824 réponses à ce sujet

[Yootje]

FreezaSama wrote...

Yootje wrote...
I said stuff

I don't think there's anything wrong with DLC. It's just that in this particular case, it seems to be a matter of "too much, too soon". I know EA loves money, but come on. Can't they just be happy with my $59.99 at least for a few months? The purpose of DLC, financial motivations aside, is to increase the lifespan of a game. You don't need launch-day DLC, because no one is going to be tired of playing the game yet. I feel overwhelmed enough whenever I'm just starting a new RPG.

Okay, I get that argument with regards to paid DLC, which indeed is better spread out a bit, but not for free DLC. Free DLC, to me, feels like something that was supposed to be in the game but couldn't be put in for whatever reason (including wanting people to buy the new game, un-idealistic a motivation as that is) and so I would welcome it most if it was available on launch day.

[Litos456]

Yootje wrote...

Good heaven, so much whining... it's a good thing the decision to release DLC is based on financial motivations and not the feedback in topics like this, because otherwise there would never be any DLC released ever.

Seriously, if you have the choice between 'as much ME2 as fits on 2 discs' and 'as much ME2 as fits on 2 discs + more free + more later on if you pay', why on Earth would you go for option A? Why not welcome every DLC with open arms? It's not as if they deliberately kept it out of the game just to spite gamers or make a few extra bucks. Yes, it's to encourage the sale of new games rather than used, but if they were really out to screw gamers, they wouldn't have bothered to make it a 2 disc game in the first place, would they?

Oh, and you do not have any 'right' to anything. This situation is not an 'ethical' debate. You get a very-probably-totally-awesome game, 2 discs full of it, for as much money as EA charges you - as much money as you pay for every other game (including the ones that suck). And if you pay more, you get more. Simple as that.

You're thinking from a different perspective. I'd say that and the opposite perspective (which is why release what should have been in the game for extra money) are both valid, and can both be viewed with an agreement.
I'm personally on the opposite side of your argument, however both sides make a fair point.

In conrusion, which is Japanese for conclusion (lol), our best shot is to wait for clarification on this issue and no point of arguing.

[izmirtheastarach]

Litos456 wrote...

In conrusion, which is Japanese for conclusion (lol), our best shot is to wait for clarification on this issue and no point of arguing.

But it's so much fun.

[Yootje]

Litos456 wrote...

Yootje wrote...

I said more stuff

You're thinking from a different perspective. I'd say that and the opposite perspective (which is why release what should have been in the game for extra money) are both valid, and can both be viewed with an agreement.
I'm personally on the opposite side of your argument, however both sides make a fair point.

In conrusion, which is Japanese for conclusion (lol), our best shot is to wait for clarification on this issue and no point of arguing.

I understand that there's also good arguments on the other side, but I never quite understand how you the customer as opposed to the makers decide that something 'should have been in the game'. Surely the people who spent their time, blood, sweat and tears on the game are the ones who decide what the important and best parts of the game are, and which parts are nice extra's for people who just can't get enough?

The argument also doesn't make sense for free DLC. I find it completely understandable to only give players who buy the game new that DLC for free. I see it like buying anything second hand: sure, it's cheaper, but you're going to have to deal with it being less perfect than when you bought it new.

Modifié par Yootje, 19 janvier 2010 - 10:16 .

[Chuck Fandango]

MojojojoeJDH wrote...

Both discs are FULL, read it: FULL. That first DLC is under 500 megs, and free, then the next content which will most likely be less than a month later, the one with the armor, shotgun and Hammerhead, will also be FREE.

My guess is small weapon additions and a few planets and maybe a few missions will be periodically added as FREE content. Larger type DLC like Expansions or maybe a an entire Cluster addition complete with its own group of Solar Systems and Planets, and maybe a large weapon and armor pack, that kind of stuff will COST.

Voice actors cost money you know. The whole, they are money grubbing thieves argument gets old once you realize how much money it takes to make the DLC, some of what you will be getting for free, cost money. There is no way that the Day One DLC and the group after that didn't cost a pretty penny to make. Though from the sounds they did have to cut that out so they could fit everything onto 2 discs, but they are releasing it for FREE, don't complain.

It will be interesting to see how many more gigs ME2 will have expanded by the time ME3 gets released.

I'm sure I remember reading a while back that M$ will only allow a developer to release 1 set of DLC free, but must charge for subsequent DLC in order for M$ to pass it. I think Valve got into an argument with M$ over Left 4 Dead DLC a while back.

I can't see this changing anytime soon, so I'll guess Bioware & EA will charge us for the Hammerhead, armour DLC & all DLC after that.

[izmirtheastarach]

Yootje wrote...

I understand that there's also good arguments on the other side, but I never quite understand how you the customer as opposed to the makers decide that something 'should have been in the game'. Surely the people who spent their time, blood, sweat and tears on the game are the ones who decide what the important and best parts of the game are, and which parts are nice extra's for people who just can't get enough?

That is pretty much my postition. The only power the customer has is their wallet.

[izmirtheastarach]

Chuck Fandango wrote...

I'm sure I remember reading a
while back that M$ will only allow a developer to release 1 set of DLC
free, but must charge for subsequent DLC in order for M$ to pass it. I
think Valve got into an argument with M$ over Left 4 Dead DLC a while
back.

I can't see this changing anytime soon, so I'll guess
Bioware & EA will charge us for the Hammerhead, armour DLC &
all DLC after that.

Another interesting point. Microsoft does fight companies tooth and nail when they try to offer content through Live for free.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 19 janvier 2010 - 10:23 .

[FreezaSama]

Yootje wrote...

Okay, I get that argument with regards to paid DLC, which indeed is better spread out a bit, but not for free DLC. Free DLC, to me, feels like something that was supposed to be in the game but couldn't be put in for whatever reason (including wanting people to buy the new game, un-idealistic a motivation as that is) and so I would welcome it most if it was available on launch day.

If they were unable to get day-one DLC on the disc because of time constraints or whatever, that's certainly one thing. But I don't think that's at all the case, as the exact same thing happened with Dragon Age. And there was a good deal of DLC for that game right at launch. It's almost as if content is being intentionally held back.

<_<

[Knightstar2001]

The DLC is optional and as such you are not entitled to it regardless of when they started or finished work on it and even if they could have added it to the Main Product before release. The standard Xbox 360 game cost 60 bucks and you are getting the game for that price, anything else outside of what they consider to be the Game(aka whatever they decided to put on the discs) is up to them to decide if and how you can get it.

Your agruement if it was included in the Main game's budget,then you should get it free would only make sense if they stated that DLC created under that budget would be free. Lets use the sword example that was mentioned earlier. You(the customer) agree to purchase a sword for 1000$ once I(the developer) have completed it. I am able to make the sword while only spending 800$ and I decide to use 100$ to created a above par scabbard that would really go great with your sword. You come in to pick up your sword and notice the scabbard on display, should you the customer consider yourself entiled to something that was outside of the agreement(aka you only paided for the sword) just because I was able to make something else with the money you gave me in payment for it. No,you should not since you got what was agreed upon.

[Yootje]

FreezaSama wrote...

Yootje wrote...

Okay, I get that argument with regards to paid DLC, which indeed is better spread out a bit, but not for free DLC. Free DLC, to me, feels like something that was supposed to be in the game but couldn't be put in for whatever reason (including wanting people to buy the new game, un-idealistic a motivation as that is) and so I would welcome it most if it was available on launch day.

If they were unable to get day-one DLC on the disc because of time constraints or whatever, that's certainly one thing. But I don't think that's at all the case, as the exact same thing happened with Dragon Age. And there was a good deal of DLC for that game right at launch. It's almost as if content is being intentionally held back.

<_<

Well, then we are at an impasse because unless someone from Bioware comes out and confirms that it either was or was not intentionally held back, we will not know for sure  Though I suspect that if it was confirmed either way, we would agree with each other that it was either great of them to release the content anyway or rather ****ty that they decided to hold back. (in the case of paid DLC. I'm still all the way on Bioware's city w.r.t. free DLC)

Modifié par Yootje, 19 janvier 2010 - 10:26 .

[izmirtheastarach]

FreezaSama wrote...


If they were unable to get day-one DLC on the disc because of time constraints or whatever, that's certainly one thing. But I don't think that's at all the case, as the exact same thing happened with Dragon Age. And there was a good deal of DLC for that game right at launch. It's almost as if content is being intentionally held back.

<_<

We know it is, and we know why. What we are debating is whether that is okay or not.

[Captainlnsano]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Captainlnsano wrote...

Could I get official confirmation from one of the moderators here about regular edition from Direct2Drive getting access?

These articles are saying EVERYONE gets access code @ release, but I asked Direct2Drive support, and they are telling me that only Digital Deluxe edition gets it. Conflicting stories!

All new copies of game.

Thats what the new press release is saying, but Direct2Drive is claiming the exact opposite. I've sent then another email, with a link to the article on IGN, hoping to get clarification from them soon. 

[Tschinz]

well i do hope that the hammerhead-dlc is free as well. I'm not a big fan of DLC's, I've never bought one nor am I planning on buying one anytime soon. I don't mind free first day DLCs though ( or first few days DLCs as long as they are free) since I buy almost all my games new.

A confirmation whether you have to pay for the hammerhead DLC or not would be nice, if you have to, I'd be very upset since a key part of the

first game is now only available to those who are willing to pay

(please don't mind my english, i think it got a little rusty since I'm out of school)

[Mokinokaro]

Chuck Fandango wrote...
I'm sure I remember reading a while back that M$ will only allow a developer to release 1 set of DLC free, but must charge for subsequent DLC in order for M$ to pass it. I think Valve got into an argument with M$ over Left 4 Dead DLC a while back.

I can't see this changing anytime soon, so I'll guess Bioware & EA will charge us for the Hammerhead, armour DLC & all DLC after that.

Valve got away with it by calling the TF2 content "game updates."   I'm sure Bioware could do similar.  

[Earlydawn]

I'm in favor of this. When (I'm shooting from the hip here, but I recall it being correct) Left 4 Dead sold 1.5 million copies new and more then 3 million copies used, it's pretty clear that something needs to be done so the developers and publishers can protect themselves. Face it - the secondary game market is intrinsically parasitic. If they solve this dilemma by providing a bunch of launch content, then that's certainly better then other, inherently negative solutions.

[CandraZ]

Really there are only two things I wish the Dev's would answer. First off is if the Hammerhead will be free or not, secondly is if we need the Hammerhead for anything at all included with the game or if the only mission we'd use it for are ones we download.

[RickmanUK]

Possibly What they will do is, as Mokinokaro says, "Content Updates" which will be stuff like Extra's to Armour, missions (one off's and shorts) Weapon's and Cosmetic updates... and Full blown Expansions, That will be DLC's of there own and be along the lines of BdtS or Pinicale Station.... or Better yet more like the Fallout 3 DLC's... Broken Steel, The Pitt Etc.

[Squallypo]

CandraZ wrote...

Really there are only two things I wish the Dev's would answer. First off is if the Hammerhead will be free or not, secondly is if we need the Hammerhead for anything at all included with the game or if the only mission we'd use it for are ones we download.

i seriously want and need an answer to that...and im sure im not the only one.

[Guaritor]

Knightstar2001 wrote...

The DLC is optional and as such you are not entitled to it regardless of when they started or finished work on it and even if they could have added it to the Main Product before release. The standard Xbox 360 game cost 60 bucks and you are getting the game for that price, anything else outside of what they consider to be the Game(aka whatever they decided to put on the discs) is up to them to decide if and how you can get it.
Your agruement if it was included in the Main game's budget,then you should get it free would only make sense if they stated that DLC created under that budget would be free. Lets use the sword example that was mentioned earlier. You(the customer) agree to purchase a sword for 1000$ once I(the developer) have completed it. I am able to make the sword while only spending 800$ and I decide to use 100$ to created a above par scabbard that would really go great with your sword. You come in to pick up your sword and notice the scabbard on display, should you the customer consider yourself entiled to something that was outside of the agreement(aka you only paided for the sword) just because I was able to make something else with the money you gave me in payment for it. No,you should not since you got what was agreed upon.

In fact, thats exactly how businesses even function... you people don't think that it cost McDonalds exactly $1.00 for the cheeseburger your eating do you?  Businesses need to make a profit, it cost them maybe $0.50, then theres employee salaries, transportation of the burger, operating costs (electrical/water/etc.), packaging etc. all of that goes into the price of the burger... and then they start to figure out what they need to charge to actually make a profit... then that profit goes back into buying equipment, expanding the business, etc. (Its actually some pretty interesting stuff, my dad owns a small business, and showed me some of what goes into the quotes he gives, how he marks up products and services etc., the math to make sure hes making a profit and stays in business).

Modifié par Guaritor, 19 janvier 2010 - 10:39 .

[Litos456]

Alright I'm starting to lose track of the argument. I'll just wait for official clarification and hope for the best. Cheers guys!

[Guaritor]

Litos456 wrote...

Alright I'm starting to lose track of the argument. I'll just wait for official clarification and hope for the best. Cheers guys!

You and me both.

Edit: Sexy avatar though.

Modifié par Guaritor, 19 janvier 2010 - 10:40 .

[Razgriz9327]

yay for ME! this all looks great

[Razgriz9327]

yay for ME2! this all looks great

[crimzontearz]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

in this case I am unsure...they ran out of space, they were surely not planning on it

Okay. Keep in mind they didn't say they ran out of space. If they did, it was in a joking fashion. Not really a business answer. I'm sure the plan was set primarily by EA.

no dude.....they pretty much said that they cut it really close the way it is (it's in one of the interviews)

still as I said it does not matter in the long run since I am getting it.....free or not

[Stoko981]

Litos456 wrote...

I wasnt talking about a straight line. Yes straight line was boring and so were some planets with extreme mountain ridges. But I loved the bumps and such. There were a lot of places where you can just drive up and randomly bounce around and use the thrusters for even more amusement. I found it fun

Okay, again, that's cool. You found it fun. But you just agreed with me that the straight flats and the extreme mountains were boring. The only fun you had was the slightly bumpy terrain you could randomly bounce around and use the thrusters for even more amusement. That's great, but can you honestly tell me you consider that random bouncing a "main feature of ME"? I'd call ME's main features a rich storyline and plenty of missions. There's other stuff too, sure, but I don't think "a handful of slightly bumpy but not too mountainous uncharted planet maps in which you can drive about for no other reason except having a bit of fun" would make the list.

Therefore, they could remove it without sacrificing a "main feature". They've sacrificed a) a bit of fun (the bumpy bouncy parts)  a huge amount of tedium and frustration (the majority of Mako driving) and c) levels in the style of Therum, Virmire, Bring Down The Sky and I just remembered, Ilos. None of those three things qualify as a main feature. Even though three of the four missions I just named were main story missions, the driving sections were only half the mission. Not too much of a loss, in the grand scope of the game.

And that's what the DLC will reintroduce. So for those that really cared about driving the Mako, you'll get your driving missions. But for those that said "oh god, I never want to see that thing ever again", well, they won't. Everybody wins.