin, to Isabela, and all that came before and after, you've made your mark with engaging storylines, options that games never thought to hold, and the ability to make a character unlike any other. [Every character you name is the reason for an engaging story... and they inhabit every recent Bioware game.].

Do you allow more Golems, assist the Geth, have the God Child, kill the Architect, cure the Genophage etc. You feel the weight of your choices, the gravity of it, and it's remarkable. And if you say you'll give a good experience I'll take it. [Half of your questions are for  a sci-fi world (geth, genophage) that the Dragon Age fantasy writers haven't had a say in, well... ever... and at least one of those questions I bet none of the DA writers would ever confirm or deny as canon. Yet I suspect you'll experience your choice in some way.]

All I want is so you don't repeat the mistakes of the past, like DA2's or ME3's if you can help it. If they becoming stepping stones, then I'm eager for everything ahead. [I get the minor mistakes of DA2 and ME3, but why those two games were such a travesty of gameplay and/or story would be great to know, since I've long been curious about the hate.]
 
Edit: So many minor formating changes.

Modifié par Kelgair, 09 mai 2013 - 12:27 .

[Shadow of Light Dragon]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

I'm curious if people had issues because, upon completion, the Avatar had obtained the most powerful weapon in the game?

My only issue was resisting the urge to give in to my Dark Side by going on a rampage to see how many people I could kill.

Thank goodness U7 had multiple save slots, or half of Britain would be dead after I offed Lord British... >.>

I don't think I ever played The Silver Seed, however.

Silver Seed had its charm. Plus it gets you the most useful item in the entire world: a freakin' keyring!

I enjoyed Forge more, though I suspect it helped one of the prizes was a wise-cracking demon sword.

[Xilizhra]

Hell, I'd claim Sebastian--aside from the fact that you can't recruit him in the first act--would be a "lead" companion in Dragon Age 2. He's the only time you get any insight into Elthina's character, you're presented with a lot of important topics such as Starkhaven or the Divine wishing to start an Exalted March on Kirkwall. Hell, his presence alone drastically changes the post-bombing scene and may carry a player's decision.

I'm of the opinion that Sebastian is worse than useless. The Exalted March never amounts to anything, his insight is all one-sided and impossible to independently corroborate, and he absolutely ruins the flow of the pre-Last Straw cutscene by having his own scenes obviously cut and pasted into the larger one, with everyone seeming to deliberately ignore him except Hawke. Also, Fenris is enough of an anti-Anders antagonist.

[Khayness]

Kelgair wrote...

Who wants a 2 year lag time for an expansion? Anyone?

Come on, there's a movement that supports such thought.

I'd rather wait two years than to not be able to play at all. Guess those "Note: Genesis/Arrival/Alternate Appearance Pack 2/Lair of the Shadow Broker is not compatible with Polish, Czech or Hungarian versions of Mass Effect 2" descriptions didn't affect you, but did many of us.

[EmperorSahlertz]

Xilizhra wrote...

Hell, I'd claim Sebastian--aside from the fact that you can't recruit him in the first act--would be a "lead" companion in Dragon Age 2. He's the only time you get any insight into Elthina's character, you're presented with a lot of important topics such as Starkhaven or the Divine wishing to start an Exalted March on Kirkwall. Hell, his presence alone drastically changes the post-bombing scene and may carry a player's decision.

I'm of the opinion that Sebastian is worse than useless. The Exalted March never amounts to anything, his insight is all one-sided and impossible to independently corroborate, and he absolutely ruins the flow of the pre-Last Straw cutscene by having his own scenes obviously cut and pasted into the larger one, with everyone seeming to deliberately ignore him except Hawke. Also, Fenris is enough of an anti-Anders antagonist.

Coming from the person who adores Anders, what you just said is highly hypocritical, since Anders is exactly like Sebastian, just of the opposite opinion.

Modifié par EmperorSahlertz, 09 mai 2013 - 12:37 .

[LPPrince]

Ninja Stan wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

http://www.psu.com/a...r-game-released

Why can't more things be like this

I think many more than can be like that. Whether they should be or not, and whether companies base their schedules on that, is a different matter. Waiting until the games ships to start DLC production isn't a bad thing, but it's not nexessarily a good thing, either. If a company is planning Day 1 DLC, waiting until Day 2 to start it is ridiculous.

It depends on the size of the project, of course, and what resources are available to work on it. BioWare DLC can be pretty substantial because they plan for it beforehand and have a lot of time to work on it, even if it's intended for release on Day 1. The arguments against Javik and From Ashes in this thread are pretty good reasons BioWare wants a lot of time to make such products. They want to make sure the characters feel like they've been part of the game from the beginning, like they can be seamlessly integrated without feeling merely tacked on. That takes time and effort, whereas a new map pack takes less effort (or rather, a lot of effort by different departments).

That's the way BioWare has done it. Is it the best way? Is it the right way? Who can tell? What's important is that BioWare thinks it's the way to go, BioWare thinks it's important to have hih-quality DLC, and they've worked towards that goal. Other companies, being run and staffed by different people, will of course have their own ideas of how to do DLC.

Great response.

[robertthebard]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

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.

In this case, no video game... not even Baldur's Gate 2, and I not so darefully say any BioWare game, satisfies this criteria.

How do you define "Artists vision?"

This is absolutely true.  I'm quite sure there's a lot of story that goes untold in a lot of games because of limits to platforms, especially now, and disc space in the past.

To the DLC and Expansion Packs are the same argument, a resounding no.  Alan did give an example of one, with TotSC, which was an expansion pack that actually added content to the main game, instead of a post story arc, but by and large, go ahead and play MotB in the middle of the official campaign...  A story which, sorry Obsidian, sort of, could have been left all the way out, and replaced with something different as far as I'm concerned.  Such is the nature of subjective opinions though, some liked it, I didn't.  It wasn't new, or innovative, it was more a copy/paste of the slayer from last chapter or so of BG 2, with little tweaks here and there so that it wasn't totally just ripped from BG 2.

[Demon Velsper]

Cameron Lee wrote...

DA3 won’t be rushed out, we won’t ship it until we’re proud of what we’ll be giving you.

Considering you were proud of DA2 that doesn't instill any confidence.